Head Start & future
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Thursday, May 16, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
Head Start & future
In response to the editorial “Preschool for all? Look who benefits — and who won't” (April 24 and TribLIVE.com): The purpose of Head Start programming is to prepare children from low-income families for school; it's just that plain and simple. It was not designed to raise high-stakes test scores in third grade or to totally eradicate the effects of poverty in our nation. It was designed to give children from impoverished homes the opportunity to be prepared to enter kindergarten with strong, developmentally appropriate skills that research has indicated are necessary for early school success.
Our children are the nation's most precious and fragile resource for the future. Head Start programs work with our most at-risk children to help develop and mold that precious future.
James Heckman, University of Chicago, writes that underdeveloped human potential burdens our economy and leaves us with a workforce that is less than what it could be. The potential of these most vulnerable children is just waiting to erupt and may never be realized because they just happen to be on the wrong side of the “have”/”have not” continental divide. It's just that plain and simple.
The writer is supervisor, communication services for the Allegheny Intermediate Unit.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Saved her life
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Fix icy hazard on Rt. 66
- Dress code
- Metcalfe wrong
- Conspicuous by absence
- Orwellian redefinitions
- Not reviled abroad