Invest in pre-K
In response to the editorial “Universal pre-K? It would be a huge waste that would dwarf Head Start's failure” : In my work with the Pittsburgh Association for the Education of Young Children, I see every day the benefits of high-quality preschool.
The evidence is overwhelming in proving that investing in high-quality pre-K is a smart choice. At-risk children who experience high-quality pre-K are less likely to commit crimes later in life. Society gains more productive citizens, with reduced reliance on social services and higher lifetime earnings.
The economy gets a boost. In the immediate picture, every dollar invested in pre-K circulates $2 in local economic impact. And there's an astounding long-term return of $17 for every dollar, through public savings and benefit.
As a parent, I'm excited to be a part of the Pre-K for PA campaign, which is dedicated to ensuring that every 3- and 4-year-old in Pennsylvania has access to high quality pre-K.
The foundations for the success of every child are laid in the first, critical years of life, from birth to age 5. When we invest in high-quality pre-K, we invest in a stronger Pennsylvania.
The writer is executive director of he Pittsburgh Association for the Education of Young Children (paeyc.org).
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.
- Corbett better choice
- Getting bad advice
- Out of ‘other people’s money’
- Obama’s VA
- Care for our children first
- Ex-Im & Westinghouse
- UAW won in Tennessee
- Not one more drop
- Restore royalty minimum
- Overlooked by PUC
- Wolf & ObamaCare