Kids Need Support to Reach Potential

As of Thursday, April 7, 2011

It’s disturbing to think that our legislators would consider eliminating Moore at Four and/or Smart Start.

We are beyond needing to prove that high-quality preschool programs are effective. We have known for decades that the early years are critical foundational learning years. The Federal Reserve Bank’s research shows that every $1 we spend in early childhood saves anywhere from $3-$17 on remedial intervention services later. Results of a study by UNC-Chapel Hill last year that said economically disadvantaged children enrolled in More at Four programs had higher scores on third-grade reading and math tests than similar students who were not enrolled in the state’s preschools.

Rather than cut or eliminate programs, we should be figuring out what we need to do so that all of North Carolina’s children have access to high-quality preschool programs. Not only is it the prudent thing to do, it’s the ethical thing to do. For years, our local Moore at Four and Smart Start preschool programs had more children qualified to enroll than they have had slots for.

Former Democratic Gov. Jim Hunt created Smart Start, an organization that has a proven track record of effectiveness and accountability. The Smart Start network of 77 local partnerships serving all 100 North Carolina counties serves as the model for our nation. Why would we consider eliminating it?

It would be devastating to our community if we were to lose either More at Four or Smart Start. We need to make early learning a priority. Children operate independently of the financial situation of the state. In good times and in bad, children have physical, social, emotional, language and cognitive developmental needs. Children need all of us, working together, to ensure that they reach their full potential.

Ronda Hawkins

SCC Early Childhood Program Coordinator

Southern Pines

More like this story

Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago

It doesn't take a village if the parents are involved. Maybe, rather than cutting, we should look at alternatives that cost less. We used DOD's defunt INTIDEA (INTernational IDEA), based on and run by Alaska's IDEA (Interior Distance Education of Alaska), a homeschooling umbrella organization that provided support for homeschoolers and supplemental schoolers. While we were free to choose curriculae, they required annual testing, proctored by a third party to show that our kid was learning. So, perhaps these early education programs, if the money to support them isn't available, can reduce costs by following a similar model for some of their students. Running some of their more costly sites that way out of more conveniently located, cheaper sites and shutting down the physical plant in the more remote locations can save money while still providing service. In the same vein, volunteer homeschooling parents who show enough capability can help teach some of those kids, much as homeschool co-ops already do. Many homeschooled children do better than public school kids, so let's enlist the help of the ones who do it best to make things work for all the other children.

Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago

Homeschool co-ops don't fall under daycare. I also am not suggesting switching to homeschooling for all or many parents, just suggesting that it can be used to supplement these programs, reducing the need for facilities. providing some services that way can increase the reach of these programs for less money.