GLOBE EDITORIAL
Head Start wisom
11/2/2003
TESTING OF students can be an excellent diagnostic tool. But the Bush administration has gone too far by testing very young children enrolled in Head Start, the country's program for low-income preschoolers.
Federal officials say testing will help improve Head Start's quality. It's a thin premise.
Early education is a complex thing. At this age, children's development varies widely, making it hard to find a test that can compensate for these natural differences. On a practical level, it can be hard to get some 4-year-olds to take tests seriously.
Young children should learn testable knowledge like numbers and the alphabet. But they must also learn concepts: that numbers represent amounts and that letters build words. In addition, being ready for learning is essential, as is knowing how to work with others, sit still, listen, and interact with adults.
Four-year-olds are in the age of wonder, easily excited by things they don't know about, from writing to dinosaurs. They need more content-rich curriculums and materials. Improvement in Head Start should include partnerships that put the resources of businesses and cultural organizations into classrooms. Another way to improve Head Start is to expand capacity so more eligible children can attend as well as increasing the number of children who are eligible.
Head Start should be evaluated. But standardized tests are too rigid and too narrow. The program needs a holistic assessment that looks at academics as well as less testable factors such as how children learn. States should be sharing experiments and best practices.
Marian Wright Edelman, head of the Children's Defense Fund, wisely argues that "experts in child development, child outcomes, and curricula should determine what happens in Head Start classrooms, not politicians."
It would also be a mistake to abandon Head Start's social components. Some children face economic and emotional stress at home that makes it tough for them to build the early skills they need. A test won't diagnose these problems, and it won't encourage officials to devise innovative changes that reach beyond classrooms and into homes. Skeptics can question whether it takes a village to raise a child. But it's clear that children benefit from living in stable homes where parents understand and encourage educational success.
It's too easy to ask: Are we getting what we pay for with Head Start? -- and answer yes just because a child can answer questions on a standardized test.
There's a more important question that testing can't answer. Are we giving children academic skills that rest on a solid foundation of emotionally and socially healthy families?
© Copyright 2003 Globe Newspaper Company.