The Education Research Alliance for New Orleans issued a report about Pre-Kindergarten in the nearly all-charter district. It found that the growth of charter schools had a negative effect on pre-kindergarten because of the lack of funding.
In this study, we examine how the growth of charter schools in New Orleans affected pre-kindergarten (pre-K) program offerings as the school system transitioned from a centralized school system to an almost-all-charter district. In Louisiana, charter schools can opt into offering state subsidized pre-K for low-income and special-needs students, but the per pupil funding level is far below the average cost of educating a pre-K student. In New Orleans’ decentralized setting, schools offering pre-K must cover this funding gap from other sources of revenue.
School districts and charter schools have different incentives for offering optional educational services, such as pre-K. In order to better understand school-level decision making, we interviewed school leaders about their reasons for offering or not offering pre-K. We also analyzed data from 2007 to 2015 to determine whether charter schools that offer pre-K programs gain a competitive advantage over those that do not. Our key findings are:
After the reforms, the number of schools offering pre-K and the number of school-based pre-K seats dropped, even after accounting for drops in kindergarten enrollment. The decrease in seats occurred primarily in charter schools.
At charter schools that continued to offer pre-K after Katrina, school leaders offered two school-centered motivations – pursuit of higher test scores and early recruitment of families committed to sticking with the school for the long-run – in addition to more mission-focused commitments to providing early education for the benefit of students and the community.
Through analyses of student test scores from 2012 to 2015, we find that offering pre-K had no measurable effect on charter schools’ third grade math or ELA test scores, potentially as a result of high student mobility between pre-K and third grade.
Charter schools that offered pre-K programs saw short-term, but not long-term, enrollment benefits. On average, charter schools with pre-K filled half of their kindergarten seats with existing pre-K students, whereas schools that did not offer these programs had to fill all kindergarten seats with new students. However, charter schools offering pre-K did not have any advantage in persistent student enrollment after kindergarten.
It is important to emphasize that our results do not speak to the important and cost-effective benefits of pre-K for students, as those have been well established in prior research. Rather, the study is meant to show how charter-based reforms influence how and why pre-K and other optional educational programs are offered in almost-all-charter systems. While we discuss below new efforts to address the shortfall of pre-K seats, our study provides initial evidence that decentralization without offsetting financial incentives can lead to reduced investments in programs that advance the broader social goals of public education.

I forwarded this post with the below narrative to the below, a long-existing NATIONAL forum for adult educators and administrators:
aaace-nla@googlegroups.com on behalf of David Rosen djrosen123@gmail.com
The narrative:
David and all:
The below blogpost contains narrative from and a link to the above report. I forward it from the Diane Ravitch blog.
The report relates directly to the treatment by charter schools of “pre-K” which relates, in turn, to adult education in the home environment.
I highly recommend that adult educators and administrators follow and read some of the earlier related posts on Diane’s blog; especially those who are considering options that include some movement towards charters and (however they portray themselves) towards privatization of education.
Best to all,
Catherine Blanche King
LikeLike
Ahah, So throwing money at the problem might be a good idea after all, also some stability in neighborhoods and schools.
The investors in Utah and Chicago preschool programs have already figured how to make money on the tykes. They put a preschool program into a financial pay-for-performance package, cherry pick students to reduce special education costs, and otherwise try to get a 5% to 7% return on investment.
LikeLike
‘Pay for Success’ or ‘Social Impact Bonds’ were written into ESSA that made their perverse financial structures legal. Every PreK expansion grant in DoEd has SIBs written in as a funding requirement.
Expand Head Start birth through PreK for all? That’s not even on the table.
LikeLike
Preschool does no long-term good. Studies have shown that Head Start gets kids up to speed for Kindergarten (which amazes me. How could a kid be up to 2 years behind in Kindergarten when you are not supposed to know anything starting Kindergarten.) but that advantage is gone by 3rd grade when they start falling behind and by 6th grade they are so far behind that they never do catch up.
You people that praise the PISA test praise Finland as as example. Well, they do not start teaching their kids until age 7, not age 3 or 4.
Why is it we need preschool and they do not?
Here is one such article, <https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2013/01/09/15headstart.h32.html>.
There are more articles.
LikeLike
Finland has a child poverty rate of about 5%, the US’s child poverty rate is about 22%. Finland has universal health care and school lunches are free to all.
LikeLike
The Scandinavian countries pay some of the highest tax rates in the world. In Finland, (and other socialist-model countries) Health care and school lunches are paid with tax money.
There are many good things in the Finnish school system, that the USA should emulate. But the Finns can keep their sky-high taxes.
LikeLike
Our taxes are too low. I would gladly pay more taxes for universal healthcare and free school lunches and school nurses.
LikeLike
Sorry. That should have been, I never thought of it that way, schlitz3 and Duane.
LikeLike
And wrong reply button too.
LikeLike
Americans don’t do enough cost-benefit as far as taxes. Rates are only the first question. The next question should be what value does one get for the money.
Since Finland has publicly-funded education (thru college), health care, parental leave policies and work training (and re-training) that are “free” they may be coming out ahead as compared to Americans.
If one added up what Americans pay out of pocket PLUS the taxes they pay the higher taxes in Finland could be less expensive on an individual family level – families could have more income after taxes and expenses, not less.
Our tax debates are over-simplified, dumbed-down. The question shouldn’t be just what do you pay – it should include what you get.
LikeLike
@Chiara, your comments are spot-on. Most reasonable people, want the government to spend their tax money “smart”. I see all kinds of waste, fraud, and abuse in our federal spending.
LikeLike
“Why is it we need preschool and they do not?”
We don’t and neither do they.
LikeLike
I never thought of it that way, Duane. You make a solid point. Maybe we should make kindergarten more like preschool and less like college. Makes a lot of sense. Interesting.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I just don’t understand this whole push (putsch?) to “academize” childhood. We are young only once, and after schooling it’s basically work one’s ass off until one dies. . . . And all for. . . what?. . . .
Kids shouldn’t have to struggle with adults telling them to be, to act, to behave, to think like the adults that the kids aren’t
LikeLike
Kids need parents who read to them, play with them, and talk to them. Preschool isn’t really much of a substitute, but it’s better than nothing.
It’s not completely accurate to say that children aren’t supposed to know anything before starting kindergarten. A child who has had healthy interactions with caring adults will have good language and social skills.
LikeLike
“Preschool does no long-term good.”
Wrong. We have years of research that shows the opposite. The right wing has been spewing propaganda & poisoning the discourse against PreK ever since Nixon tried to end Head Start.
This country has the money to expand Early Head Start and Head Start PreK into every community.
LikeLike
Over 98% of Finland’s children aged 3-6 attend [free] preschool and daycare programs, which are taught by [minimum BA] degreed teachers and follow national curriculum guidelines that are synched w/school-aged curriculum.
LikeLike
Communities need to understand that they lose control of what is good for their students when they turn education over to corporations. Based on a single, narrow metric, performance on a standardized test, poor students lose pre-K, which is proven to have social, emotional and language benefits to poor students and ELLs. Corporations will always favor lowering the bottom line in order to preserve profitability. So the paper towels and toilet paper contain fewer sheets and get flimsier, and in New Orleans, the poor, the same students that need it the most, lose pre-K. Walmart has made a bundle using this strategy. Let’s apply this bad idea to the poor to preserve profitability. It is time stop the market based madness! https://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2017/05/03/524907739/pre-k-decades-worth-of-studies-one-strong-message
LikeLike
The study people cite for long-term benefits is what I call the Ypslanti, Michigan study. It looked at adults around the age of 40 or so and looked at there situations. The had the control group and the groups that had had preschool. They noted slightly better outcomes for those with the preschool.
So, the conclude that preschool had positive effects well into adulthood, wrongly. The problems with this conclusion are manifold.
One is the research methods (similar if not exactly the same as those done in sociology are flawed. this is according to a Diane Ravitch book where she says that 20th Century philosopher Mortimer J. Adler said that sociologists had flawed research methods. I agree).
Specifically, my problems are mainly, that one cannot account for all variables in people therefore any groups will never never have the same start points. Therefore any differences cannot be verified. Since they do not live their lives in a vacuum then influences beyond the scope of the researchers will be missed. Not only missed factors but the ones they find cannot be adequately weighted as to how much the differences actually affected the outcomes.
Also, time has a dampening effect in nature. An analogy is throw a rock into a pond and watch the ripples as they get smaller and smaller the farther away from the impact point. Human beings are a part of nature in that respect.
For long term also there are even more factors that cannot be looked at.
For this particular study to look at middle aged people and say that 1-2 years of preschool caused their slightly better outcomes is suspect in my book.
LikeLike
The positive changes that occur from birth to three early intervention & PreK-K are in parental attitudes and child attitudes towards education. The Ypslanti Studies have been replicated by looking at social variables other than test scores & grade level achievement. Lazar & Darlington (1979 & 1982) found long term effects on societal attitudes and children’s social emotional outcomes, as well. These effects have been replicated over & over & over to include improvements in social-communication. There’s more to success than third grade test scores and if the reformers will leave PreK alone it can continue being successful.
LikeLike
The issues you have with the Ypsilanti studies could equally be cited as factors disproving a study often cited by those against spending govt $ on preK– one that showed that HeadStart effects were short-lived.
LikeLike
One other point I forgot. That study was done at a time when jobs were still available and this helps out any situation.
We have only 6 million open job for the over 12 million unemployed that are getting unemployment benefits (the official count). We have a labor force of about 264 million and about 100 million adults (18-64) that do not have a job. The total number of jobs is about 150 million total — open and filled. Forget about those over educated for the jobs they hold or who are otherwise underemployed.
We have legal immigrant coming here at the rate of almost 1 million per year and we do not have the jobs for almost 50% of our current adult population.
I could go on with this but I think that you get the idea.
No amount of education early or otherwise will help this.
LikeLike
The tech industry has abused the use of the H1-B visas. They are supposed to be granted them when they cannot find qualified Americans. Instead, they have been firing Americans and replacing them with cheaper H1-Bs. This has led to wage stagnation in the tech, industry and an abuse of the system.
LikeLike
This also applies to the so called shortage of American engineers. In addition flood the market with STEM graduates and drive down the salaries of these professions.
LikeLike
I am an engineer. The fact is that there is a shortage of qualified technical professionals in SOME engineering fields. (Ex: Petroleum engineering). And there is a surplus of qualified technical professionals in SOME science/engineering fields. (Ex: Biomedical Ph.Ds. )
I once worked a project for Sprint Telecommunications, and I was the only American citizen on the project. The team lead was a Hindu (Indian), and the balance were Turks, Filipinos, Pakistanis, etc. Sprint claimed that they could not find enough qualified American engineers, to staff the project, and everyone except myself had an H1-B.
see this article, it is spot-on:
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2015/article/stem-crisis-or-stem-surplus-yes-and-yes.htm
LikeLike
Well, might as well close all the schools, your argument seems to say. Doesn’t make any more sense than requiring that all get bachelor’s degrees. Education is an organic feature of developed civilization. Whether and precisely how education intersects at various points of national employment cycles, or in an individual’s working life, is varied, indirect, complex. Measures of educational benefits are imprecise at best, why not just use common sense: education is beneficial to humans, society should provide as much as it can afford to. We can make some rough international comparisons by looking at amount spent as a proportion of GDP.
LikeLike
We have public prek here thru the school district – and it’s VERY popular, particularly among lower income, younger parents. Our lower income parents tend to be younger than higher income parents.
One has to be fairly motivated to take advantage of it because it’s easier to put children in day care all day rather than manage daycare plus a trip to school and back for prek.
On the school district side it’s hard to plan for because it’s not mandatory for children so the enrollment numbers swing a lot, but, they mostly swing towards “wait list”. Obviously hiring employees and dedicating space is more difficult with a voluntary program where children can and do drop out than it is for mandatory attendance. Harder to predict.
LikeLike
It’s funny because adding prek wasn’t at all controversial here and this is a very conservative area of Ohio. I don’t know – I suspect it sort of went under the radar because it was gradual and now it’s so accepted and popular they would have a lot of trouble taking it away. My district was actually the last to adopt offering free prek- the smaller more rural districts adopted it years ahead of my larger, less rural district.
LikeLike