The indispensable Checker Finn has a column in the Dallas Morning News explaining why universal preschool, funded by taxpayers, is neither a necessary nor wise component of an education-reform strategy based on sound research. He punctures four common myths:

1) Everybody needs it.

In fact, about 85 percent of 4-year-olds already take part in preschool
or child care outside their homes, paid for with a mix of public and
private dollars. And fewer than 20 percent of 5-year-olds are seriously
unready for the cognitive challenges of kindergarten in the No Child
Left Behind era.

2) Preschool is educationally effective.

On the contrary, while a few tiny, costly programs targeting very poor
children have shown some lasting positive effects, the overwhelming
majority of studies show that most pre-K programs have little to no
educational impact (particularly on middle-class kids) and/or have
effects that fade within the first few years of school.

3) Existing programs are shoddy.

Quality control is indeed patchy, and some operators do a lousy job.
But experts, leaders and providers in the field of early-childhood
education cannot agree on how to define and judge quality. Most often,
antiquated measures of spending, staff credentials and adult-child
ratios ? i.e., “input” gauges ? are used, rather than appraising the
kindergarten-readiness of these programs’ graduates or sending
qualified observers to crouch in classrooms to assess the quality of
teacher-child interactions.

4) Head Start is terrific but doesn’t serve enough kids.

If only. This iconic, much-loved federal program, now costing more than
$7 billion annually, has spent four decades denying that it’s an
education program, refusing to embrace a pre-K curriculum and being
staffed by people ? now a major interest group ? many of whom are
themselves ill-educated (and ill-paid). Though its statute pays lip
service to “school readiness,” Congress has forbidden Head Start to use
readiness measures to evaluate program effectiveness.

JLF’s Terry Stoops has some specific observations about North Carolina?s well-publicized foray into government preschool intervention: