Another study from Vanderbilt questioning the efficacy of Pre-K has been published in Developmental Psychology.
TCCRI has taken some points out of context and used a quote by one of the study authors stated that "something is not always better than nothing."
However, if we read the study (
PDF link here), then we find at least one hole in the study's methodology:
"While we do not have information on the alternative care
arrangements for students in the RCT [random control trial] analytic sample who did not attend TN-VPK [Tennessee Volunteer Pre-K], we do have that information via parent interviews for the 306 nonattending children in the ISS [intensive sub-study] sample described earlier.
Overall, 63% received home-based care by a parent, relative,
or other person; 13% attended Head Start; 16% were in private center-based childcare; 5% had some combination of Head Start and private childcare; and childcare for 3% was not reported.
Characteristics of the programs and students contributing to the ISS were very similar to those in the RCT analytic sample (Lipsey et al., 2018)."
It seems that what the author is calling "nothing" many actually be "something." Additionally, this small group (under 3K) of students studied was only in TN.
If we see this study getting more momentum, we will, of course, will continue to send you talking points as to why this study does not reflect what is actually happening in Early Childhood Education in Texas.
