Friday, November 30, 2007
Pre-K is an excellent investment
From the RoundTable blog
Read the latest entries
Dan B. Fleming
Fleming, professor emeritus of education at Virginia Tech, lives in Blacksburg.
A major issue in the upcoming session of the Virginia General Assembly is whether to expand prekindergarten education for an additional 17,000 at-risk 4-year-old children. There is considerable research showing such education will help students achieve better in later years.
Virginia spends more than $1 billion a year on state and local corrections, with costs going up. Several new prisons will soon be required to meet a growing prison population. Spending money on educating pre-K children will over time lessen crime resulting from functional illiteracy and reduce soaring correctional costs.
It will also provide other economic benefits to the state such as lower unemployment and welfare costs. The savings in students not having to repeat grades in school will also be substantial as potential educational deficiencies are addressed at an early age.
A concern over the proposed expansion of the pre-K education is that there are 6,000 unfilled slots under the current program. Part of the reason for this is that the initial per pupil cost of $5,400 has been raised only $300 since the program began in 1996.
Based on an average inflation rate of 2.65 percent, the fiscal year 2008 per pupil amount should be $7,348. To keep up with increased costs, local school districts have had to pony up additional funding just to stay even, or cut the number of students to provide the same service.
This is now a voluntary program, but some local school districts that are the poorest have students that need help the most. They may not participate in this program because they can't afford it. Space for more students is also a problem as new building funds are scarce.
There are few investments that the state can make that will pay off as well in the long run as pre-K education of at-risk children. Even in this time of tight budgets, state leaders should find funds for this vital service. Two sources could be considered: Bring back the estate tax that affects only a small number of families and/or increase the income tax slightly on those making more than $200,000 a year. This new revenue could be dedicated to the pre-K initiative.
The state needs to expand the program for pre-K at-risk students and also adequately fund the existing program. Failing to do so will only continue a policy of the old adage, "penny-wise and pound-foolish." This is not a liberal or conservative issue, but one of sound economic investment policy. Will legislators have the good sense and gumption to do so? Soon we will find out.
