• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Head Start Cuts Services For More Than 57,000 Children Due To Sequestration

Phys251 said:
I'm not gonna take those studies at face value until I consider the counterevidence. But even if they pan out, then we should reform, not abolish, Head Start. This sequestration is, yet again, ineffective and stupid.
Click to expand...

Assuming it doesn't work, why should we reform it? It's a wasteful program that isn't worth the money that's pumped into it. Are you that desperate to spend money that shouldn't be spent in the first place?
 
Cephus said:
Assuming it doesn't work, why should we reform it? It's a wasteful program that isn't worth the money that's pumped into it. Are you that desperate to spend money that shouldn't be spent in the first place?
Click to expand...

Why do you not want to invest in the future of our society, particularly at such a crucial age?
 
Phys251 said:
Why do you not want to invest in the future of our society, particularly at such a crucial age?
Click to expand...

Because we already know, for a fact, that it doesn't have anything to do with the future of society, it doesn't have any long-lasting educational effect, and WE CAN'T AFFORD IT!
 
Cephus said:
Because we already know, for a fact, that it doesn't have anything to do with the future of society
Click to expand...

Wrong. This is such a basic concept that I shouldn't even need to explain it.

it doesn't have any long-lasting educational effect
Click to expand...

Wrong. Do you even have any experience in education, or is this just another Fox "News" talking point?

and WE CAN'T AFFORD IT!
Click to expand...

But we sure can afford tax cuts for the rich and for big corporations, military spending, and the War on Drugs!
 
Phys251 said:
Wrong. This is such a basic concept that I shouldn't even need to explain it.
Click to expand...

There is no demonstrable positive effect of Head Start after a couple of years of schooling. Those children who were in a Head Start program do no better on average than those who were not.

Wrong. Do you even have any experience in education, or is this just another Fox "News" talking point?
Click to expand...

We're not talking about preschool, we're talking about Head Start. Head Start is just free daycare with a thin veneer of education laid over it.

But we sure can afford tax cuts for the rich and for big corporations, military spending, and the War on Drugs!
Click to expand...

Which is entirely irrelevant. Yes, I think we ought to cut all of those things too. Our government should never live beyond it's means.
 
Cephus said:
There is no demonstrable positive effect of Head Start after a couple of years of schooling. Those children who were in a Head Start program do no better on average than those who were not.
Click to expand...

Ah. I was talking about preschool, not Head Start. And I need some evidence for this claim.

We're not talking about preschool, we're talking about Head Start. Head Start is just free daycare with a thin veneer of education laid over it.
Click to expand...

I'm going to need a lot more convincing than that.

Long-Term Benefits of Head Start Study Fact Sheet

"Despite doubts cast by previous studies of Head Start, a long-term study shows that a Head Start program of the 1970s, which was part of the National Planned Variation Head Start Project, helped participating young children achieve greater school success and avoid crime as they grew up. Earlier studies of the federal Head Start preschool program for low-income children and families, which began in 1965, found short-lived effects on children's test scores, prompting the government to make program improvements."​

In other words, the studies that show that "the benefits disappear after a few years" may only be focusing on test scores--and there's so much wrong with doing that that I don't even know where to begin.

Which is entirely irrelevant. Yes, I think we ought to cut all of those things too. Our government should never live beyond it's means.
Click to expand...

No, it's entirely relevant. The same people who were begging for guns, wars, and bombs in the 2000s are the very same ones screaming to reduce any sort of government function that improves the quality of life, especially for disadvantaged people of color.
 
There has been plenty of proof provided that Head Start is not an effective program, go back and find the links.
 
Arbo said:
There has been plenty of proof provided that Head Start is not an effective program, go back and find the links.
Click to expand...

By what standard? And which links? As I made clear in my last post, are we talking about test scores a few years later (which means very little), or general performance in life once they grow older (which means very much)?
 
The information is there, go back, read it, then dismiss it because it does not fit your beliefs.
 
Phys251 said:
Ah. I was talking about preschool, not Head Start. And I need some evidence for this claim.
Click to expand...

It's already been widely quoted in this very thread.

No, it's entirely relevant. The same people who were begging for guns, wars, and bombs in the 2000s are the very same ones screaming to reduce any sort of government function that improves the quality of life, especially for disadvantaged people of color.
Click to expand...

I'm not begging for any of those things so if you want to debate them, feel free.
 
Phys251 said:
Why do you not want to invest in the future of our society, particularly at such a crucial age?
Click to expand...

in this case, it is a poor investment
for an investment to be worthwhile, one should be able to receive something for the monies invested
based on the data evaluating the performance of head start, there is no educational or behavioral benefit to have resulted from our many head start tax dollars
'throwing good money after bad' is an appropriate expression to use if head start funding continues
 
Cephus said:
It's already been widely quoted in this very thread.
Click to expand...

That preschool is ineffective? Show me.

I'm not begging for any of those things so if you want to debate them, feel free.
Click to expand...

Tell that to your politicians who keep increasing the size of the military-industrial complex. They are the ones whose actions concern me.
 
justabubba said:
in this case, it is a poor investment
for an investment to be worthwhile, one should be able to receive something for the monies invested
based on the data evaluating the performance of head start, there is no educational or behavioral benefit to have resulted from our many head start tax dollars
'throwing good money after bad' is an appropriate expression to use if head start funding continues
Click to expand...

Based. On. What. Standard.
 
Phys251 said:
That preschool is ineffective? Show me.
Click to expand...

That Head Start is. In case you haven't noticed, this is a thread about Head Start. If you want to talk about preschool, start your own thread.

Tell that to your politicians who keep increasing the size of the military-industrial complex. They are the ones whose actions concern me.
Click to expand...

My politicians? How did I suddenly gain ownership of politicians? Why doesn't anyone ever tell me these things?!?!?!
 
justabubba said:
this.report:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/executive_summary_final.pdf

read.it

at.least.the.executive.summary
Click to expand...

What's up with all the periods? Anyway, let's see what we have here:

(btw, this copy-pasting was incredibly glitchy, lol...)

"Head Start group children did significantly better on the PPVT (a vocabulary measure) for 4-year-olds and on the Woodcock-Johnson III test of Oral Comprehension for the 3-year-olds.

"By the end of 1st grade, there was some evidence that the 3-year-old cohort had closer and more positive relationships with their parents. These impacts were preceded by other social-emotional impacts (improvements in behavior-hyperactive behavior and total problem behavior, and social skills and positive approaches to learning) in the earlier years. The findings for the 4-year-old cohort are inconsistent with teachers reporting that children in the Head Start group are more shy and socially reticent and have more problems with student and teacher interactions than control group children while their parents are reporting that they are less withdrawn.

"For the 3-year-old cohort, there were positive favorable impacts on use of time-out and authoritarian parenting at the end of 1st grade and on spanking and time out in kindergarten. These favorable impacts for authoritarian parenting and spanking were also demonstrated in the earlier years. For the 4-year-old cohort, there were no significant parenting practices impacts in kindergarten or 1st grade.

"Among the 4-year-old cohort, these subgroups include children of parents with mild depressive symptoms, children who were Dual Language Learners, and children with lower cognitive skills. Additionally, Black children experienced favorable impacts in the social-emotional domain at the end of kindergarten.

"Among the 3-year-old cohort, the subgroups showing favorable impacts include children with special needs, children of parents with no depressive symptoms, children from higher risk households, and children in non-urban settings. In the 3-year-old cohort, there were also several groups with more favorable impacts during the earlier years of the study: these groups included children with lower cognitive skills upon entering Head Start and Dual Language Learners."​

Are you sure you posted the article you wanted?
 
Arbo said:
My wife has never HAD to work. I have taken on extra work to ensure it. There were many times where she wanted to and did. But even when I was in the navy and had a second job and she was working, we still managed to teach our kids beyond the kindergarden level before they ever hit that age.
Click to expand...
Same here, even the Navy part. Our kids, and grandkids, were all reading before kindergarten. Wife started teaching school the day our youngest started first grade, at the same school. Our kids have college degrees, one is a teacher, the other owns half of an internet business.
 
UtahBill said:
Same here, even the Navy part. Our kids, and grandkids, were all reading before kindergarten. Wife started teaching school the day our youngest started first grade, at the same school. Our kids have college degrees, one is a teacher, the other owns half of an internet business.
Click to expand...

There are those that will do what is needed, and there are those that bring down humanity. It is clear what group we are in. ;)
 
Arbo said:
There are those that will do what is needed, and there are those that bring down humanity. It is clear what group we are in. ;)
Click to expand...

​
 
This is the goal of the current Republican Party. Rand Paul is very happy.
 
One incompetent government program down, tens of thousands to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom