November 16, 2005
Controversy over 2005 Mental Health
Screening/Early Learning Legislation
EdWatch Responds to Star Tribune/ Sen.
Hottinger
Proponents of early childhood programs distorted the data from
this subjective readiness assessment to create a false sense of crisis by
saying that 50% of children are not ready for kindergarten. And,
even if the data were objective, there are no early childhood programs in
Minnesota or nationally that have shown long term benefit even for poor,
at-risk children, much less for middle class children. According to
experts, too early an exposure to formal schooling can actually harm
their development.
-- Karen R. Effrem, MD, EdWatch Board of Directors
This statement, taken from Dr. Effrem's response to the Star
Tribune and to Senator Hottinger's whining about the wisdom of the
legislature in rejecting early childhood mental health screening and the
kindergarten readiness assessment [see below], has been confirmed yet
again. Researchers from the Universities of California Berkley and
Stanford have
just released a study showing that "attendance in
preschool centers, even for short periods of time each week, hinders the
rate at which young children develop social skills and display the
motivation to engage classroom tasks, as reported by their kindergarten
teachers...Our findings are consistent with the negative effect of
non-parental care on the single dimension of social development first
detected by the NICHD research team."
This effect was found across the socioeconomic spectrum and was worst for
children from higher income families. Here is more solid evidence that
expanding preschool programs is not the panacea for social and emotional
development that proponents state it is. The epidemic of preschool
expulsions and psychotropic drug use in toddlers is not due to a lack of
preschool, as nanny state backers suggest, but, rather, by the uncritical
push for universal preschool, among other prominent factors. "'So,
the report's a bit sobering for governors and mayors - including those in
California, Florida, Georgia, New York, North Carolina and Oklahoma - who
are getting behind universal preschool,' comments the study's Co-Author
and UC Berkeley professor Bruce Fuller."
We hope that Governor Pawlenty and his National Governor's Association
colleagues pushing expansion of federal control of education from
"P-16," as well as Congress considering Head Start and state
legislatures, are sobered by this. We commend Governor Pawlenty and the
Minnesota Legislature for not expanding preschool programs any more than
they did. This provides them impetus to reconsider the whole bad idea of
the Minnesota Early Learning Foundation.
Sen. Hottinger: Star Tribune
letter to the editor, 10/23/05
To your editorial about school readiness and early childhood education
and what the Legislature failed to do in 2005 [see Star Tribune
editorial printed below], I would add:
The school readiness survey and socio-emotional health screenings would
have received additional funding -- both were included in the Senate's
Omnibus Early Childhood Finance bill that passed last May with bipartisan
support. Likewise, DFLers and some Republicans in the House support these
efforts. As chair of the Senate's Early Childhood Budget Division, I
wholeheartedly agree that cutting programs that provide us with such
valuable information moves us away from the goal of ensuring all children
are fully prepared to begin kindergarten. No child should start
behind.
The Senate is not holding these initiatives back -- it's the extreme
conservative elements of the Republican House and the governor.
SEN. JOHN HOTTINGER, DFL-ST. PETER, MINN.
Response from EdWatch:
To the Editor,
The Legislature was very wise to reject early childhood
mental health screening as recommended by the New Freedom Commission
(NFC) as well as to not fund the kindergarten readiness survey.
To call either one 'standardized' is laughable. Both assessments are
composed of questions that are value laden, subjective, suggestive, and
so broad as to be almost meaningless.
Proponents of early childhood programs distorted the data from this
subjective readiness assessment to create a false sense of crisis by
saying that 50% of children are not ready for kindergarten. And,
even if the data were objective, there are no early childhood programs in
Minnesota or nationally that have shown long term benefit even for poor,
at-risk children much less middle class children, when too early an
exposure to formal schooling, according to experts, can actually harm
their development.
Early childhood mental health screening has similar problems. The
screening instruments are not scientifically well validated, creating
both false positives and false negatives, and have not themselves been
proven safe. The diagnostic criteria upon which they are based have been
called 'subjective' and 'value judgments that vary across cultures' by
the experts that wrote them. Even if the screening and criteria
were reliable, the vast majority of interventions rely on medications
constantly proven to be ineffective and dangerous.
SAMSHA, the federal mental health agency, is backing off of its support
of the NFC's recommendations to widely mentally screen and medicate
children because of justifiable criticism from professionals, parents,
and grassroots groups, both liberal and conservative. The
Legislatureís rejection of mental health screening in Minnesota helped
cause that retrenchment and shows visionary
leadership.
Karen R. Effrem, MD
EdWatch Board of Directors
Star Tribune editorial: 'State should study school
readiness' October 19,
2005
Surveys of kindergartners in the last three years have been a
canary-in-the-coal-mine indicator for Minnesota's future -- and a
sputtering canary at that. That's why it's a shame the survey isn't being
conducted this year. It wasn't funded by the 2005 Legislature.
The surveys found that fewer than half of the kids tested were fully
ready for the math and language lessons that kindergarten offers them.
About 12 percent were badly lagging in preliminary learning in those
crucial areas; the remainder were judged "in process."
In today's education-driven economy, those are disturbing findings. They
spurred interest in the quality and availability of early childhood
education in Minnesota, rallying business people, educators and
policymakers to common cause for little kids -- until the plug got
pulled.
It's not that the state Education Department did not want the survey
continued. In fact, said state early childhood/school readiness
specialist Barbara O'Sullivan, the department wanted it enlarged. Surveys
in 2002, 2003 and 2004 sampled 5 percent of kindergartners; the
department wants a 10 percent sample, combined with parent interviews.
That would carry about a $500,000 pricetag, she said.
If that sounds steep to legislators, they should think again about the
information's value. The survey's findings were more than
attention-getters. Knowing which children are coming to school poorly
prepared, and in what ways they are lagging, is essential to helping them
catch up.
Gleaning that knowledge does not make Minnesota a "nanny
state," as some conservatives claim. It puts helpful information
in the hands of those already entrusted with the nurture of young lives.
The Legislature continued to support voluntary developmental assessment
of younger children by school districts, and allowed those assessments to
be made as early as age 3. That's a positive step.
But the Legislature said no to appeals by mental health professionals
to include a standardized social and emotional development assessment in
those screenings. That decision, too, needs rethinking. A child's social
and emotional growth is an important component of school
preparedness. Refusing to assess it makes the screening incomplete,
and deprives parents of an early alert that might forestall real trouble
for a schoolchild later.
There is nothing constitutionally, developmentally or morally magic about
age 5 when it comes to education. In fact, research suggests that the
most important learning in a child's life happens before age 5. If this
state is serious about educating every student to his or her full
potential, then, at a minimum, the state should monitor the learning
little kids do. [Emphasis added.]
EdAction is entirely
user-supported. The continuation of our work is dependent upon individual
contributors. EdAction is a political action committee. Contributions are
not tax deductible. We promote the work of
EdWatch. If you want to ensure that
our work continues, contact us
here. If you want to
subscribe or unsubscribe to this EdAction e-mail service, mail to:
edaction@lakes.com. Put "subscribe" or
"unsubscribe" in the SUBJECT of the message.
![[]](http://www.edaction.org/images/edaction.jpg)