Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

jody

(26,624 posts)
10. OK Head Start has only minor effects on children. Its purpose is
Sun Sep 23, 2012, 08:02 AM
Sep 2012
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
Sec. 636. [42 U.S.C. 9831]
It is the purpose of this subchapter to promote the school readiness of low-income children by enhancing their cognitive, social, and emotional development—

(1) in a learning environment that supports children’s growth in language, literacy, mathematics, science, social and emotional functioning, creative arts, physical skills, and approaches to learning; and

(2) through the provision to low-income children and their families of health, educational, nutritional, social, and other services that are determined, based on family needs assessments, to be necessary.

I guess it's a leap of faith but if Head Start had been successful, then children living in poverty would benefit from education and be able to rise out of the poverty.

Implicit in my conjecture is a belief that education is a road from poverty to Good Times.

On the other hand, the Minnesota Twin Family Study suggests what a child becomes is strongly influenced by genetics and not the environment in which raised. https://mctfr.psych.umn.edu/ and papers written on the results of the study.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

This line stands out for me: LWolf Sep 2012 #1
I think one of the reasons is that within living memory americans (my grandparents and parents' HiPointDem Sep 2012 #2
"Magic merit dust" -- there's a memorable phrase. :^) eppur_se_muova Sep 2012 #3
"But our mythology has never caught up with the facts." Starry Messenger Sep 2012 #4
Don't be so quick to denounce it as a myth. Igel Sep 2012 #6
Colleges are not efficient? At what? mbperrin Sep 2012 #7
"if you can compete, you can move up". everyone can compete. most people lose. HiPointDem Sep 2012 #8
Do you mean your assertion to apply to professional athletes? If not how do you define exceptions?nt jody Sep 2012 #13
OR upward mobility is more restricted to STEM fields and some entertainment fields. nt jody Sep 2012 #14
If most jobs are of the burger-flipping variety, that means most people will not be 'competitive,' HiPointDem Dec 2012 #20
Didn't the Head Start Program have any effect on reducing poverty? jody Sep 2012 #5
head start has no effect on the poverty rate. it's an educational enrichment program intended HiPointDem Sep 2012 #9
OK Head Start has only minor effects on children. Its purpose is jody Sep 2012 #10
it has been successful. it's the most successful educational intervention ever. HiPointDem Sep 2012 #11
You assert Head Start is the "most successful educational intervention ever" but on what factor? jody Sep 2012 #12
Head start has been around for nearly 50 years and has been studied intensively over that time. HiPointDem Sep 2012 #15
I understand, your mind is made up so reject facts even the "Head Start Impact Study". I want to jody Sep 2012 #16
Children remain mired in poverty because wealth is becoming more concentrated. The one follows HiPointDem Sep 2012 #17
Is poverty destiny? Ideology vs. evidence in school reform GMR Transcription Dec 2012 #18
Members, I'm pretty sure this account is a spam bot. Starry Messenger Dec 2012 #19
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Education»Is poverty destiny? Ideol...»Reply #10