Oh, I'm aware it's very, very un-PC to suggest it.
Who mentioned un-PC? I'm talking about facts.
But if you look at all the studies out there is becomes apparent that while there are folks who are "left behind" due to circumstance, by and large you cannot for account this gap. It's not due to early access to pre-school, it's not due to race, it's not due to time spent reading with small children, or other 'early literacy' activities. All of those things have been show to have very limited impact on a child's education.
Could you cite your sources please? Because I believe you are misunderstanding the evidence, and I'd like to get specific.
OK, I have to take very strong issue with the claim that "all of those things have been shown to have very limited impact on a child's education."
Quality pre-school has been overwhelmingly shown to have a positive and lasting impact on a child's education. I am not going to google now for the studies, but they are there and I have read them. Just one example, out of many:
http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news-imp...-role-in-later-reading-math-achievement/"Using information from the longitudinal Study of Early Care and Youth Development, which was carried out under the auspices of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, they discovered that children who spent more time in high-quality (that is, above-average) child care in the first five years of their lives had better reading and math scores. This was especially true for low-income children; in fact, their scores were similar to those of affluent children, even after taking into account a variety of family factors, including parents’ education and intelligence."
