I look forward to reading it in some detail later. My initial impression is of a good piece of research.

A couple of quick observations:

Although an emphasis on academic curriculum in Head Start can only be helpful, not all children start at the same level, or even the same age. Not all children enter the program as soon as they are eligible. The child who, after almost a year, spoke her first words to me last week may not be at the same level of achievement as a less withdrawn child in her cohort, even though that other child came into the program later, speaking no English. (He speaks plenty of it now. ;) )

Many children from families above the poverty line have trouble with some of the phonics concepts, and reading readiness can be delayed as a normal part of cognitive development until as late as 7 years old. Any program dealing with young children needs to keep that in mind.

The social aspect of the program may help children to maintain the cognitive edge they have in the first three years, if it focuses on behaviors that will encourage learning. Field trips to socially and culturally enriching institutions with services available at low or no cost to the consumer will encourage children whose families may not know about those organizations to continue to use them as they get into the older grades. This would include not only the library, but local museums and cultural events like band concerts and parades, special movie days, fairs, supervised playground activities, and organizations like 4-H and the YM and YWCAs. They will also have the chance to make friends outside their economic group in places where interests and achievement are less dependent on income.

To question Head Start is to start a discussion about how to improve it, and need not be a political poison pill. To gut the program would be a different story. I don't see Mr. Bush moving in that direction.

Regards--
Mary Anne