I find it interesting that the article talks about creating kids that "grow up to be smarter, richer and more law-abiding", then quotes a bunch of statistics from standardized tests in order to disprove that claim. How can a standardized reading test assess a student's chance of being more law-abiding when they grow up?
I personally have doubts about how well a standardized test can measure intelligence, let alone how successful a person will be.
I'm not saying that the points made in the article aren't valuable, but rather that the way the authors choose to prove them doesn't seem valid.
I agree that having publicly funded preschools would be a help to at-risk kids who need a positive environment, but I don't see the benefit of pulling other kids out of the home environment so early. I'm not sure how universal preschool works in the US, but I know that in my neck of the woods, even kindergarten is optional. Sure, most parents put their kids into kindergarten because it provides a good transition between the home environment and a more rigid school environment, but this is ultimately up to the parents.
