<<  <  >  >>

Page 16

did the control group, providing no support for the effi-

cacy of the intervention.83

Spitz also points out that differences favoring the

intervention group first emerged at six months of age,

when those children's advantage was 6 points.  He writes,

"This is a rather surprising finding when one considers

that the mean age of entry into the daycare center was 4.4

months."84   In terms of IQ, the intervention groups' IQ

advantage at five years of age was essentially the same as

it had been at six months of age.  Spitz asks, "What hap-

pened during the initial 1.6 months to produce essentially

the same advantage for the intervention group that later was

found at 5 and 12 years of age?"85   "We need to understand

why an additional 4.5 years of intensive intervention had

so little effect that, at six years of age (and older),

the difference between the intervention and control groups

was not appreciably different than it had been at six months

of age."86  Spitz also argues that some of the reported test

results may be biased in favor of the Abecedarian Project,

given the ways the tests were conducted.87

Whether or not one believes the Abecedarian findings

are wholly valid, as is the case with Perry Preschool,

there are several facts that should prevent legislators

from basing policy recommendations for universal preschool

on the study.  First, benefits were obtained only for a

small group of "economically disadvantaged African-American

children."  Again, Abecedarian faces the problem of appli-

cability: one cannot assume that the findings would apply

evenly, if at all, to mainstream children.

Second, the Abecedarian Project has not been replicated.88

Because the Abecedarian Project is the first of its kind

to demonstrate such lasting, positive results, it is crit-

ically important that it be replicated before being used

as a model.

And finally, even if the Abecedarian Project is wide-

ly replicated in the future, the intervention is far more

intense than that offered through universal preschool.

One could not expect to see--indeed, one has never seen--

Abecedarian-type results from a one- or two-year preschool

program.  It is likely that the positive outcomes of the

Abecedarian Project occurred because the children entered

the unprecedented intensive program at such an early age.

Universal preschool is simply not comparable to what was

essentially an adoptive or second-home environment.

To summarize, then, no empirical evidence supports the

claims that universal preschool will reduce the number of