What the Supporters are Saying

Supporters say the proposed changes will strengthen Head Start by holding programs accountable and better partnering with states to improve the quality of early childhood education.

Although the last reauthorization — in 1999 — required that Head Start programs use standards in early literacy and number skills, the Bush Administration says that those standards were never really put in place. The new act would change that by evaluating programs on whether they effectively help children meet those standards.

The Administration also says gains will only be made by more directly involving states, who have the primary responsibility in public education. The act would expand the role of state offices that promote collaboration between Head Start and state programs.

What the Critics are Saying

Most opponents to the changes say two things: don't fix what already works, and add more funds so that more pre-schoolers in poverty can benefit from Head Start. A less prominent group of critics charge — on the other ideological end — that the changes don't go far enough; Head Start should be ended altogether since it has no proven record of long-term benefits for its recipients.

Don't Change the Program — and Add More Funds
Those who advocate for keeping Head Start as is point to studies, such as the Family and Child Experiences Survey conducted by the US Department of Health and Human Services, that show Head Start delivers on its promise to give students a leg up in preparing for Kindergarten. Although opponents don't oppose higher standards in hiring teachers and monitoring programs, they believe that focusing on testing and monitoring will siphon funds away from offering the comprehensive services - such as health and social services - that Head Start advocates say are vital to the program's success.

Although the president's proposed bill increases Head Start funding, critics say is doesn't go far enough. Current funding is able to provide programs for 3 out of 5 children who are entitled to Head Start - advocates would like to see that funding increase so that every child in poverty can get Head Start services.

Head Start needs to go
A less prominent group of critics charge that the president's proposal will not do enough to change Head Start, and that the program — which they say has failed to have lasting benefits — should be ended altogether. These opponents point to studies that show that while Head Start may help four year olds prepare for kindergarten, by the time those students are twelve years old Head Start students fare no better in school than students who did not attend Head Start. At a cost of almost $7 billion a year, they say rather than revamp Head Start, it should be gotten rid of.