In January’s State of the Union address, President Obama declared,

In states that make it a priority to educate our youngest children…studies show students grow up more likely to read and do math at grade level, graduate high school, hold a job, form more stable families of their own. We know this works. So let’s do what works and make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind.

Despite Obama’s assurances that preschool helps to close the “achievement gap,” do we really know if and how these programs work? Politicians and voters on both sides of the aisle have jumped (perhaps prematurely) on the pre-K bandwagon. (After all who doesn’t love helping kids, especially little ones?) Yet, there still remains much we don’t know about early childhood education, especially when it comes to implementation of preschool programs. While it seems fairly intuitive that helping children learn earlier in life would better prepare them for later schooling, this is only half of the equation.

What does that theory look like in practice? Let’s turn to the research. One of the most cited studies is the Perry Preschool Project which examined the lives of 128 impoverished children at high risk of failing in school.  The study took place from 1962-1967 and randomly divided the 3 and 4 year old subjects into 2 groups—one group received a “high-quality” preschool program and the other group received none. The study found that the participants who attended the preschool program had higher earnings, and were more likely to hold a job and graduate from high school. While this speaks in favor of preschool’s benefits, is this a program that can be replicated today, over 40 years later, and at scale? Also worth noting is the cost factor. The program’s cost was approximately $11,300 per student per year. Just one more question to keep in mind.  In other words, while there might be evidence that high-quality preschool programs have positive long-term effects, it’s an open question if this will work across the country, and at what cost.

A few states have implemented statewide universal pre-K programs—with Georgia and Oklahoma as two of the most notable. Given the relative newness of these programs—Georgia in 1996, Oklahoma in 1998—we don’t yet know how strong these programs are, or at what cost to the state.

Furthermore, the White House calls for “high-quality” preschool. What does that entail? How will teachers be certified or even evaluated? Will it be full or half-day school? What will be the class size or teacher to student ratio? In a broader sense, what is the point of universal preschool? Is it primarily a form of child care, to give working parents flexibility to get jobs? Or is it intended to impart real learning? The answer will determine how long kids are there, the teachers that are hired, the costs, and much else. These are just a few of the questions facing policymakers as they decide whether or not to embrace America’s youngest learners and their preschool education.

The idea of pre-K makes a lot of sense. I myself taught kindergarten in the Mississippi Delta, and witnessed the difference early childhood makes. But we ought to be humble when making declarations about “what works,” and recognize that there are a number of important questions in figuring out how to design high-quality pre-K at scale.

To that end, AEI Education is excited to move formally into the early childhood education space. Today our new pre-K fellow, Katharine Stevens, joins the team, where she will be conducting the same kind of rigorous research and thoughtful commentary that are hallmarks of our K-12 and higher education work. We’re thrilled to welcome her to AEI!

For more, check out our website and follow us on Twitter @AEIeducation.

Follow AEIdeas on Twitter at @AEIdeas.