Pros and Cons - Debbie Newman, Ben Woolgar 2014

Nursery education, free provision of by the state
Section F. Culture, education and sport

Some countries, including Britain, provide free nursery or kindergarten education for one or two years before the start of school. But is this a good use of state funding? Should children be left to play at this age, or can these years be the foundation of success in education?

Pros

[1] Developmental psychology has demonstrated how crucial the early education of children is for their later progress. In other words, science has shown that nursery education should be a priority for any government. Many more doors are closed in the long term by a lack of education and stimulation at an early age than by the lack of free degree-level education. Specially trained nursery school teachers are needed to help to fully realise the development potential of all pre-school children, since most parents are not well equipped or trained to do this entirely by themselves. If a child has slipped behind in language development by the time they reach school, studies have shown that they are likely to continue to struggle with literacy throughout their education. This also means they will need costly interventions later on.

[2] If free nursery education is not provided by the state, then only the rich will continue to provide it for their children. This is particularly pernicious, as it means that social and economic inequalities are being engrained in the next generation from the first few years of their lives. Those whose parents could not afford nursery education will be at an intellectual and educational disadvantage from the outset. Free nursery education is a crucial way for a government to fight against the perpetuation of elitism and inequality. We should not be totally fatalistic about inequality — free nursery education will do something to redress the balance, even though it will not, of course, wipe out economic differences.

[3] Nursery schools provide crucial social training for young children as well as preparation for academic work and school. Without free nursery education, more and more children will grow up socially underdeveloped — a real worry in our modern society where the idea of community has almost completely broken down. Socially undeveloped children can grow into anti-social and even criminal adolescents.

[4] Nursery schools also fulfil a pastoral, social-work role. Teachers can be on the lookout for disturbed or abused children. It will be harder for parents to hide the neglect or abuse of their child if nursery school is compulsory and the child is in regular contact with teachers from an early age. Hence, as well as enhancing equality of educational opportunity, socioeconomic equality and social adaptation, free nursery education is a weapon against child abuse.

[5] A culture of nursery education means that parents (usually women) will take shorter career breaks when they have children. This is good for the economy, and in particular is good for women and gender equality, as studies show that the longer women are off work, the more their careers suffer.

Cons

[1] Up to the age of four or five, it is right and proper that children be educated in the home. Parents are biologically adapted to be the best carers for and educators of their children. Development during this period is important, but it can best be fostered by parental attention and stimulation. Children need to play and discover, but do not need any formal education at this age. Given that parents can fulfil this role, nursery education need not be seen as an essential part of a financially stretched public sector education system. Public education spending can properly be concentrated on the school years when specialist teachers are required, rather than being stretched and depleted to cover, in addition, nursery education, university education and museums.

[2] It is, sadly, already the case that the children of the rich will receive a better pre-school education, with or without nursery schools. It is the rich who can afford books, educational toys and advanced technology for their children, and who are often better educated themselves. With or without free nursery school education, socio-economic inequalities will be active in children’s lives from the start.

[3] Young children can get the social development they need by going to playgroups, parent and toddler groups, classes (such as music or gymnastics) and by playing with siblings and friends. If they are closely supervised by a parent during their early social interactions then they are more likely to have lessons in proper behaviour, such as sharing and turntaking. With a ratio of one adult to eight or 10 children in a nursery school, bad habits can be formed unnoticed.

[4] It is not clear that providing free nursery education for all is the most efficient way to deal with child abuse. The money would be better spent if it were targeted directly at child abuse, in particular via charities and social workers. This would be cheaper and more effective than having free nursery education for all. In addition, there have been cases where children have been abused in nurseries by the workers there.

[5] Most nursery hours are very short, perhaps 9 am to 2 pm, so this will not enable women to return to work. Either they will need wraparound childcare which means that their children will never see them, or they will be at home on their own during the day when they could have been looking after their children and saving the government money.

Possible motions

This House believes that nursery education is a right, not a privilege.

This House believes that the child is father of the man.

Related topics

Welfare state

University education, free for all