Teeth, grades, links and causes

Suppose I did a study that demonstrated beyond all statistical doubt that children who are hospitalized are more likely to die before their 21st birthday than those who never enter a hospital.

My recommendation:  Save children's lives by refusing to admit them to hospitals.

I'd be hooted down, right?  In this case,  it's intuitively clear that even though one event is a strong predictor of another,  hospitalization is not the cause of death.  Instead,  both result from a complex array of illness and trauma.  It's smart to keep looking for ways to prevent early death,  but shutting down children's wards won't help.

In the world of education,  a lot of links look like causes.  Kids who fail in school are more likely than successful students to grow up to be adults in prison.  Heck, everybody knows that jail planners use third-grade reading scores to plot the number of cells they'll need.  (It's not actually true,  but everybody knows it.)  So if we stop social promotions and/or adopt someone's favorite reading program,  we'll keep young people out of jail.

Or  ... children who enter kindergarten lacking in basic skills are starting down that track to bad outcomes. So we can spend $1 on prekindergarten and save taxpayers $7 on jail and welfare costs down the road.  That ratio is based on a long-term study of children in a couple of high-quality preschool program decades ago  (read summaries of the Abcedarian Project and the Perry Preschool study).  But locally and in many other programs across the nation,  researchers have struggled to find measurable academic benefits that last past elementary school.

The most recent example to catch my attention was an Observer article about a Pew study on use of dental sealants to prevent tooth decay. “Oral health problems not only can be painful but are linked to lower academic scores and additional physical problems,”  said a Pew official arguing for better dental treatments in school.  Implicit was the suggestion that fixing kids' teeth would boost their scores.

Most people who are serious about education understand that the issues that cause academic failure and bad lives for adults are at least as complex as the physical ailments that send children to the hospital.  But when it comes time to sell a new program,  it's tempting to tout it as the thing that will break all these cycles and fix the future.

And when it comes time to oppose those programs,  it's tempting to shoot down the inflated claims and dismiss it all as a waste of time and money.

As a new superintendent gears up his vision,  we can expect to hear a lot of pitches and rebuttals.  I'm thinking back to what Teach For America founder Wendy Kopp wrote about one-percent solutions. She cautions that no one program can be expected to transform children's lives  --  but doesn't see that as an excuse to stop seeking the right combination of measures to make a real difference.

We Americans like quick fixes and easy "gotchas."  As citizens,  politicians and educators delve into preK and reading programs and cultural competency and new technology,  I'm hoping for a serious,  thoughtful discussion of what it takes to give Mecklenburg's kids their best shot at the future. Though I have to admit,  I kind of hope there's not a CMS task force on tooth decay looming.