I understand that many children are disadvantaged because of language barriers and working parents, etc., but wasn't Head Start begun for that very reason, to help these children? Many other children are brought up in homes with great parents and many advantages and they are better off in the hands of their parents for their early learning. It seems the expenditure of $3 million to fund UPSTART locally to just experiment is a waste of precious dollars. There already are many studies as to the advantages of the current Head Start program.
Why can't an existing program be perfected, if there is proof that it is working, rather than begin a new, costly program?
Salt Lake City
- John Florez: Utah public education is a house...
- In our opinion: How committed are Obama, U.S....
- Charles Krauthammer: The jihadi logic
- 19 songs to consider as replacements for the...
- Catherine Rampell: Have America's public...
- My view: Utah, where do you stand on marriage?
- In our opinion: The Scots have set an example...
- Can you pass the U.S. citizenship test?
- My view: Utah, where do you stand on... 93
- Ralph Hancock: Society cannot... 76
- Letter: Bush dilemma 2.0 37
- George F. Will: Obama needs Congress to... 27
- Richard Davis: Scots — Be brave,... 25
- In our opinion: Accountability,... 25
- Who likes Obama's ISIS plan, and who... 24
- My view: Intergenerational poverty the... 19