Celebrating Children’s Rights

November 18, 2011

Since 1954, the United Nations (UN) has observed November 20 as “Universal Children’s Day,” a day to honor children and promote activities for their welfare. On this day in 1959, the UN General Assembly adopted their Declaration of the Rights of the Child. On this date in 1989, these rights became legally binding to all UN member countries that ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which at present includes all member countries except Somalia and the United States. However, not all countries act equally on the goals of the Convention—many signatories are not taking proactive steps, while the United States, who has not signed, may even be doing more on some fronts.

The basic premise of the Convention is that all children are born with fundamental freedoms and inherent rights, and the principles held within it further UN goals of protecting children’s rights, including expanding opportunities to advance children’s potential as well as meeting their basic needs. Like human rights in general, children’s rights are based on respect for each individual’s dignity and incorporate civil, cultural, economic, political, and social rights. Article 28 of the Convention outlines very specific goals for children’s educational opportunities:

1. States Parties recognize the right of the child to education, and with a view to achieving this right progressively and on the basis of equal opportunity, they shall, in particular:

(a) Make primary education compulsory and available free to all;

(b) Encourage the development of different forms of secondary education, including general and vocational education, make them available and accessible to every child, and take appropriate measures such as the introduction of free education and offering financial assistance in case of need;

(c) Make higher education accessible to all on the basis of capacity by every appropriate means;

(d) Make educational and vocational information and guidance available and accessible to all children;

(e) Take measures to encourage regular attendance at schools and the reduction of drop-out rates.

2. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that school discipline is administered in a manner consistent with the child’s human dignity and in conformity with the present Convention.

3. States Parties shall promote and encourage international cooperation in matters relating to education, in particular with a view to contributing to the elimination of ignorance and illiteracy throughout the world and facilitating access to scientific and technical knowledge and modern teaching methods. In this regard, particular account shall be taken of the needs of developing countries.

Even without having ratified the Convention, the U.S. has long had free and compulsory education for children from first grade through high school. However, we at NIEER feel that our country is missing a golden opportunity but not providing more free – although voluntary – educational services when children are younger. Full-day kindergarten programs are far from the norm throughout the country, and access to freely available prekindergarten is limited rather than universal and varies greatly from state to state. Preschool education programs can further many of the goals in Article 28, including the reduction of drop-out rates, combating chronic absenteeism, and the elimination of illiteracy. Studies have found that preschool education programs have long-term outcomes and far-reaching benefits beyond school success, including financial stability, reducing crime, preparing U.S. military forces, and better health, all of which are in line with the UN’s vision for both children and adults.

Though publicly-funded pre-K remains the domain of state governments in the U.S., early education is gaining traction as an issue of international importance. As a recent OECD report noted the decrease in well-qualified workers globally, NIEER’s Steve Barnett responded that “far too many of our children enter kindergarten so far behind that higher education will not be within their reach, despite the best efforts of our schools to prepare them.” Recognizing the lifelong impact of early childhood education, developing nations are offering such programs, including Colombia (where NIEER is conducting a study). Early childhood education stands as one of the most effective interventions in facing the modern challenges of a global economy, a fact recognized by campaigns from both the OECD and the UN. A strong research base has demonstrated that providing access to preschool is beneficial to the society as a whole and furthers children’s rights not just in education but in other areas as well. Indeed, it can contribute to the Convention’s goals of “the full and harmonious development of [a child’s] personality” and allow a “child [to] be fully prepared to live an individual life in society.” The UN must continue to provide specific goals and technical assistance as countries work towards their vision of respecting and promoting the rights of all children.

- Jen Fitzgerald, Public Information Officer, NIEER

- Megan Carolan, Policy Research Coordinator, NIEER


Sharing Time: Looking at a Busy Week in Early Education

September 30, 2011

It’s been a big week for pre-K in the news.

Education Nation, NBC’s annual education summit, presented its second offering this week, and it had a heavy focus on early learning. Dr. Nancy Snyderman, NBC’s chief medical editor, moderated the panel “Brain Power: Why Early Learning Matters” featuring early learning notables, including researchers, practitioners, advocates, and a little star power from actress-advocate Jennifer Garner.  While the Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge was clearly a point of interest, the panel also discussed a number of issues NIEER has recently explored, including policies on family engagement, how to reform Head Start, and the 10 states that do not offer state-funded pre-K. More of Education Nation’s early education coverage can be found here, including NIEER data making a cameo appearance in this Today Show interview as well as in the Start Early, Aim High panel discussion earlier this month.

Also this week was the release of Pre-K Now’s final report, “Transforming Public Education: Pathway to a Pre-K-12 Future,” which reflects on the growth of state-funded pre-K during their decade of advocacy while pushing for increased alignment with the K-12 system moving forward. Their recommendations include expanding preschool-for-all programs to more children, aligning standards with state elementary and Common Core standards, supporting early educator professional development, and re-assessing governance structures to make effective use of existing resources.

The report succinctly lights a path for early learning advocates to follow as Pre-K Now closes its doors, though these goal reached a whole new audience thanks to a Time magazine article, “Rethinking Pre-K: 5 Ways to Fix Preschool.” The article, which was among the most popular of the week, provided “reality checks” on which aspects of the report’s recommendations are most likely to be implemented.  Program data used in the article from the 2010 State of Preschool Yearbook makes clear that resource constraints have taken a toll on state-funded pre-K programs and could continue to slow growth going forward. In particular, at a time when accountability is the watchword in education reform, NIEER Director Steve Barnett is quoted in the article saying, “Evaluations take a lot of time and money. With budget cuts, I’m afraid they will be the first to go.” Indeed, the 2010 Yearbook did see a slackening of accountability standards in many programs, a trend we fear may be repeated in our 2011 report. Look for NIEER data also in the article “The Preschool Wars,” which looks at the battle for pre-K in North Carolina and elsewhere, in the October 10 print issue of Time magazine (available online now for Time subscribers).

NIEER, Pre-K Now, and Education Nation made a number of other media appearances this week.  An MSNBC interview with Dennis Van Roekel of the National Education Association draws attention to the need for greater access to high-quality pre-K programs, especially for children who may not be school ready. Another piece with Mark Shriver, of Save the Children’s U.S. operations, calls for increasing investment in early interventions, even in an era of budget cuts.

After this week of much discussion, it is clear that early childhood education has made great strides in recent years, but still has far to go to help all children who can benefit. For those in the field—educators, researchers, advocates, and parents—who know the challenge of advocating for increased resources during these austere times, there may be motivation in the President Obama’s address to students this week: “It means that you have to stay at it.  You have to be determined and you have to persevere.  It means you’ve got to work as hard as you know how to work.  And it means that you’ve got to take some risks once in a while.”

- Megan Carolan, Policy Research Coordinator, NIEER


Early Childhood Education Featured in Principal Magazine

August 10, 2011

NIEER co-directors Ellen Frede and Steve Barnett discuss the critical role pre-K plays in closing the achievement gap in the May/June issue of NAESP’s Principal magazine. Drs. Frede and Barnett note that the availability of preschool is a strong predictor of differences in scores in the 2009 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), a comparison of educational achievement across 65 countries.  They also point to research findings that show national achievement test scores rise with the level of public spending on and quality of preschool education.  Frede and Barnett maintain that a commitment to an effective, quality preschool program could reduce the achievement gap in the United States by 20 percent.  The article from NIEER co-directors also offers principals and other school leaders 10 research-based, practice-tested steps they can take to increase the availability of quality pre-K whether or not they currently offer pre-K in their school.

Also included in the May/June 2011 issue of Principal magazine:  Jacqueline Jones, senior adviser for early learning at the U.S. Department of Education, writes about assessment in early childhood education.  First Five Years Fund director Harriet Dichter writes about pre-K to grade 3 education in Pennsylvania.  University of North Carolina assistant professors Rebecca Shore and Pamela Shue and former principal Marion Bish report on a professional development program in Cabarrus County, North Carolina, designed to prepare elementary principals for preschool.


Early Education: The Power to Reduce Future Crime Victimization

July 29, 2011

While the goal of high-quality preschool programs is to ensure all young learners are ready to succeed in school, these programs are linked with a number of impressive long-term outcomes. Children who attend high-quality preschool are more likely to graduate from high school and go on to higher education than are their peers who did not attend. They are also less likely to require special education services or repeat a grade in school, both of which contribute to savings for taxpayers.  Benefits extend well beyond reducing education costs. The societal and cultural improvement stemming from education reduces future crimes and future victimization. Students who attend these programs are less likely to become teenage parents, become dependent on welfare, and, notably, commit crimes as teenagers or adults. A recent study from the University of Minnesota found that, years later, participants in a high-quality preschool program had lower rates of incarceration and substance abuse than did their peers who were not enrolled.  Deterring children from future crime benefits not only those individuals, but all those in society who may have become victims of crimes against person and property. Outcomes like this have triggered a wave of support for pre-K programs from groups ranging from Fight Crime: Invest in Kids to The Boys and Girls Club of America, among other organizations.

However, the long-term benefits of high-quality programs are being sacrificed for short-term savings during this economic downturn.  As The State of Preschool 2010 found, states have reduced funding for pre-K programs while unemployment and falling wages have placed more children “at-risk” of involvement in delinquency and crime.  In the 2009-2010 school year, state funding for these programs nationwide fell by nearly $30 million from the previous school year to about $5.4 billion, marking the first drop in total spending since NIEER began tracking.  Spending per-child adjusted for inflation also has fallen by about $700 over the decade so that recent cuts add to a long-term unfavorable trend.  Nationwide, at least 23 states fail to spend enough per child in their programs to meet the 10 quality benchmarks set by NIEER; another 10 state governments provide no funding at all for pre-K.

Trends have been better for availability of pre-K than for funding, but not what one might expect given the benefits.  While access to state-funded preschool has increased over the last decade (see Figure 1 for details), we’ve seen slow growth in the percentage of 4-year-olds enrolled as well as a complete stagnation in 3-year-old enrollment in recent years. And, there is a wide variation among states in terms of pre-K access – ranging from 1.1 percent of 4-year-olds in Rhode Island to nearly 71 percent of 4-year-olds in Oklahoma.  Far too many children are missing out on early learning opportunities that will have positive outcomes throughout their lives, including reducing the likelihood of serious crime, arrest, and incarceration as teenagers or adults.

Figure 1: Access to State-funded Pre-K, 2002 to 2010

Indeed, research indicates that between 35 and 45 percent of American students enter kindergarten not “school ready” — these are the students who can most benefit from the long-term academic and social benefits of pre-K.  Some quick number crunching tells us that for an additional $1.7 billion, the nation could enroll all at-risk 4-year-olds in high-quality pre-K; another $5.8 billion would extend that opportunity to all at-risk 3-year-olds nationwide.

While taxpayers may pause at the price tag for state-funded pre-K programs, it is a small fraction of the costs our society pays for failing to start vulnerable children on the right foot.  A 2007 study by Robert Lynch finds that high-quality pre-K for just the poorest 25 percent of 3- and 4-year-olds would result in $77 billion in annual decreased crime and child abuse costs by 2050.

Other research has pointed to similarly staggering figures regarding child abuse and neglect. The direct cost of child abuse and neglect in the United States totals more than $33 billion annually. The indirect costs of child abuse, including special education, mental health care, juvenile delinquency, lost productivity, and adult criminality, increase this total to more than $103 billion annually. While taxpayers might feel burdened by a $1.7 billion investment in at-risk 4-year-olds, this number seems insignificant compared to the $103 billion they will eventually spend on the results of lower education standards and the continued cycle of crime and abuse.

Likewise, reducing the number of both perpetrators and victims of crime is an important goal in American society. The criminal justice system, including incarceration, costs billions of dollars each year, to say nothing of the loss of life, property, and security experienced by too many victims each year.  A report by Mission: Readiness reveals that criminal convictions contribute to the fact that 75 percent of America’s young adults are ineligible for military service. And, as recently noted by the National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), children are more likely than adults to be exposed to violence and crime, placing them directly in a vicious cycle with often disastrous results. As Mai said in a recent blog at The Crime Report, “Without the proper support to cope with their experience, young people are more likely to face, and cause, additional crimes in their own community.”

While even the highest quality preschool program cannot completely eradicate crime from our society, early interventions can significantly reduce the problem and better prepare the next generation for more productive, brighter futures. As a society, we have the resources to help young people avoid becoming victims and resist turning to crime.  Protecting our children is an investment that cannot start too early.

- Steve Barnett, Co-Director, National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER)

- Mai Fernandez, Executive Director, National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC)


The Bottom Ten: A Closer Look at No-Program States

June 6, 2011

The State of Preschool 2010 provided some good news regarding two new pilot programs in Alaska and Rhode Island, meaning there is no longer a “dirty dozen” of states without preschool education programs. However, 10 states still have not made preschool a priority and lack such programs for young learners. These “Bottom Ten” states do provide some services to their youngest learners through federal special education and Head Start programs, though enrollment is limited only to those most “at-risk,” whether due to disability or meeting a low-income threshold.

“Preschool-age children in these 10 states are denied the opportunity of early learning experiences that will help them succeed both in school and later in life,” says W. Steven Barnett, NIEER’s co-director and author of the report. “In particular, states in the Mountain West and Upper Midwest with predominantly rural populations need to find a way to provide access to high-quality pre-K.”

In this post, we take a closer look at the bottom 10 states that don’t fund pre-K programs meeting our definition of a state program.  For additional information on these and all other states, visit the State Data page.

Ten states don't provide state-funded pre-K programs.

Hawaii

Although Hawaii does not have a state-funded pre-K program that meets the criteria of the report, the state funds several initiatives providing early learning services. The state’s Preschool Open Doors Project provides low-income families with subsidies to purchase preschool education for their 4-year-olds and, in limited cases, 3-year-olds with special needs. Income eligibility is reassessed and children can be removed from the program based on increases in family income, so the Preschool Open Doors Project is best viewed as offering support to working families rather than as a dedicated educational program.

Other prekindergarten initiatives in the state include the Pre-Plus Program, Junior Kindergarten, Keiki First Steps, and Special Education Preschool. In addition, the state is piloting pre-K programs in two elementary schools. Although remarkable progress has been made, the “Youngest State” still has room to grow in serving its youngest learners.

Idaho

Idaho dedicated $1.5 million in TANF funds to supplement the federal Head Start program in the 2009-2010 school year, enrolling an additional 195 children in the program. But, even with these children, Idaho enrolls less than 7 percent of the state’s 3-year-olds and less than 15 percent of the state’s 4-year-olds in special education preschool and Head Start. Only Utah enrolls a smaller proportion of 3-year-olds, and Idaho is in the bottom five states for enrollment of 4-year-olds.

Indiana

Enrollment of 4-year-olds in special education preschool and Head Start in Indiana is just barely at 15 percent, with only five states enrolling fewer 4-year-olds. Earlier this year, pre-K was notably absent from Governor Daniels’s education reform agenda. At that time, the office of the state Superintendent of Public Instruction expressed interest in investing in state-funded pre-K but noted that the state funding for such a program was unlikely to be available in the near future.

Mississippi

In 2008, the state established Mississippi Building Blocks, a public-private program designed to provide effective support to and increase the quality of existing child care centers. In 2010, a special commission of business leaders and education experts began studying the program as a basis for establishing a statewide model.

When accounting for early education access through Head Start and special education preschool, Mississippi is in the top 5 states enrolling 3-year-olds, serving a higher percent of 3-year-olds than most states with state-funded pre-K programs. With nearly 27 percent of 3-year-olds served in these federal programs, Mississippi’s enrollment is topped only by Vermont, Illinois, and New Jersey. These four states are the only ones to serve more than a quarter of their 3-year-old population.  In addition, Mississippi enrolls almost 37 percent of 4-year-olds in federal pre-K programs.  Despite these advances, Mississippi’s lack of state-funded pre-K makes it an anomaly in the South, where nearby states have committed themselves to universal access.

Montana

Federal special education preschool and Head Start programs in Montana enroll nearly 15 percent of 3-year-olds and 22 percent of 4-year-olds in publicly-funded early learning programs.  This places Montana in the top 20 states for 3-year-old program access, but the bottom 20 for 4-year-old access.  Relying on these programs limits access for most children in the state, and Montana cannot truly be the “Treasure State” for young children until the state makes available access to high-quality pre-K.

New Hampshire

New Hampshire provides slightly more than $300,000 in state supplemental funds to the federal Head Start program. Rather than using these funds to enroll additional children as most states do, New Hampshire dedicates this funding to enhancing teacher salaries.  Less than 9 percent of 3-year-olds are enrolled in a state or federal program in New Hampshire, below the national figure of 14 percent. With only about 11 percent of the state’s 4-year-olds enrolled in special education preschool and Head Start, New Hampshire ties with Nevada for the bottom spot for 4-year-old enrollment in state and/or federal pre-K programs.

North Dakota

North Dakota enrolls 16 percent of its 3-year-olds and nearly 24 percent of its 4-year-olds through federal Head Start and special education preschool. But, the Grand Forks Herald notes that Head Start has a waiting list of more than 800 children throughout the state, indicating that demand outpaces access. State Representative Kathy Hawken told the newspaper, “This particular (legislative) session has not been kind to children. We have pretty much defeated most of the bills that had to do with kids, whether it was health care or prenatal care or CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program). We didn’t fund school nurses. We didn’t fund Head Start.” In addition, earlier this year, the state Senate defeated a bill to fund a $1.5 million pilot preschool program in four school districts. However, a recent law does include expansion statewide of Gearing Up for Kindergarten, a parent education program designed to prepare 4-year-olds for school.  North Dakota has weathered the recession better than most states – since 2006, the state has had the smallest increase in the unemployment rate nationwide, as well as the largest increase in per capita income.  Investing in the future workforce through pre-K can solidify the state’s path to economic prosperity and maintain this growth for future generations.

South Dakota

Existing special education preschool and Head Start programs enroll 16.5 percent of the state’s 3-year-olds and 24.5 percent of its 4-year-olds. Additionally, the Starting Strong Sioux Falls public-private pre-K pilot program was in its third year during the 2009-2010 school year. In response to positive outcomes from this pilot program, a pre-K pilot is being planned for Rapid City. While these pilot programs are encouraging, state-funded early education is only available in select areas. Statewide, the “Land of Infinite Variety” consistently shoots down any attempts to vary preschool education opportunities with the inclusion of state-funded pre-K.

Utah

Utah enrolls only 6 percent of its 3-year-olds and almost 13 percent of its 4-year-olds in special education preschool and Head Start. This makes the state last in the nation for enrollment of 3-year-olds. For enrollment of 4-year-olds, Utah exceeds only New Hampshire and Nevada. Unfortunately, Utah is not alone in its underinvestment in young children, as it is one of the four Mountain West states that fail to provide state-funded pre-K.

Wyoming

With no state-funded prekindergarten program, Wyoming still enrolls nearly 17 percent of its 3-year-olds and 26 percent of its 4-year-olds in special education preschool and Head Start. But this means only children with special needs or from low-income families have access to high-quality early learning opportunities. The “Equality State” could benefit from heeding U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan’s comment at The State of Preschool 2010 press conference that educational inequality is the civil rights issue of our time and increased access to quality pre-K and other early learning opportunities is the way to begin addressing disparities.

2009-2010 Enrollment of 3- and 4-Year-Olds in Preschool Special Education & Federal and State Head Start

State Percent of 3-year-old population (SpEd) Percent of 4-year-old population (SpEd) Percent of 3-year-old population (SpEd + HdSt††) Percent of 4-year-old population (SpEd + HdSt††)
Hawaii 3.8% 5.1% 8.4% 14.5%
Idaho 3.7% 5.6% 6.7% 14.7%
Indiana 5.2% 7.0% 9.7% 14.8%
Mississippi 4.1% 6.9% 26.9% 36.8%
Montana 2.6% 5.0% 14.9% 22.1%
New Hampshire 5.5% 7.1% 8.8% 11.4%
North Dakota 4.8% 7.1% 16.1% 23.7%
South Dakota 5.3% 8.0% 16.5% 24.5%
Utah 3.9% 6.1% 6.5% 12.8%
Wyoming 10.7% 16.7% 16.8% 26.0%

†† This figure includes federally funded and state-funded Head Start enrollment.
Source: The State of Preschool 2010: State Preschool Yearbook

Preschool provides a return on investment these states cannot afford to miss out on. Years of research have demonstrated the benefits of high-quality preschool. Compared to children without high-quality preschool, children who attend are more likely to graduate high school and go on to higher education. They are less likely to require special education or repeat a grade, become teenage parents, or commit crimes as teens or adults, all at great savings to taxpayers. As adults, they are more likely to be qualified to fill the demand for skilled workers that will keep America competitive in the global economy.  As revenues begin the return to pre-recession levels, each of these ten states in particular must take a good look at their fiscal house and choose to make investment in their future a priority.

- Jen Fitzgerald, Public Information Officer, NIEER

- Megan Carolan, Policy Research Coordinator, NIEER


Selling our Children’s Birthright

March 4, 2011

Is Anybody Listening to Ben, David and Paul?

Anyone interested in our children’s future — and thus that of our nation — should be alarmed at the news coming from state houses and Capitol Hill these days. From Georgia to Iowa to Texas, governors are proposing to cut early childhood education in their efforts to reduce spending and the U.S. House of Representatives has proposed massive cuts to Head Start and education that will no doubt affect many young children and their families. Like Esau who sold his birthright to Jacob for a bowl of stew, these political leaders are choosing a small immediate gratification over much larger future rewards, thereby sacrificing our children’s future.  Previously I have written in this space why, when it comes to education, austerity is a false cure for what ails our economy.  In recent days, three of the most respected minds in the nation have also sounded their concern over looming cuts to education.

This week, Federal Reserve Chief Ben Bernanke urged state and local leaders not to short-change education as they address fiscal problems and zeroed in specifically on early childhood education. “Research increasingly has shown the benefits of early childhood education and efforts to promote the lifelong acquisition of skills for both individuals and the economy as a whole,” he said.

In recent days two of the nation’s preeminent columnists (from opposite sides of the political spectrum) added their voices to the call to spare education from the meat axe approach many politicians are taking to spending. David Brooks, the conservative columnist at The New York Times, said what many politicians have been unwilling to: “Trim from the old to invest in the young. We should adjust pension promises and reduce the amount of money spent on health care during the last months of life so we can preserve programs for those who are growing and learning the most. Brooks described governors’ cuts to education as “thoughtless and destructive” and said Republicans in Congress are excusing the elderly while imposing budget cuts that would send early childhood programs off a cliff.

Nobel laureate Paul Krugman sounded a similar message in his recent New York Times column titled “Leaving Children Behind.” He zeroed in on Texas where Governor Rick Perry has proposed cuts that would deny an estimated 100,000 at-risk kids access to state pre-K. Krugman points to the abysmal 61.5 percent high school graduation rate in Texas and asks, “What’s supposed to happen when today’s neglected children become tomorrow’s work force?”

I do not for a minute downplay the severity of the fiscal crisis confronting the nation. It is severe. However, it must be addressed in a way that preserves the prospect of our future prosperity.—and that means investing in early childhood education. Doing so requires brand of leadership that seems in short supply these days. During the dark days of 1776, Thomas Paine, the author of Common Sense saw the need to pen another pamphlet to encourage the populace to do the right thing in the face of dire threats to the republic. It was titled The American Crisis and in it, Paine wrote that it is surprising to see how rapidly a panic will sometimes run through a country. Yet, he said, panics are capable of producing “as much good as hurt” because “the mind soon grows through them and acquires a firmer habit than before.” Let’s make sure that habit includes putting productive investments in children’s early education at the top of our list of priorities.

Steve Barnett,

Co-director, NIEER


The State of the Union and Early Education

January 28, 2011

Like many others I was disappointed that President Obama didn’t mention early childhood education in his State of the Union Speech. Yet when he talked about education, government, and the American people the president said many of the right things for our early learning programs. He noted a sense of urgency when he said the future is ours to win but to get there, we can’t just stand still. He called for more competent and efficient government and for every classroom to be “a place of high expectations and high performance.”  His call to “out-innovate, out-educate, and out-build the rest of the world” had that uniquely American “can do” ring to it that early education policymakers and practitioners should heed.

The president made his case for quick action when he pointed out that over the next 10 years nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school education. And, he pointed out that as many as a quarter of our students aren’t even finishing high school. He asked whether all of us — as citizens and as parents — are willing to do what’s necessary to give every child a chance to succeed and he pointed out that when a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance.

He spoke proudly of Race to the Top, pointing out that instead of just pouring money into the status quo his administration launched a competition for innovation and reform across the education spectrum.  The Obama administration has moved similarly to bring competition to Head Start.  Properly implemented, this has the potential—to paraphrase the president—to be the most meaningful reform our early childhood system has seen in a generation.  The administration should have the support of everyone in the early childhood field to get this reform right, and in my opinion that means including measures of children’s learning in decisions about who gets funded.  This principle ought to be extended to subsidized child care, as well.

Of course there is much more to be done in way of directing funds specifically to innovation in the early education sector so that we too can reinvent ourselves.  We need a great deal more research and evaluation aimed at identifying the effects and costs of policy and practice alternatives in early care and education.  The federal government could greatly facilitate reinvention by sponsoring a program of research to help guide policymakers at the state and local level as well as program administrators in Head Start, child care, and the public schools.  By incentivizing local innovation by educators willing to engage in experiments (freeing them from regulations that get in the way of innovating on a trial basis) and systematically collecting good data on the costs and effects of these innovations, government can build on the hard work, creativity, and imagination of our people the president recognized.  Nothing could help us more to do big things for little children.

Steve Barnett

Co-director, NIEER


Early Childhood Education and the U.S. Labor Market Crisis

January 21, 2011

Guest post by Tim Bartik, Senior Economist, Upjohn Institute for Employment Research

Tim BartikAs Steve Barnett’s recent post indicated, the U.S. faces a prolonged labor market recovery. As of today, the U.S. would need more than 10 million additional jobs to return to the employment to population ratio at the beginning of this recession (December 2007). Based on typical job growth rates, the U.S. will take five to 10 years before returning to “normal” employment conditions.

Given our labor market crisis, every area of public policy must consider how it might improve the labor market.  This includes early childhood education. Advocates of early childhood programs need to answer how early childhood programs might deal with the U.S.’s labor market problems.

First, the labor market crisis means that early childhood programs are more needed than ever to make up for negative effects of parents’ labor market problems on young children.  Research by Greg Duncan and others shows that parental income when a child is ages zero to five has large effects on the child’s later earnings as an adult. Once we control for parental income when a child is five or less, parental income at later ages does not much affect the child’s later earnings as an adult. This fits in with the assumption of early childhood education that children are more malleable to various influences (parental income, quality of preschool, etc.) when they are young.

Therefore, more children are at risk than before the economic crisis. The economic returns to early childhood education occur for all children, but are greater for at-risk children.  The labor market crisis implies that investments now in early childhood education will have particularly high rates of return.

Second, early childhood programs provide economic stimulus by spending more money.  Preschool teachers spend their salaries, which stimulates the economy. There is a net stimulus even once we adjust for the taxes needed to finance early childhood education.  In my new book, Investing in Kids, I estimate that the spending associated with preschool (with some effects from the child care provided) will immediately boost earnings by about 22 percent of the preschool spending.

Third, we should explore packaging early childhood programs with programs that can help parents find jobs, such as well-designed adult job training programs. There could be some positive synergies between early childhood programs and job training programs for parents. The early childhood program provides time for parents to engage in job training programs. Parents may be more forward-looking with respect to their over lives if they believe that their child’s needs are being addressed. Read the rest of this entry »


Early Education Seen in a Human Capital Framework

December 23, 2010

The idea that education leads to the accumulation of capital in the form of more productive workers and that this returns a profit to those who invest in it goes all the way back to Scottish philosopher Adam Smith, the man considered the father of capitalism and whose The Wealth of Nations is considered the first modern work of economics.  It is ironic that in this day and age, the human capital rationale for investing in more and better early education continues to receive short shrift in this most capital-oriented of countries while China and other rising powers forge ahead of us on this front. Could it be that our policymakers are not sufficiently persuaded?

If so, Childhood Programs and Practices in the First Decade of Life: A Human Capital Integration, recently published by Cambridge University Press, provides all the evidence even the skeptics among our political leadership will need in a single volume. In it, leading scholars in human development and early childhood education discuss the effects and cost effectiveness of the most thoroughly studied model early childhood programs as well as state and federal programs. Head Start, Early Head Start, the WIC nutrition program, the Chicago Child-Parent Centers, the Nurse-Family Partnership, the Perry Preschool Program, and state pre-K are among them. Also discussed are various school reform strategies.

The book applies a multi-disciplinary approach to understanding and improving programs, practices, and policies with a goal of fostering increased human capital. This is reflected in the editors chosen for the assignment: Arthur J. Reynolds is a professor at the Institute of Child Development at the University of Minnesota and director of the Chicago Longitudinal Study. Arthur J. Rolnick is senior vice president and director of research at the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis and associate economist with the Federal Open Market Committee. Michelle M. Englund is a research associate and affiliate member of the Graduate Faculty in Child Psychology at the Institute of Child Development at the University of Minnesota. Judy A. Temple is an associate professor at the Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs and the Department of Applied Economics at the University of Minnesota.

State-funded early childhood education is well represented in the book. Georgetown University’s William T. Gormley who has studied Oklahoma’s universal pre-K program extensively provides his analysis of the impressive gains made by that program in Tulsa.  Our NIEER team, including co-director Ellen Frede and fellow NIEER researchers Kwanghee Jung, Cynthia Esposito Lamy (now at Robin Hood Foundation), and Alexandra Figueras, contributes a chapter on the long-term effects of New Jersey’s well-regarded Abbott Preschool Program. Robert G. Lynch, Washington College, provides a state-level synthesis of the cost effectiveness of public investment in high-quality pre-K.

In addition to Arthur Reynolds, other NIEER affiliated authors in this book include Clive Belfield (Queens College, City University of New York), Henry Levin (Columbia University), Robert C. Pianta (University of Virginia), Lawrence J. Schweinhart (HighScope Educational Research Foundation), and Edward Zigler (Yale University).

Childhood Programs and Practices in the First Decade of Life: A Human Capital Integration emanates from a conference by the same name held by the Human Capital Research Collaborative. That’s the organization sponsored by the University of Minnesota and the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis that explores links between human capital and economic development, public health, education, and other connections. With this effort, they have gone a long way toward accomplishing their mission.


What the PISA Scores Are Telling Us

December 17, 2010

There is much talk in Finland these days about the country’s showing in the recent international comparison of PISA (Program for International Student Assessment) scores — not the self-congratulation one might expect from a country that topped yet again the list of high performing countries, but rather a sober look at the report’s nuances. A slight decline in Finland’s reading scores have educators looking for solutions and Minister of Education Henna Virkkunen urging reinforcement of reading skills beginning with “very early education.” It’s a good bet the Finns will take action to remedy what they see as a problem and they will not wait until kids are in formal schooling to apply it.

We should be so lucky. Many responses coming from the chorus of experts in this country to the poor showing of our 15-year-olds look past early childhood education, failing to recognize that preschool education is a strong predictor of difference across countries in PISA scores. According to the PISA report, students who attended preschool scored higher more than a decade after they moved on to the higher grades.

Michael Davidson at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development which conducts PISA points out that 20 percent of the U.S. performance was attributed to social background. This is much higher than in other countries in the evaluation. This too argues for making substantial new investments in high-quality pre-K. While research shows all kids benefit from pre-K, it is the disadvantaged kids who benefit most. Yet despite the evidence, policymakers at all levels continue to seek reforms that have little positive effect. They apparently haven’t gotten the message, backed by abundant research, that high-quality preschool produces positive effects, not to mention high returns on the public’s investment in it.

This message has obviously resonated in Shanghai, China, which now sits at the very top of the list of high performers. Like Finland, this immense city with a population equal to many large U.S. states also provides universal pre-K and requires highly trained teachers. We don’t have to model what we do after the Chinese or the Finns. We can look to selected communities in the United States that have already adopted serious reforms including raising the quality of early care and education. But we do have to begin taking high-quality preschool education as seriously and with the same sense of urgency as the most educationally successful nations. After all, their children are the ones our kids will be competing against.

Ellen Frede & Steve Barnett

Co-directors, NIEER


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 30 other followers