New Research on Effects of Pre-K 2012 Building a Grad Nation Summit - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

New Research on Effects of Pre-K

2012 Building a Grad Nation Summit Washington, DC March 19, 2012

Steve Barnett, PhD

Why invest in Pre-K?

• First 5 years are a time of rapid brain development
• Early experience substantially influences development
• Pre-K has been demonstrated to produce short- and

long-term positive impacts

• Later compensatory efforts face reduced plasticity and

higher costs

• Early failure & success are self-reinforcing

Potential Gains from Investments in Early Education

Educational Success and Economic Productivity

• Achievement test scores
• Special education and grade repetition
• High school graduation
• Behavior problems, delinquency, and crime
• Employment, earnings, and welfare dependency
• Smoking, drug use, depression

Decreased Costs to Government

• Schooling costs
• Social services costs
• Crime costs
• Health care costs (teen pregnancy and smoking)

Cognitive gains from Early Education Programs 0-5 in the US (123 studies since 1960)

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Treatment End Ages 5-10 Age >10 Effects (sd) Age at Follow-Up

1 sd = achievement gap, so High Quality preschool closes nearly half the achievement gap

All Designs HQ Designs HQ Programs

What works?

• Intentional teaching
• Balanced curriculum

– Cognitive and Socio-Emotional

• Individualization

– Small-group and one-on-one

• More to come---

Program Effectiveness Varies Greatly

CPC Tulsa TN 8 St Head St Language na na na .26 .13 Math .33 .36 .28/.48 .32 .18 Literacy na .99 .42/.82 .80 .34

Effects in standard deviations. Figures in parentheses are adjusted for noncompliance. Early Head Start is 0-3, more expensive and less effective than Head Start

Oklahoma: Effective Pre-K for All

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Letter-Word ID Spelling Applied Problems TPS Pre K Head Start

Program impacts in months

Preschool programs strengthen reading, writing, and math skills

Woodcock-Johnson achievement subtest

Oklahoma’s Broad & Lasting Gains

• Positive effects on attention, no negative

effects on social-emotional (also TN)

• More likely to take regular tests

– At K: 81% pre-K v.70% none – At 3rd grade: 70% pre-K v. 59% none

• Higher math scores at grade 3, but not

reading—no correction for testing difference

• Teacher with BA & ECE + asst. in each class;
• Full-day (6 hour educational day), 180-day

program, plus extended day/full year;

• Access to all 3 and 4 yr. olds in 31 school systems
• Maximum class size of 15 students;
• Evidence-based curricula;
• Early learning standards and program guidelines;
• Support for potential learning difficulties; and
• Professional development for key staff.

NJ’s Urban Pre-K Transformation

3.9 19.9 34.6 27.7 12.1 1.7 0.0 0.2 4.2 32.2 47.4 16.0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1.00-1.99 2.00-2.99 3.00-3.99 4.00-4.99 5.00-5.99 6.00-7.00 Figure 3. ECERS-R Score (1=minimal, 3=poor 5= good 7=excellent) Percentage of Classrooms

00 Total (N = 232) 08 Total (N = 407)

NJ Classes Change in ECERS-R Overall Quality 1999-2000 vs 2007-2008

Increased Quality in NJ Pre-K Improved Education Outcomes

• Gains in language, literacy, math
• 2 years have twice the effect of 1
• 2 years closed 40% of the achievement gap
• Effects sustained through 2nd grade
• Grade repetition cut in half by 2nd grade

International Evidence

OECD test scores higher and more equal as access approaches 100% France: Ecole Maternelle increased income Norway: universal child care increased earnings and employment Argentina, Uruguay, and UK: universal preschool raised long-term achievement Denmark, Quebec: universal child care null or negative effects on children--quality matters

Initial Results from the Newest Studies

• Arkansas pre-K long-term effects– reading and

math effects at grade 2 and reading at grade 3

• Rhode Island: UPK positive effects on literacy

and math, all children gain

• Chicago RCT of half v. full-day Pre-K: larger

effects of full-day on language and math

• Boston Pre-K—strong effects on language,

literacy, math, and executive function

Conclusions

• Pre-K is proving a good public investment
• Increased achievement
• Job and GDP growth, decreased economic and

educational inequality, fewer social problems

• Pre-K for all children can yield a higher return and

greater equality than targeting only the poor

• Intensity and quality are the keys to high returns
• Quality requires high standards, adequate funding

and relentless focus on continuous improvement

References

• 1. Barnett, W. S. (2011). Effectiveness of early educational intervention. Science, 333, 975-978.
• 2. Burger, K. (2010). How does early childhood care and education affect cognitive development? An international review of the

effects of early interventions for children from different social backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 140-165.

• 3. Camilli, G., Vargas, S., Ryan, S., & Barnett, W.S. (2010). Meta-analysis of the effects of early education interventions on cognitive

and social development. Teachers College Record, 112(3), 579-620.

• 4. Dumas C. & Lefranc, A. (2010). Early schooling and later outcomes: Evidence from preschool extension in France. THEMA

Working Paper 2010-07. Université de Cergy-Pontoise.

• 5. Frede, E. C., & Barnett, W. S. (2011). New Jersey’s Abbott pre-k program: A model for the nation. In E. Zigler, W. Gilliam, & W. S.

Barnett (Eds.), The pre-k debates: current controversies and issues (pp. 191-196). Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.

• 6. Gormley, W., Phillips, D., Newmark, K., Welti, K., & Adelstein, S. (2012). Social-emotional effects of early childhood education

programs in Tulsa. Child Development, 82, 2095-2109.

• 7. Havnes, T. & Mogstad, M. (2011). No Child Left Behind: Subsidized Child Care and Children's Long-Run Outcomes. American

Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3(2): 97–129.

• 8. Hill, C., Gormley, W., & Adelstein, S. (2012). Do the short-term effects of a strong preschool program persist? Working Paper No.
• 18. Washington, DC: Georgetown Unversity, CROCUS.
• 9. Kitzman, H. J. et al. Enduring Effects of Prenatal and Infancy Home Visiting by Nurses on Children: Follow-up of a Randomized

Trial Among Children at Age 12 Years. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, Vol. 164, May 2010, pp. 412-18.

• 10. Lipsey, M., Farrran, D., Bilbrey, C., Hofer, K., & Dong, N. (2011). Initial results of the evaluation of the Tennessee Voluntary Pre-K
• Program. Nashville: Vanderbilt University.
• 11. Neidell, M., & Waldfogel, J. (2010). Cognitive and noncognitive peer effects in early education. The Review of Economics and

Statistics, 92(3), 562-576.

• 12. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B. (2004). The final report: Effective pre-school education.

Technical paper 12. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

• 13. Waldfogel, J., & Zhai, F. (2008). Effects of public preschool expenditures on the test scores of fourth graders: Evidence from
• TIMMS. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14, 9–28.

Pre-Kindergarten Academies – A Bridge to Success

2012 Grad Nation Summit Presentation

Jay Speck, Solano County Superintendent of Schools

Demographic Data

Source: California Department of Education

 5 Time-Winner 100 Best Communities for

Young People!

 6 School Districts  65,000 Kdg-12 Students  42% Free/Reduced Lunch  14% English Language Learners (ELL)  25% Drop Out Rate  Ethnically Diverse: 32% Hispanic, 29%

White, 17% African American, 9% Filipino, 4% Asian

Why am I Committed to School Readiness?

California – The Land of Propositions

Common Ground

Pre-K Academies

 Targeted to children that are poor and/or

English Language Learners (59%)

 Little or no pre-school experience  4 week period prior to the start of

kindergarten

 Teachers and curriculum matched to

schools children will attend

 Emphasis on both pre-academic and

social-emotional development

 Kindergarten School Readiness Profile

• 18% mastered 7 out of 10 core items at entry
• 57% mastered 7 out of 10 core items at exit

 ELL made less gains especially in pre-

academic

 Teachers placed a high value on social-

emotional readiness

 High parent and teacher satisfaction  Timing of academy matters

Return on Investment

 “Race to the Top” Early Learning Challenge

Grant

 Transitional Kindergarten

• Changing kindergarten entrance from Dec

2 to Sept 2

• Create a TK program for all children

What’s Next…

 The need to think differently about K-12  The need to take the long view

• School Readiness is a dropout prevention

strategy

• Changing from a reactive system to

proactive

 The need for a robust public policy discussion

• policy makers
• Involving Business and Community Leaders

School Readiness as a Game Changer

Thank You

Early Learning at the U.S. Department of Education

Jacqueline Jones, PhD Senior Advisor on Early Learning to the Secretary of Education U.S. Department of Education

2012 Building a Grad Nation Summit Session 2: Getting a Jump on a Grad Nation: How early childhood education puts our children on the path to success Washington, DC March 19, 2012 2:45-4:00pm

"To win the future, our children need a strong start."

• Secretary Arne Duncan

27

A Cradle-to-Career Continuum

All graduates

have

• pportunities

for success in the 21st century economy All students graduate high school on time prepared for at least

• ne year of

post- secondary All students enter middle school with foundational skills to tackle advanced subjects All kindergarten students arrive ready to succeed and remain on track to 4th grade

Elementary (Grades K-5) Secondary (Grades 6-12) Post- Secondary Early Learning (Birth-grade 3) 28

28

ED Strategic Plan 2011-2014

Early Learning

Improve the health, social-emotional, and cognitive

• utcomes for all children from birth through 3rd grade, so

that all children, particularly those with high needs, are on track for graduating from high school college- and career- ready.

29

29

High-Quality Early Learning Systems

High-Quality Coordinated Early Learning System

Program Standards/ QRIS Early Learning Standards Data Health Promotion

Family and Community Engagement Workforce/ Professional Development

Comprehensive Assessment System 30

Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge

31

Increasing the number of children entering kindergarten ready to succeed Improving the quality of early learning programs

by

32

Goal

37 Applicants

Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Illinois Iowa Kansas 33

33

Kentucky Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Nebraska Nevada New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island Vermont Washington West Virginia Wisconsin

9 States Funded

1.

North Carolina

2.

Massachusetts

3.

Washington

4.

Delaware

5.

Ohio

6.

Maryland

7.

Minnesota

8.

Rhode Island

9.

California

34

Key Reform Areas

Successful State Systems

High-Quality, Accountable Programs

TQRIS Promoting Outcomes

Improving the Workforce

Measuring Outcomes Standards

Assessment Systems

Health Promotion

Family Engagement Framework/ Credentials Supporting Improvement

KEA Data

Investments Reform Agenda

35

High-Quality, Accountable Programs

 Tiered Quality Rating and Improvement System

(TQRIS)

 NC: serve 75% of children with high-needs in TQRIS programs

rated 4 stars or higher

 WA: expand existing TQRIS to include Head Start, Early Head

Start, and state-funded pre-k programs

 DE: work with KY and NC to develop, field test, and pilot

new quality scale

36

Promoting Outcomes

Early Learning Standards

 NC: develop standards for children from birth to age eight,

aligned with K-3 standards

 MA: evaluate standards for cultural and linguistic

appropriateness and for English learners

 RI: align with K-3 Common Core standards in math and

literacy

37

Promoting Outcomes

Comprehensive Assessment Systems (NC, MA, OH, MD, MN, RI)

 MA: scale up statewide assessment from birth to 3rd grade  DE: outreach to physicians to include developmental

screenings in well-child check-ups and expand capacity of mental health specialists

 MA: require formative assessments in level 3 and 4

programs

38

Promoting Outcomes

Family Engagement (NC, MA, WA, MD)

 OH: pilot incentives for families to encourage enrollment in

high-quality programs

 MD: promote family leadership in the early childhood

system

 RI: reach children and families not enrolled in early learning

programs through healthcare providers using interventions in early literacy, socio-emotional development, and family engagement

39

Improving the Workforce

Workforce Knowledge and Competency Framework/ progression of credentials

(WA, DE, OH, MD, MN, RI)

 WA: incorporate statewide core competencies, career lattice,

and professional registry in its TQRIS

 RI: develop a new core competency framework for providers  OH: integrate and align its Core Knowledge and Competency

Framework with all professional development

40

Improving the Workforce

Supporting Early Childhood Educators in improving their knowledge, skills, and abilities

(NC, MA, DE, MD, MN, RI, CA)

 NC: increase completion rates in community college training

programs

 CA: establish PD hubs to train providers in supporting English

learners

 MD: provide leadership training and facilitation in public-

private partnership with the Annie E. Casey Foundation

41

Measuring Outcomes

Data (NC, MA, OH, MD, MN, RI)

 MN: implement web tools to help providers use assessment

data to guide instruction

 RI: link to state K-12 data system and to the universal

newborn screening and health data system

 CA: modify the State’s longitudinal data system to

accommodate and share kindergarten readiness data

42

Measuring Outcomes

Kindergarten Entry Assessment

 MA: pilot a new KEA in its first grant year  MD & OH: will partner to include all domains of school

readiness and include results on local school report cards

43

THANK YOU!

Full applications available at

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-earlylearningchallenge/awards.html

Please see our website for additional information and to join our list serve

http://www.ed.gov/early-learning

44