Sue Shellenbarger, who writes the Work & Family column for the Wall Street Journal reports on new Bureau of Labor Statistics data showing more women staying home to be with their young children. She reports that about-to-be-released data shows that women from all income groups are tending to stay out of the workforce, usually for one to three years. The column notes the case of a mother and father who are teachers in Overland Park, Kansas, and who say that their knowledge about how babies' brains grow was a major factor in the mothers' decision to stop working after their twins, now 2½, and their third child, now 15 months old, were born. At home, Ms. Gunderson says, "I try to make sure everything we do together involves some kind of learning."

A very thoughtful comment on my entry on the Times' magazine piece critiqued it for not giving enough ink to what happens to children from birth on. The writer urged me to read a summary of the 1994 "Starting Points" report from the Carnegie Corp. I did and doing so got my reporterly juices flowing. The report noted that, relative to other developed countries, the U.S. was doing a poor job of providing prenatal care and high quality child care, and was seeing a rise in the number of children living in poverty. The report also said children were growing up with little attention from parents and in single-parent homes, due to divorce and a rise in births to unmarried mothers. The commenter suggested that journalists should be asking: "What Early Intervention Programs have been put into place as a result of
that report? Where are they? What follow-up studies have been done? How has
the Federal Government responded to the report? Is the US still lagging far
behind other industrialized nations in addressing this issue? This is the
true SHAME of our society. Those who analyze test scores never get the
point. The cycle of poverty puts generations at risk before they even enter
this world."

Just in November the government reported that 38% of births are to unwed mothers, an all-time record and twice the percentage it was in the 1980s.

The story in the NY Times' Sunday magazine last week on what it would take to close the academic achievement gaps based on class and race continues to reverberate. My friend Joanne Jacobs on her blog reports that at a meeting at the Hunt Institute in North Carolina "former governor, Jim Hunt, handed out copies he’d underlined to everyone there, urging the legislators to 'read every word.' "

Others I've spoken with in the last few days have critiqued the article. Jenny D, who writes her own blog posted a comment on my entry that criticized the article for failing to note all that traditional public schools are doing to try to improve instruction. Another colleague, whose organization here at Teachers College works with teachers, said that while he agreed with Tough's perspective, he thought the piece minimized the difficulty--and improbability--of being able to replicate schools such as KIPP on a large scale. Such schools require terrific leaders and teachers willing to work long, long hours and, therefore, the burnout rate is high. The conversation continues.....

In his recent columns, David Brooks of the New York Times has made early education, and the role of families in helping children develop self-regulation and discipline, something of an ongoing theme. In his Sunday column Brooks weighs in on the magazine cover story from last week on NCLB, KIPP schools, and the effects of poverty on children's performance in school. Brooks cites the work of Robert Sternberg, the Yale psychology prof and others to argue the importance of tacit knowledge, which he says is "knowing how, not knowing what. It's knowing how to listen, how to see and organize what you see." Brooks asserts that children pick this knowledge up informally in "homes that are organized, in families where the attachments are stable, among people who plan for the future and within cultures that celebrate work." But he also applauds schools that try to build this kind of structure into their approach.

It's great to see a newspaper columnist, especially a conservative one, explore how such capacities develop and can be encouraged. It's also interesting that many liberals shy away from schools that are so structured, as are the KIPP academies. Reporters should be willing to examine their own views on such questions and be sure their reporting is unaffected.

The San Antonio Express-News has a very well-written, thoroughly reported package of stories and graphics on the increasingly academic nature of kindergarten. But, unlike a lot of coverage of this issue, the Express-News' piece delves into both the academic challenges disadvantaged kids face as well as the dilemmas that confront educators who are striving to help them catch up and thrive.

For other journalists interested in exploring this subject, this story offers both a good model and several researchers to turn to: they include Sam Meisels and Frances Stott of the Erikson Institute, Jack Fletcher of the University of Houston, and Dominic Gullo of Queens College, here in New York City. Part of the package is a graphic showing the rate at which various Texas school districts hold back kindergartners. Other journalists could track down this data in the communities they cover and explore the reasons for any disparities they turn up.

Still looking for a news story out of Denver, following up on the vote in favor of a local tax to support expanding preschool opportunities there. But until that's published an op-ed written by two advocates does a nice job of exploring the issues at hand. For example, the program could serve fewer students but for more hours or more students but offer a less intensive program. Such tradeoffs are worth exploring. Some of the recent growth in state-level spending on pre-K has increased the number of students served but cut the amount of per-pupil spending, resulting in programs of lower quality. Megan Ferland and Jennifer Landrum of the Colorado Children's Campaign concluded that "today's competitive world places greater demands on our educational system. While providing preschool alone is not enough and must be part of a broader, coordinated education system, we know the best place to start is at the beginning, by making sure children enter school ready to learn."

The three-part series in the San Antonio Express-News on the transformation of kindergarten is now available here. I like a lot about the series. All of its pieces were meticulously reported and instructive, in the sense that they gave readers insights into the dilemmas and decisions of educators in trying to figure out what's best for kids. It was not sensational in any way but it was interesting and filled with real examples. Different viewpoints were offered but it didn't feel like the "he said-she said" stuff that I often see. I also liked that the reporters talked to a lot of kindergarten teachers who seemed like they were given the freedom to express their professional opinion.

Word to principals and supes who try to "gag" teachers and administrators to prevent them from talking to reporters (OK, that phrasing is probably oh so five years ago, but forgive me, I only hang out on a college campus....) You don't get this kind of coverage that explores the issues you deal with all the time, and that helps parents and policy makers understand those issues, unless you provide access to your classrooms and trust your teachers....

The Oregonian reports that Oregon Gov. Ted Kulongoski's budget request includes $39 million to expand Head Start programs to all eligible children. State Supe. Susan Castillo had argued for using state money to expand full-day kindergarten. Kulongoski, a Democrat, said schools may use the money for that purpose if they wish, and, according to the Oregonian "Castillo praised the governor's education spending plan, saying it's a strong step toward restoring the losses schools suffered during the recent recession."

Full-day kindergarten is getting a lot of attention around the country, parelleling the growing interest and spending on pre-k. Here's a place for reporters to go to get the most recent research on full-day kindergarten. Comes from WestEd in San Francisco, a good source of reliable, unbiased research.

Question I'd have is whether the Head Start programs that will be getting more money are geared up to prepare kids for kindergarten? What is the curriculum? Who is teaching in Head Start programs? Point is, there's plenty of follow-ups. Never a shortage of stories.

A University of Wisconsin study of the positive effects of pre-school is getting plenty of attention up in Canada. Last Friday the Wall Street Journal published a column that said that more women are staying home to give their children a learning advantage. But the new study suggests preschool may actually do more for many kids.

The key is you really have to look at what happens at home vs. what happens at preschool or centre-based care," lead author Katherine Magnuson, of the University of Wisconsin at Madison, said in an interview with Susan Schmidt of the CanWest news service. "While it's true parents can give one-on-one attention, they also run errands, talk to their friends, put (children) in front of the television.

The study, to be published in the forthcoming edition of Early Childhood Research Quarterly, assessed the skills of a sample of 7,748 children at school entry in 1998. The researchers then tested their academic progress in math and reading in the spring of Grades 1 and 3.

The chorus of governors touting a full day of kindergarten--devoted to learning and not just that silly playing around stuff--continues to grow. Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels is offering $25 million for districts' startup costs. But Hoosier educators say creating the space for full day kindergarten could cost $200 million statewide. The Indianapolis Star made a good contribution to the public's understanding of the investment required by surveying the facilities needs of the districts in their area, and reporting on how many kids attend fullday kindergarten now. The team of reporters assigned to the story also got into the educational issues. One angle I haven't seen reported elsewhere:

"IPS teachers fight off assumptions that full-day kindergarten amounts to baby-sitting on the state's dime. Kindergartners at School 60 on the Near Northside study continents and oceans on world maps, count money and learn the days of the week....Kindergarten isn't like what it used to be, when they would go to play, socialize, take a nap," Whicker said. "That's history. We have structured curricular time."

Veteran Hartford Courant education writer Bob Frahm reports on the recommendation of a state-level study group to spend $100 million to expand children's services, including preschool classes, to make the state "a national model for early childhood education." The goal is to more than double the number of low-income children in preschool classes, train more preschool teachers and aides, and bolster the quality of preschool programs statewide, according to Frahm. The story notes the proposal will, as always, compete with other needs. "It really becomes a question of whether the people of the state of Connecticut are ready to pony up for this issue and raise taxes," state Sen. Toni Harp of New Haven notes.

What I missed in this story, though, was the sense that: 1. this is an issue very much on the frontburner in numerous states. A paragraph or so is all that would have been needed. and 2. any reference to the research on the effects of high-quality pre-k on poor kids. In other words, why is anyone suggesting spending hundreds of millions of dollars.

It did, however, include a legislator saying pre-kindergarten is important for preparing the workforce of tomorrow.

Washington Post uses the report of a committee on pre-kindergarten appointed by Virginia Gov. Timothy Kaine to provide a good regional and national roundup of activity on the issue. When elected a year ago Kaine vowed to bring universal, voluntary pre-kindergarten to all four-year-olds in the state. But other issues, including highways, got in the way. The story notes that opposition is growing to what some legislators see as a subsidy for the middle class and one legislator even claimed that "frankly, there's no proof it works." Oddly enough, the legislator offering that confident, and misinformed, assertion was Majority Whip M. Kirkland Cox, a Republican who is a government teacher in Chesterfield County. If Mr. Cox didn't want to accept research widely available from places such as the National Institute on Early Education Research, he might consult this position statement from the American Federation of Teachers.

I don't think it would be advocacy for a story such as this to note that a number of studies have shown that high-quality pre-kindergarten does make a difference in kids' lives and that such programs provide a good return on investment, in terms of lowered social costs. Journalists shouldn't let legislators deny evidence, even if the implications of that evidence involve spending some dough.

Connecticut Post carries a story about unfilled vacancies in pre-kindergarten programs in Bridgeport, which also has more than 900 kids on waiting lists. The story serves a useful purpose, alerting folks to the situation. The story notes that most of the unfilled slots are only part-time. Journalists should be aware that when schools or agencies offer half-day pre-kindergarten, without what are known as "wrap around" services that allow kids to be at the center all day, it's very difficult for working parents to participate.

Now comes a Wisconsin task force to say that the state is not doing enough to assess the outcomes of its state pre-school program for four-year olds. "There's no study or determination of whether we are getting for our dollars' worth and...whether or not four-year-old kindergarten is a cost-effective means by which we can educate our children," said the incoming Speaker of the Wisconsin House, Republican Representative Mike Huebsch. According to a report on WKBT television La Crosse, the task force wants monitoring of whether children are learning English, test scores, and whether state spending on special education is dropping. The broadcast quoted a pre-k center director who says, "I think the standards are important as guidelines but, it is very difficult in early childhood to say, 'You have to have a "C" or above average in whether you can tie your shoe or not."

Good way to show the limits of "assessing" four-year-olds. It would also be good for the story to have noted that Wisconsin spends about $4,200 a year on a half-day program, according to the National Institute of Early Education Research. (state profiles available here). That's not even half the amount the state spends per pupil on K-12 education and, though it seems paradoxical, high quality pre-k costs more, not less.

New York has a way of putting the rest of the country in perspective, by defining extremes. Latest evidence of this is the rush of parents in affluent parts of Brooklyn to get their kids into the "right" preschools, where tuition can run to five figures. The breathy story here from New York Magazine says the "brownstone-Brooklyn baby boom is causing a sort of educational crisis," leaving parents to ask, "When did this turn into Manhattan." The story notes that one pre-k set up a lottery for it's "juice-party interview slots" and quotes a parent who says the competition is "preposterous." Sort of makes you wonder how half-day public programs that spend $3,000 or so per kid can achieve their stated aim, of closing achievement gaps.

Inside Pre-K, a new blog written by a New Jersey pre-k teacher named Sophia Pappas, debuts. Journalists planning to visit a pre-k class should read some of Sophia's very detailed descriptions of vignettes that depict what her four-year-olds are learning. The blog will help journalists formulate questions and develop their skills of observation.

The new report from the New Commission on the Skills of the American Work Force is nothing if not bold. It paints a grim scenario of a drastically reduced standard of living for many Americans if the nation doesn't get better at building a skilled workforce. Essentially, the report says the U.S. needs to move in the direction of successful education systems around the world: more investment in pre-kindergarten, and getting most young people well-prepared for college or trade schools by the 10th grade. Lots of recommendations and well worth journalists' attention. The commission report says the recommended changes in the system would save about $67 billion a year it says about a third of that money should be spent on a system of high quality pre-kindergarten for all 3- and 4-year-olds. Time magazine, Tom Friedman in the New York Times and the Chicago Tribune
all covered it. (Update: NYTs coverage is here and Christian Science Monitor is here.)

Remember the three-part series on kindergarten the San Antonio Express-News did a few weeks back? I can envision a similar, and similarly provocative, series that could be done on pre-kindergarten. Given that expanding Pre-K seems to be very much at the top of the agenda for many policy makers, and given the expansion that's already occurred, it'd be useful and timely for journalists to see what's really going on out there in these programs as they expand.

I was traveling last week so didn't catch up with the terrific Wall Street Journal (as in funny, terrifying, depressing) story about what they called "BlackBerry Orphans," kids who are neglected as their parents compulsively check email on the devices. The story tells the story of kids trying to put limits on their parents' usage, which extends to the dinner table, while driving, during school plays, and so on.

A few parents say "BlackBerry" is in their toddlers' early vocabulary. Lucas Ellin, a Los Angeles 5-year-old, pretends he has his own, parading around the house with a small toy in his hand while shriking, "Look, Mommy, it's my BlackBerry."

Another story I'd like to see has to do with cell phone usage. When I'm out running in Manhattan or elsewhere I see parents pushing strollers or walking hand-in-hand with their child while talking on their cell phone. The time parents spend with their kids talking to them and answering their questions and discussing all that they are seeing is infinitely valuable for their development and learning. So, when these parents are out with their kids but have their minds elsewhere, they're not really doing much good. Better to let the nanny take the kids and talk to them than you, Mom or Dad, go somewhere with the kids but spend the whole time talking on the cellphone.

The term "readiness" for kindergarten is one that makes me sort of itchy and uncomfortable. I started feeling that way when I read this otherwise innocuous column in a little paper out in Oregon. The column reports that one in five Oregon five-year-olds are "not ready" for kindergarten and that the state ranks 40 out of 50 in terms of the percentage of four-year-olds enrolled in pre-kindergarten. Remember that all kids are ready for learning--their brains (like ours) are hardwired that way. Meanwhile, kindergarten is getting more academic and putting more emphasis on learning. But it doesn't necessarily follow, though, that those coming into kindergarten who are not reading and doing math aren't "ready" for kindergarten. Kindergarten is not like college. Five-year-olds shouldn't have to qualify to get into it and be held back until they're "ready." This stuff worries me because I've seen some charts from researchers that seem to argue that 80% or more of kids aren't "ready" for kindergarten. The standard such data seems to use is that some kids--those who have all the advantages, who have had $15,000 per year pre-school experiences, who have had violin lessons from the age of 3 on--are more advanced at age 5 than others. Therefore, anyone not at the top, top, top of the chart in terms of development is said to be "not ready" for kindergarten. I don't buy it.

The substantive point of my rant is that a great story for journalists would be to talk to kindergarten teachers about what it is that they think makes kids "kindergarten ready." What they're likely to find, and I'm speculating here, is that those who teach kindergarten are thrilled if kids come in being able to sit still in a group, to share, to play with others, to listen, In other words, the social, non-cognitive skills. If the kids know their colors, letters and can hold a pencil that's nice too. Being able to do differential equations and quote Shakespeare? Nice. But not required.

Latest federal data on participation of three-to-five-year-olds in child-care or pre-school or Head Start is available here. Data shows that the percentage of that age group enrolled in centers increased from 53 percent in 1991 to 60 percent in 1999, before decreasing to 57 percent in 2005. Despite the increase in state spending on pre-kindergarten, it's not keeping up with the population.

The Pew Charitable Trusts, which since 2001 has invested more than $50 million in its "Advancing Quality Pre-K For All" initiative, has put out a five-year status report on its progress. (Full disclosure: the Hechinger Institute, which I direct, has received two grants from the Pew Trusts to raise journalists' awareness and knowledge of pre-kindergarten and this blog is part of that work.) The report is notable for its frankness and offers a good sense of where the issue stands. The authors, Susan Urahn and Sara Watson, say the Trusts will continue to focus on increasing public investment in pre-kindergarten. But they also note that the Trusts and 11 other funders are pursuing research to "assess the contribution that different supports for young children make to the nation's economy." In other words, what other services do children need, and how can their impact on the economic well-being of the U.S. and its people be monitored and measured. That project is known as the "Partnership for America's Economic Success" and bears watching.

One other part of this memo that should be of particular interest to journalists is the list of criteria it offers for pre-k programs and for state pre-k policies. The list offers a good template for questions journalists should ask about efforts in the states they cover.

The Washington Post had a frontpager Sunday about the rapid spread of the elementary school version of the International Baccalaureate program. I really like how the story takes the reader inside this program and these classrooms and gives one a very clear sense of the instruction and expectations.

Here's an excerpt:

The program seeks to mold students, from preschool age on, into "transdisciplinary" and bilingual scholars who can deliver a major academic project by fifth grade and then move into deeper studies in secondary schools and beyond. (IB middle schools also exist.) Critics wonder whether it's all a bit much for a student demographic that still receives scratch-and-sniff stickers on written work.

The story quotes a mother, speaking about her husband's motivation for enrolling the kids in IB: "He was like, 'Our kids are going to an Ivy League school, and we need an education that's going to get them on the right track.' "

By the way, I'm collecting statements and references to how preschool will get kids on track for 1. The Ivy League. 2. Science Careers 3. To Become Doctors. Please send in your nominations!

I mentioned a few days ago the new blog from Sophia, a New Jersey pre-kindergarten teacher, who describes what goes on in her classroom. As a journalist, I find her entries to be quite enlightening, giving me a sense of what to notice in classrooms and what to ask pre-k teachers about.

One example: in an entry headed "Wow!" she talks about one of her student's progress toward learning letters and their sounds. It reminded me of a point made by a Hechinger Institute seminar about assessment. "If you ask a good teacher how a particular student is doing, you'll never hear her say, 'I don't know. I don't have her test scores back.' " That's because good teachers always know how they're students are doing, and what they need help with. Good point for journalists to ponder.

Who knew? I thought those flatearther, conspiracy theorists went out of the scaremongering business in the 1970s. But no. The report of the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce got the JBS all riled up because it didn't call for enough privatization and also asserted a societal interest in education. Here's what the JBS had to say about the recommendation to spend $20 billion or so a year on high quality, universal pre-kindergarten for all three- and four-year-olds.

...the plan calls for kids not yet old enough for kindergarten to be gobbled up by universal pre-kindergarten programs. Because the state would hold the purse strings, the state would have full control. And with the enrollment of children who are only three and four years old, the state would gain more control over more children.

"Gobbled" up by free, voluntary, high-quality pre-school....interesting concept

My call for stories in which sources claim that getting into the "right" pre-school or kindergarten is an express ride directly to 1. The Ivy League. 2. Science Careers 3. To Become Doctors. prompted Hechinger Institute Assistant Director Liz Willen to send me a story she did last spring for Bloomberg News. The story had the obligatory only-somewhat-tongue-in-cheek quote about the pre-K-Harvard link. But it also had this perspective quote from William Fitzsimmons, Harvard's admission director: ``You have students who are home schooled, students who have gone to any kind of school you could imagine and even students who have spent no time at all in their lives in a formal classroom who end up getting into Harvard,'' Fitzsimmons said.