Stories about parents camping out on streets overnight to get their children into a quality pre-kindergarten program are easy targets for the media. It’s not hard to get quotes from exhausted and annoyed adults who have slept outside for several nights in search of a coveted spot in a quality program for their progeny.

That's exactly what reporters for 11 HD News in Atlanta Atlanta Journal Constitution did last week. The photos really bring this story home.

The hope, desperation and anger on those Georgia sidewalks and in the campers and RV's parked nearby speaks volumes about the value of a solid educational beginning for young children and the need for a better system of signing up. In Atlanta, parents sign their kids up on a first-come first-serve basis for pre-k, and camping out to be first is an accepted practice.

Atlanta’s Superintendent of Schools Beverly Hall apparently disapproves of it and had sent out a letter schools discouraging it. But it came too late for the parents who had spent the night on the sidewalk to be the first on line, only to have police barricades blocking them from entering the school.

The process is an education itself. But is it the right kind of education?

At Early Ed Watch, Sara Mead notes statements Sens. Clinton and Obama made over the weekend before Tuesday's primary regarding investing in high quality early education. Clinton repeated her support for universal prekindergarten. (She favors providing states with incentives to invest their own money in high quality programs.) Obama linked high quality early education to improving the global competitiveness of the American workforce. Mead notes that North Carolina and Indiana have two very different approaches to prekindergarten. North Carolina is one of the nation's leaders and Indiana doesn't spend a dime on prekindergarten.

The Utne Reader's Science and Technology blog links has a fascinating video interview with Elizabeth Spelke, who heads a team of Harvard
researchers studying the development of language and social awareness in babies. The video was produced by The Telegraph newspaper in London, which published an in-depth story on this line of research. Here's a nugget: babies from the very youngest age show preference for people who speak with the same accent as their parents, for people their own gender, and for people their own race.

Ezra Klein, who blogs for the American Prospect, chides liberals for not getting behind universal prekindergarten. He says research shows universal prekindergarten is "tremendously cost effective" and produces "massive educational benefits." He bolsters his case with a link to the well-known William Gormley study of the universal program in Oklahoma. Gormley's study does, indeed, show positive results from the program but the biggest gains were made by Latino children learning English. To quote Gormley: "Preliminary results from a growing body of research on the
effects of pre-K programs are encouraging, but not entirely con-
vincing." He also cites Nobel Prize-winning economist James Heckman as supporting universal prekindergarten. Heckman, however, is something of a thorn in the side of supporters of universal programs because he actually says the higher payoff comes from targeted programs: "There are many reasons why investing in disadvantaged young children has a high economic return. Early interventions for disadvantaged children promote schooling, raise the quality of the work force, enhance the productivity of schools, and reduce crime, teenage pregnancy and welfare dependency. They raise earnings and promote social attachment. Focusing solely on earnings gains, returns to dollars invested are as high as 15% to 17%.”

Klein knows this but has ignored the distinction in the past as well.

In reaction to the Ezra Klein post (see next entry), Bennett Gordon comments on the education blog of Utne.com that universal prekindergarten "reinforces existing inequalities" in the public schools and should be denied to middle-class children. That's an argument that Bruce Fuller of the University of California, Berkeley makes as well.

Given limited resources, I understand why Fuller argues that services should be targeted. But I find it hard to accept that it's a good idea to deny some children education to provide it for others. By that logic, one could ask whether the $550 billion or so spent on public education shouldnl't be targeted mostly to poor children? Certainly, more affluent families can send their children to private schools, can't they? Why should they be subsidized?

The City Paper in Nashville produced an insightful analysis of the Tennessee budget realities that forced Gov. Bredesen to give up on his plans to keep expanding the state's pre-k program. The move shows shows the seriousness of the state's financial problems, said Rep. Les Winningham (D-Huntsville), the chairman of the House Education Committee. “Obviously, he had a goal of continual expansion of pre-K,” Winningham said. “And we have to know and recognize that when he actually pulls back on an investment in that, that the situation financially is pretty serious.”

Jeff Solochek's blog The Gradebook in St. Petersburg says a state auditor's report suggests revising the method by which schools participating in the Voluntary Pre-K program are evaluated to take better account of the gains children make. But linking to this entry also let's me run this photo from the blog, which shows the 2007 "graduating" class of the Li'l Camper's Academy.

Some of the most interesting work I've read about early childhood comes from Ross Thompson , a professor at the University of California, Davis. I heard him give a fascinating talk once about the importance of the mother child relationship for early learning.

This week, Education Week published a story about a new study indicating that the quality of the relationship between preschool teachers and students may be even more important to their learning than credentials, class size and other factors.

For reporters covering pre-school, the relationship question is worth pursuing, but tough to quantify. There may be certain clues, though, and all require close powers of observation and some background knowledge. The study provides yet another rationale for visiting pre-school classrooms to help shine some light on what happens inside -- and why it matters.

It's worth reading the study, which was released in the May/June issue of the journal Child Development. Authors include Robert Pianta, dean of education at the University of Virginia, who developed an assessment tool that measures 10 different aspects of teaching and is being used across the U.S. to train pre-school teachers. Some initial conclusions and useful observations can be found in the press release.

The information is a good starting point for classroom visits and questions to ask -- all of which will lead to higher quality journalism.

Ann Doss Helms of the Charlotte Observer posed some interesting questions in a Sunday story on Bright Beginnings, a pre-kindergarten program in Charlotte-Mecklenberg schools with a big promise -- to transform the lives of at-risk children and help them succeed later on.

Her story found the $23 million a year program has not kept its promises and that the school system cannot say what its academic impact has been. The Chief accountability officer of the district told Doss Helms that analyzing the success of the pioneer class -- now high school freshmen -- isn't on their radar, at a time when long-term research on the impact of public pre-kindergarten is lagging. A sidebar to the story shows how little data a researcher hired to analyze the program has received.

As states and governors consider investing public funds in pre-kindergarten, it's critical for journalists to follow-up the way the Doss Helms has done and hold the programs and public officials accountable. The questions her story poses -- including what factors determine and shape a student's success, and what influence a strong pre-kindergarten program might have -- must be part of the public dialogue.

(Wiped out by kindergarten?)

Children who don't get a chance to attend pre-kindergarten may have their first experience with school when they enter public school for government-funded kindergarten.

Pressure is growing to make such programs a full-day in areas where they are not, better to give children the academic start they need and mesh with the schedules of working parents who in many cases have already had their children in school all day.

In the upscale Massachusetts town of Lexington, parents have agreed to pay an additional $1,025 in student fees for a full day program, according to a story in the Lexington Minuteman, picked up in Sara Meade's Early Ed Watch blog.

In Arizona, a full-day kindergarten program that began three years ago with just 11,000 students grew to more than 86,000 students in 2007.

In the West Des Moines school district in Iowa, the number of full-day kindergarten classes will nearly double next year, according to the Des Moines Register . The article noted that parents prefered an all-day option, but never got into the debate that sometimes occurs among parents considering such programs.

The comments that appeared on the end of the story made it clear that all-day kindergarten still feels like a stretch to some parents, who worry about their children staying awake.

"They don't offer naps anymore,'' one parent lamented.

Reporters interested in learning more about the benefits of all-day programs might check out fact sheets about their states, such as this one compiled by the Minneapolis Foundation.

There's also a report on full-day programs by the National Institute for Early Education Research.

Most states have websites or organizations devoted to detailing facts about full day kindergarten, such as Strategies for Children in Massachusetts, and similar fact sheets for many states that have or are continuing to debate this issue.

And always, there is a concerned parent to interview who worries about naptime.

While some states are pushing for all day kindergarten, Texas and Florida are jump-starting pre-school, trying out children as young as 2 and 3-years-old with the help of a $6 million grant from the University of Texas.

A piece by Staci Hupp in the Dallas Morning News noted that pre-school is "moving to the potty-training set,'' and took a look at a new project coming to Dallas that aims at training child-care workers to connect with children early to help boost their success in school later on.

Dallas is home to a fast growing Hispanic population with children younger than 5 making up the largest age group. The city also has a disproportionate population of poor children who are more likely to start pre-school developmentally behind and the hope is that starting children younger by building their vocabularies and school routines will only help them give them a better academic start.

It will be interesting for reporters to visit these early start programs and talk to some of the caregivers and teachers. What kind of structures and curriculum are in place, and how is the program being evaluated and measured? What are the expectations, and what are the hoped for -- and achieved -- outcomes? Is anyone measuring progress once they do start school, and if so, how? What constitutes success for the potty-training set?

(Early reading or book eating?)

A story in The Sun about a class of pre-kindergarten students in Oklahoma who are "already reading,'' caught my eye this week, in part because I'm always on the look out for ways in which we are pressuring children to hurry up and master skills.

Turns out, while some of these four-year-olds are finishing beginner books, most are simply memorizing a sentence or two, according to the article.The story is sweet, and filled with quotes praising the administrators and teachers for being supportive and creative and for pushing the students. What it doesn't do is examine a longstanding debate about the appropriate age to teach reading.

There are plenty of people who do not believe formal learning should start for children until they are seven, including Lilian Katz,, a professor of education at Illinois University

Katz last year addressed an international conference on nursery school at Oxford University in England, and told the U.K. newspaper The Guardian that teaching children to read and write too early can dent their interest in books later on.

In Sweden, children do not star formal instruction until six or seven. I know one thing from my own experience. For the first few years, any book I put in front of my children ended up in the same place -- their mouth. I do think the issue how reading is taught, what books are introduced and what the right age to get kids started is a fascinating one, especially at a time when public school children are taking standardized tests earlier -- and more often.

An editorial in the Charlotte Observer followed up on the excellent reporting by Ann Doss Helms earlier this month on Bright Beginnings, a program aimed at helping at-risk children succeed later on by giving them preparation for kindergarten and helping them learn to read.

School officials in Charlotte-Mecklenberg told the paper that tracking the children in the program so they could analyze its long term impact had not been on their radar screen.

It should be, noted the editorial, pointing out that any data gathered could shed light on how pre-kindergarten programs can help close the achievement gap -- and illuminate the value of public investment in pre-kindergarten.

It falls to the press sometimes to make such arguments on behalf of the public. At a time when public investment in pre-kindergarten has moved front and center, the public needs details of what works -- and what doesn't.

Information, the editorial noted, is power.

Or as USA Today's Greg Toppo says in an email: "What not to do as a kindergarten teacher." This teacher ought to be voted off the island. But, since the police determined what she did wasn't a crime, she probably possesses the immunity idol.

(Locked out of pre-school in New York City?)

New Yorkers of means have long been willing to subject their tykes to interviews, tests, and endless tours to secure a spot in prime private programs like the 92nd Street Y, where tuition for 4- and 5-year-olds is $23,000 this year.

Lately, a few new obstacles have been thrown into the mix for those who don't posess the money,connections and savvy for private programs.

Those seeking a saner route -- such as securing a spot in a public pre-kindergaten for an equally coveted spot in a kindergarten with a gifted and talented program -- may find themselves out of luck.

New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein last year said he hoped to equalize opportunities for gifted kindergartners by expanding and improving the testing process for admissions.

And it has expanded -- almost 24,000 kindergarten and first-graders took such examps this year compared to about 8,000 last year, according to a story in the New York Sun, which has been closely following his efforts.

The Sun revealed that Klein will now allow parents to opt out of kindergarten testing that would have cost the city about $1.5 million, at a time when schools are facing steep budget cuts and the city is experiencing a $99 million budget deficit.

Opponents who hated the testing program and argued that such tests were both inaccurate and potentially damaging cheered, but elsewhere in the city there is more admissions angst..

Parents trying to get their toddlers a spot in a public city pre-kindergarten are also running into roadblocks, according to Insideschools.org, a project of Advocates for Children of New York, which has been tracking problems and complaints.

Rejection letters are already out -- and being disputed by parents whose children have been shut out, even of their neighborhood programs where older siblings attend.

City school officials are apparently investigating all complaints.

(The bus may take off without siblings in NYC)

A quick follow-up to New York City's pre-kindergarten woes: Turns out the New York City Department of Education got confused about who had siblings in the same school this year, and now must straighten out complaints from parents whose children were denied a pre-kindergarten spot in the school their older child already attends.

Schools Chancellor Joel Klein had announced earlier this year he was overhauling pre-kindergarten admission in the city, promising to replace what he called a "confusing, unfair and difficult to navigate,'' process with something simpler.

Instead, he's got a lot of angry parents, calls for a probe from Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum and a whole lot of four-year-olds with no place to go next fall, according to stories in both the New York Daily News and the New York Times.

Some 20,000 parents applied for about 23,000 pre-kindergarten slots in the city and an untold number got rejection letters saying no slots were available. Many went to those with brothers and sisters in the programs -- who, according to the new system, were supposed to be given priority under the new system.

The Department of Education has now agreed to review some 9,000 applications -- and appears to be blaming the problem on mistakes parents made filling out forms or listing two different addresses.

A simpler process?

(Affordable day care in Philadelphia hard to find)

Alfred Lubrano of the Philadelphia Inquirer did a good job explaining the dilema facing parents who want to work, but can't find decent and affordable child care.

His piece brings home the issue with some startling facts: The list of children waiting for federal and state child care subsidies in a five-county area including Philadelphia has grown by 400 percent since 2002, leaving some 8,000 children waiting for subsidies. Child care for the average family of four in the area costs almost $20,000 annually -- an amount one woman Lubrano interviewed likened to "a mortgage payment.''

The piece was timely: it comes at Pennsylvania Governor Edward Rendell wants to increase child-care subsidies by $6.9 million. Rendell also wants to increase voluntary pre-kindergarten slots in the state and create more full-day programs.