Oh, it's so painful for me to realize, now that I'm middle-aged, how much I missed as a child. Just think how much I could have accomplished, how much happier I'd be, had I been as lucky as 3-year-old Elliott Baines of Guttenberg, N.J. Alexander Russo linked the other day to a story in the Wall Street Journal that reported on the adventurous travel vacations families are taking their young children on to give them enriching experiences. Little Elliott, for example, "has already cleared customs in Israel, Argentina, Uruguay, Mexico, France and Canada. His parents...say they believe the experiences are shaping Elliot's personality even at this early age. For instance, when Elliot and a group of children were pretending to fly in their gymnastics class, other youngsters said they were going to Florida, while Elliot said he was en route to Paris." All my family ever did was drive one time from Ohio to the East Coast to visit family friends, and we weren't even allowed to stop at the Mystery Spot along the way.

But, seriously, articles such as these are what I like to call "rich porn" and are a staple of the Journal, the Times, Vanity Fair, and other publications aimed at the elite. Those of us who spent our childhood catching tadpoles and playing baseball with kids in the neighborhood instead of flying off to Thailand to ride bikes through the jungle love to be voyeurs observing the lives of people with so much money it skews their judgment of what's important. A little skepticism about whether such trips actually put kids ahead of their peers, and a little context as to how few families actually take such vacations would be nice. But that would make such stories far less entertaining.

The Associated Press and Washington Post report that the House of Representatives has passed by a more than 7-to-1 margin a Head Start reauthorization bill that increases spending by $500 million, increases enrollment, boosts salaries, and expands services. The bill also sets a goal for increasing the percentage of Head Start teachers who have gone to college and raises the income ceiling for eligibility. It also ends the controversial National Reporting System for monitoring program quality and bars programs from using religious beliefs as a factor in making personnel decisions. The Senate is working on similar legislation. The AP reports the White House opposes the bill. The Post puts a finer point on it, saying the legislation rejects the Bush Administration's main effort to make the program more academic.

Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm is in a tight spot. She's caught between a here-and-now plunge in current tax revenues and the need to prepare children of today as best she can to function the world of the future. She wants a $1.5 billon tax increase to offset a deficit over two years of $2 billion. To get the additional revenues, she's threatening to force massive cuts in health care and education starting June 1. State Supe Mike Flanagan has told school districts to start cutting preschool immediately. Actually, that's a shrewd move. Cut those preschool classes and send Michigan parents who depend on them into an instant frenzy, which could pressure the Michigan Legislature to go along with the tax hike Granholm wants. "We can invest in order to pull this state out of this economic slump or we can disinvest and further the spiral downward," Granholm said in seeking to get the Legislature to act.

The National Institute on Early Education Research has weighed in, with an op-ed arguing that cutting preschool is like a farmer "eating his seed corn."

Easy quick-hit story would be for a journalist to go out to one of the school district preschools and talked to a dozen or so parents dropping off their children about what they'd do if, starting June 1st, their kids had nowhere to go.

'The story Tracy Jan published in the Boston Globe about a month ago on the frank and disturbing study of preschools and kindergartens in the city got a lot of attention, as it should have. I've been waiting to find a copy of the full report to link to but so far haven't. I'll keep looking.

According to Jan's story, which was followed up by a hardhitting editorial, the study by the Wellesley Centers for Women found "mediocre instruction, unsanitary classrooms, and dangerous schoolyards." The study also found that the quality of about 70% of the classrooms were not good enough to achieve the goal of closing gaps in kindergarten readiness between white and Asian children and Latino and African-American children.

A couple points from the Globe story to emphasize: The teachers in the classrooms studied all had bachelor's degrees but a fifth of them didn't necessarily have degrees in early childhood education. One school of thought in early childhood education insists on college degrees as a measure of quality. An alternative view is that teachers in preschools need to be highly skilled. It sounds like the same point but it's not. If preschool teachers can gain critical skills and knowledge of how young children learn and how best to help them learn in community college or in a special training program, then what's the purpose of insisting on a bachelor's degree? It's heartbreaking but the researchers found that many of these kids were sitting in their seats in kindergarten and preschool, being lectured to and responding to flash cards. No wonder these preschools aren't helping much.

Another point to emphasize comes from Elizabeth Reilinger, a member of the Boston Schools Committee. She commented that Boston Mayor Thomas Menino had pushed to expand preschool too quickly. Is this a problem around the country? Is the pressure so great to expand pre-k spending as quickly as possible causing the creation of poorly funded, poor quality programs that are accomplishing little?

One other observation. Yes, these were the conclusions of researchers. But couldn't journalists have made some of these same observations by visiting a lot of classrooms? A journalist who knew a little bit about how young chldren learn would have noticed that kids were sitting still too long and doing worksheets instead of engaging in purposeful, creative activities that involved a lot of conversation, right? I hope so.

One of the greatest challenges of education policy and, frankly, education journalism, is that accurately measuring education quality is very difficult. So, instead, we pay attention to what's available to us: spending, class size, teacher experience, teacher test scores, graduation rates, college-going, test scores. All of those are proxies for what really matters--the interactions between teachers and students. But how do you measure the quality of those interactions? How do you measure whether they will help children not just learn facts but understand, think, question, grow in their confidence as learners and speakers and do-ers?

I had a chance the other day to listen in to a "webinar" put on by two of the great minds on preschool quality--Robert C. Pianta of the Center for Advanced Study of Teaching and Learning at the University and Barbara Bowman, the Chief Early Education Officer of the Chicago Public Schools and the founder of the Erickson Institute in Chicago. (The event was sponsored by Pre-K Now and a link to the slides for the call as well as the slides for previous calls with experts on a variety of topics can be found here.
Bowman made the point that children have a "natural predisposition to develop" and they do so through exploration of their senses, relationships, language, play and self-regulation. But school learning is different. School learning requires what she called "decontextualized language," meaning, for example, the words for categorization of objects. School learning also involves symbolic skills, small muscle control, social skills, complex grammar, a large vocabulary, clear enunciation and other things. The point is that those who say "kids learn naturally" are right. They do develop and learn some things naturally. They're programmed to, though at different rates. School learning is different. And it requires intentional, thoughtful, planned learning opportunities and interactions. What a useful way to break down that old teaching vs. development argument! It's also useful for journalists, to help them better understand child development and schooling and how they are similar and different.

Bowman's point also leads right into what Pianta had to say. Pianta's research involves lots and lots of observations of classrooms. His observations have led to the development of a scale that measures the quality of teachers' interaction in pre-school and kindergarten classrooms with their children. Pianta says that scale predicts quite accurately how much children learn. Unfortunately, it also demonstrates that the quality of those interactions is often not very good. Pianta wrote a piece in the journal Education Next a while back. In that piece, he asserted that only about a quarter of the pre-k classes and classes studied provided students with the high levels of emotional and instructional support needed to maximize learning.

Fortunately, however, Pianta and his colleagues have developed some training tools that help pre-k teachers get better. He asserts that it is the skill and knowledge of the teachers--not their degrees or certifications--that matters. In fact, his data show no correlation between degree attainment and teacher performance. What does matter is training and professional development tied to knowledge and skill about teaching in actual classrooms. A "webinar" caller asked about that. If there's no connection between B.A. degrees and children's learning, the caller asked, doesn't insisting on college degrees for preschool teachers just raise the cost of those programs?

Advocates for higher quality such as Libby Doggett of Pre-K Now acknowledge that the evidence that children who have teachers with more formal education learn more is ambiguous. But she said in response to the caller that degrees have to be required if the teachers are to be paid a professional salary and be regarded as professionals. In other words, it's about positioning pre-k as part of the formal education system, which requires formal degrees and credentials. That may be the right strategy. But one hopes that somewhere along the line the teachers, whatever formal degrees they have, also get the kind of training Pianta is talking about.

All Gregory Mankiw, former chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, did was post on his blog the headline "Preschool Pays" and link to the Joel Waldfogel Slate entry mentioned just above. That touched off a flurry of comments, pro and con. Many of the comments wrestle with the economic analyses themselves, especially what can be concluded from the Perry Preschool study of the effects of high quality preschool designed to serve the most disadvantaged. But some reflect the fears referenced by Waldfogel, that good quality voluntary preschool undermines the family and replaces parents with "government agents." (One has to think that if preschool teachers really were government agents they'd be earning a lot more money!).

In any case, I urge economists or journalists who are examining the economic returns of investing in preschool to start with the superb "Dollars and Sense" report to gain perspective. Although put out by a group that advocates for universal preschool, the report examines the strengths and weaknesses and generalizability of various analyses of economic returns from preschool. It also acknowledges the bias of Pre-K Now, which issued the report.

"> Anyone who pays attention to the unfolding debate over the propriety and educational effects of public investments in preschool and child development has encountered fears of "government" brainwashing. Though not all such fears emanate from the dark imaginings of the far right, that crowd is certainly far more vocal. (Never forget that the seeds of dreaded liberalism tomorrow find fertile ground in the preschool sand tables of today!).Judge Roy Moore, (left, at a younger age), the former chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court who was ousted after refusing to remove stone tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments from his court room, demonstrated this once again in this Internet column.

The column is a mish-mash of references to studies and research that he misapplies and misinterprets for his purposes. In addition to the usual rhetoric, however, the good judge added a new leap of logic that I've never seen anywhere. The "founding fathers," reared in 18th century colonial America, did not go to public schools and they did pretty well. Americans back then were the "most literate and well-informed in history," he contends, and "poetry, religion, and history flourished...without support from the state." I know that many critics of public education claim, without much foundation, that student achievement has been sliding the past three or four decades. But I had no idea that the zenith of U.S. education was in the 1750s! Sure, recreating slavery, ridding ourselves of 300 years of technology and medicine, and reclaiming our true heritage as colonies would be problematic, but is there any other way to be competitive in this global economy? Let's turn back the clock three centuries before it's too late!

The Washington Post picked up on a report from the advocacy group Pre-K for All DC that says (no surprise) free pre-kindergarten would more than repay its cost. The actual study is not yet up on the group's Web site. But a quote from the Post story indicates that its authors tried to calculate the short-run economic benefits from expanding pre-k as well as the long-term gains. A high quality program would provide 6,300 jobs in the city, support working parents, and cut down on employee absenteeism, according to the article.

This kind of information is powerful. It is a compelling counterpoint to those who argue that the long-term gains don't justify the short-term expense, when balancing the budget is a priority. I'll look forward to reading the actual report but I was glad to read about it in the Post. However, the Post article does not mention how this study fits in with the many other recent economic analyses of pre-kindergarten's effects. Nor does it mention that the D.C. advocacy group is one of dozens pushing universal pre-k nationally. I know print reporters are being pressured to write short stories. Adding a paragraph providing readers with a little bit of context, just a pinch, would have been easy.

Hartford Courant reporter Hilary Waldman produced a fascinating, compelling story in yesterday's paper that was based on a....research study! But the story about a study of the effects of putting mental health consultants in pre-kindergarten classrooms was anything but dry. The spine of it was the story of a three-year-old boy named Terrence who was described by his teachers as a "human tornado," wreaking fear and destruction in the classroom. His teachers sought help and a state-funded program supplied a consultant, who helped them develop strategies for how to help Terrence learn to adjust socially.

The details in the story, the national context, the clear explanation of how the research was conducted and the human drama it captured--all were impressive. The article shows how richly visiting classrooms and making connections with real teachers, kids and their parents pays off journalistically. Journalism such as this will always find an audience no matter the "platform"--print or digital.

Sara Mead has an insightful and illuminating commentary on the similarities between school choice and universal pre-k advocates--two groups that likely would be uncomfortable rubbing shoulders at the same wonkfest. (Yes, it's a real word. You can look it up. Synonym is wonkapalooza) It's worth reading the whole thing. One insight, for example, is that both groups are committed to "redefining the boundaries of publicly-supported education--In preschool, to include younger children; in school choice to include private, charter, and other non-traditional schools."

One other similarity I'd add. School choicers want to privatize education through vouchers and subsidies for private charter management organizations. UPK-ers would prefer to have states invest preschool money in programs in public schools. But the fact that there is already a mature, mixed public-and-private school delivery system for preschool means that, inevitably, public dollars end up subsidizing private school operations. So....if public dollars can subsidize private preschools and private colleges (through loan subsidies and reseach grants), why the adamant opposition in so many places to doing so in K-12?

Story idea: As state legislatures are considering expanding spending on pre-kindergarten, examine the lobbying efforts of groups representing private preschools. You'll find they fight hard to maintain what they would call a level playing field, so that public spending on preschool doesn't put them at a competitive disadvantage.

Florida newspapers, television stations and bloggers all reported on the release of the state's so-called accountability system for the mostly private pre-kindergarten programs that get public money. Leslie Postal in the South Florida Sun-Sentinel came closest to calling the state accountability system what it is: a mess. As she points out, the state set an artificial limit of 15% on how many schools can be low-performing. That means, in reality, that 15% of the schools will be labeled substandard no matter how they do and schools that may be weak against an objective set of standards, but not as weak as others, will get a seal of approval. But there are two even bigger problems with the so-called accountability system: 1. It doesn't take into consideration the characteristics of the kids served or the size of gains they made. Not surprisingly, as Postal notes, "low performing" preschools had more poor, disabled, and Spanish-speaking kids. 2. It tests kids in kindergarten and attributes their performance to the preschools. What about the rapid development of kids that age? What about all the other influences in a child's life that are more significant?

Sure, we all want all kids to be the same. But can 540 hours (which is what the state pays for) of relatively low-quality preschool really make it so? Florida's preschool program satisfied only four of 10 quality criteria established by the National Institute of Early Education and Research and the state spends only $2,163 per child on the program (when part-year attendance is taken into consideration.) The effect of this so-called accountability system will be to discourage these private schools from accepting the very kids who need help the most.

The CBS affiliate in Tallahassee got right to the point. The Gainesville Sun did not take note of any of the shortcomings of the rankings. The Gradebook, the education Web log of the St. Petersberg, noted that the system was unfair but that so was life. The state says it is holding preschools accountable. Journalists should hold the state accountable for at least acknowledging that their accountability system is "low performing."

It's a long journey from kindergarten to high school graduation and even longer to adulthood. Those of us who think a lot about how kids get off to a good start on life's road sometimes forget about the bumpiness and dead-end exits along the way. Starting off in the right direction with a smooth-running vehicle full of gas does not mean one is assured of arriving at his destination safe and sound. Three good stories over the weekend are good reminders that, as important as it is to give kids a proper start, it doesn't necessarily assure them of a smooth ride through school or life.

Erin Einhorn and Carrie Melago of the New York Daily News worked backwards from interviewing a young man about to graduate from a New York high school who is headed to Carnegie Mellon to major in physics. They tracked down his kindergarten teacher, still in the classroom, and she led them to the class of children identified as gifted that she taught in 1994. Their story shows that pregnancy, violence, family instability, large, impersonal schools, uncaring teachers and many other unforeseen bumps in the road can make the ride rocky even for kindergarteners who are bright and ready for school. One girl who overcame the violent deaths of both of her parents to make it to graduation with the help of an iron-willed grandmother had this to say: "You have to have family support," she said. "You have to have a good relationship with teachers. You have to have motivation within yourself. ...And you have to have hope." Part three of the series is here.

Dale Mezzacappa, the veteran education writer for the Philly Inquirer who took a buyout sometime back, returned with a terrific profile of a class of 112 6th graders who had been guaranteed a college education by a rich Connecticut investor. George Weiss spent millions, mentored them, gave them tutoring, jobs and contacts and more. Now, 20 years later, Mezzacappa fills us in on where they ended up--and the news is mixed. Less than two-thirds of them graduated high school (twice the rate of other poor African Americans in Philadelphia from that year) and 20 earned bachelor's degrees.

Sara Rimer of the New York Times had a front-page profile that looked at the friendship of two very different girls, who became one another's support system through high school. Their friendship helped them get to graduation with good
grades and glowing recommendations--despite trials rivaling those of Job. Again, the point's the same: a great preschool experience is certainly a good start--a full tank of gas in a car that runs, as it were. But teachers, friends, resilience, luck, opportunities, family stability and so much more are required along the way.

(By the way, all three have audio, slide shows and other stories that add to the printed stories. At the NY Times site you can watch the commencement address given by Queen, one of the two girls Rimer profiles.)

Over the past three years Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen has steadily increased his state's spending on high-quality pre-kindergarten classes. Last week the governor addressed a group of editorial writers who gathered at Teachers College in New York City for a two-day seminar sponsored by the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media that dealt with early education issues. Pre-k advocates talk a lot about the studies that tout the long-term returns for investing in pre-kindergarten. But Bredesen, who has a degree in physics from Harvard, said those studies were not what persuaded him to push pre-k. What did the trick, he told the editorialists, was conversations with teachers around his state.

I went around the state and I talked to teachers and I asked them, "If you had one more dollar to spend on education, how would you spend it." When you forced people to pick one thing, it's amazing how many pick pre-kindergarten. It seems like there's a broad consensus.

Rather than plunge into a universal pre-k program all at once and launch poor quality programs with the intent to improve them later, Bredesen decided to establish high-quality programs and roll them out slowly. The Tennessee program employs only certified teachers, keeps class sizes small, and uses only approved curricula. Surprisingly, Bredesen said, the biggest political fight had to be fought over quality. Day care centers and private pre-k programs did not employ certified teachers or pay decent salaries and so they saw the state program as a "threat to their livelihood."

Bredesen said that he hopes that any parent in Tennessee who wants to send their child to a state-funded pre-kindergarten will be able to do so. Right now, he said, the state is about 40% of the way there. But he said it was a "realistic goal" that can be reached in about three and a half years.

More about the seminar over the next few days.

The Hechinger Institute, in collaboration with the National Conference of Editorial Writers, gathered 30 or so editorial writers from around the country June 29-30 to discuss early education issues, emphasizing, in particular, the effects of poverty on children. Three of those who attended have already written commentaries, spinning off in different directions. The latest came from Kay Semion of the Daytona Beach News-Journal, who Download file">chided her state's leaders for cynically offering up a sub-standard pre-k program in response to the plea of voters for a high quality, universal program.

Earlier, Mary Ellen Schoonmaker wrote a lovely column in the Bergen (New Jersey) Record that drew on comments from a wonderful young pre-school teacher we had at the seminar as a speaker. And Linda Valdez in the Arizona Republic focused on the comments of New York developer and philanthropist Daniel Rose, who exhorted the writers to refer to high-quality pre-kindergarten as an investment, not an expense. Valdez referred to Rose as a "triple shot of espresso" for his rousing talk.

Nicole Christian wrote a compelling editorial in the Detroit Free Press this past weekend, arguing that even though strong evidence for the effectiveness of high quality pre-kindergarten eminated from the state, the state's political leaders have not built on that legacy. She acknowledges that the state is struggling economically, as the auto industry tries to avoid complete collapse. But she says state political leaders could set what she calls a "committed, consistent political tone" in favor of expanding pre-kindergarten. Such a tone would inspire corporate and foundation leaders to get on board and create momentum. That's the strategy used in a number of other states that are now ahead of Michigan, which has sacrificed its early lead in the area.

Out in Spokane, Gary Crooks wrote an editorial in the Spokesman Review making the case that Idaho, one of 11 states that do not invest in pre-kindergarten programs, ought to learn a lesson from other states. He cites the case of Oklahoma, another conservative, relatively poor state that has made a commitment to preschool and the results it is getting, The editorial concludes by saying "let's hope the legislature can close their own learning gap."

The last time Arthur Reynolds of the University of Minnesota et. al. reported on the long-term effects of the Chicago Child-Parent Center programs the former preschoolers in the study were in their teens. That was in 2001 and the study results got good play in the New York Times and elsewhere, admitting the CPCs into the (small) pantheon of pre-kindergarten programs documented to be successful by tracking the lives of the children they served into their adulthood. An update on how the Chicago group being studied, now about 24 years old, is out this month, appearing in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. (Media can gain access to the study as well as two related articles here.) The study finds that a representative sample of those who attended the centers in the mid-1980s are on average better educated; more likely to have health insurance; less likely to have been arrested, convicted, and jailed on felony charges; and less likely to suffer from depression.

The study has gotten a little attention from a few newspapers and bloggers and has been linked to by other research and advocacy groups interested in equity, education, and early childhood. But the study has a number of interesting findings and also raises some questions which merit follow-up by general interest journalists.

Cohort studies such as this one (others most notable were of the Abecedarian Project in North Carolina and the Perry/High Scope Preschool in Ypsilanti, MI) provide powerful evidence of the value of high quality preschool because they can estimate the long-term economic benefits--to individuals and to society--from early investments. In terms of policy implications, though, the Chicago program is the most important. One reason is that the parent centers are in public schools, they're not super-expensive boutique programs, and they're still operating today (although with some features eliminated). The centers serve three and four year olds, focus on improving language and math skills using a semi-structured curriculum; send teachers into homes to work with parents and require parents to participate in training activities; and include medical screening and meals.

Some of the points that merit further reporting:

1. Boys got a whole lot more out of the program than girls did. In fact, boys' gains in high school graduation accounted for most of the group's gain. About 64% of the boys who attended preschool graduated from high school, compared to a graduation rate of 48% for the comparison group. About 79% of the girls who attended preschool graduated from high school, compared to 78% for those who did not. So, if society were trying to maximize its investment, only boys would attend preschool. That is absurd, of course, so sometimes economic efficiency is trumped by social justice and political reality.

2. The group that attended preschool, may or may not have attended full-day kindergarten, and participated in an afterschool program did better than the comparison group, which was enrolled in full-day kindergarten. In many states, the expansion of preschool is competing for funds and political favor with a strong national movement for full-day kindergarten. This study suggests that the money is better spent on preschool and an afterschool program that targets the needs of disadvantaged kids. A separate analysis on the effects of an afterschool program alone found that it contributed little.

3. Even though the program was offered in the public schools, all of the children were poor and most were African American. The published article cautions against using the study to justify public spending on universally available programs, because they're unlikely to have the same effects.

4. There are no silver bullets: it's true that there were gains, some of them quite large percentage-wise. But, as an accompanying article by James Forman Jr., a D.C. lawyer who founded an alternative charter school in Washington, D.C. said, the study group was still struggling. Nearly 30% did not graduate from high school and only 15% attended college. Sure, the college attendance figure is 50% higher than for those who did not attend preschool but it's hardly a result to be satisfied with. The crime reduction was significant, too. But, still, about one in five of those who attended preschool had served time in jail, 16% had been found guilty of a felony, and arrests for violence were just as high among those who had attended preschool as for those who had not.

"Social scientists can, and should, debate the relative efficacy of different interventions in combatting poverty and its associated ills," Forman writes. "But anybody who claims that reform one aspect of our broken social services infrastructure will, all by itself, make a profound difference is selling snake oil."

As I say, more questions to ask and stories to do. The story on boys, in particular, would be quite provocative and interesting.

Michael Pound had a nicely done piece in the Beaver County Allegheny Times, which serves communities just west of Pittsburgh, that took a look at both full day kindergarten and the growing public investment in pre-kindergarten. Sounds like full-day and pre-k in the local school districts there meld together well. Elsewhere, of course, those two services are sometimes seen as being in competition for short funds. The recent study of the longterm effectiveness of the Chicago Child Parent Preschool program suggested that full day kindergarten, alone, had little effect if it wasn't paired with pre-k.

The Baltimore Sun made their back to school story substantive by reporting on the challenges of the transition to full-day kindergarten. Article links full day to concerns about kindergarten becoming too academic and to NCLB. Critics quoted say that kindergarten shouldn't be about stuffing kids' heads with facts. While supporters, such as Maryland schools Chief Nancy Grasmick, said the longer day gives teachers time to develop understanding of key concepts in reading and math as well as social skills.

To bolster the case that the kids and the teachers are under academic pressure, the article states:

"She has only nine months to get her 5- and 6-year-olds to identify the sequential property of numbers using the calendar, learn the alphabet, recognize letter sounds, learn how to sort by color and number, and learn to share and play nice with one another."

Isn't this what kindergarten has always been about? Learning to count, sort, start to read and play nice? This is overly academic? This is stuffing kids' heads with facts? These are exactly the domains and expectations in good pre-k programs and, because most of these kids will have been in pre-k, they've probably mastered or are very close to mastery of them all. The other idea in here that always bothers me is that, because there is the potential that a teacher, school, or district will make developmentally unwise choices, they shouldn't be given the opportunity to make such a mistake.

Piece has a nice video of a enthusiastic teacher who is new to kindergarten talking about what she hopes to accomplish for the year....worth watching.

I didn't know it and you may not have either but, in the blogosphere, yesterday was "attack John Edwards Day." At least, that's what I'm surmising from the deepening pond of bile and name-calling in right-wing blogs fed by an article in the Concord Monitor.

Here's the lede of the article:

John Edwards says if he's elected president, he'll institute a New Deal-like suite of programs to fight poverty and stem growing wealth disparity. To do it, he said, he'll ask many Americans to make sacrifices, like paying higher taxes.

Edwards, a former Democratic senator from North Carolina, says the federal government should underwrite universal pre-kindergarten, create matching savings accounts for low-income people, mandate a minimum wage of $9.50 and provide a million new Section 8 housing vouchers for the poor. He also pledged to start a government-funded public higher education program called "College for Everyone.

In reaction, cries of socialism and all manner of other sins suddenly appeared here, here, here, here, and here. The entries were rife with name-calling of Edwards, the most progressive of the three leading Democratic contenders for the presidency who is, according to media pundits and polls, running third behind Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Apparently they all got the memo that said Edwards' plans to address poverty would drive away investment capital, undermine the family, coddle those who are lazy or stupid or just plain unlucky, and result in brainwashing of the children. Note to the memo-writers, two red states--Oklahoma and Georgia--have universal pre-school programs that others are trying to emulate and Republican legislatures and governors support expanded investments in pre-k.

Speaking of presidential candidates and publicly funded pre-kindergarten, Hillary Clinton was in a Miami Beach preschool yesterday touting her plan for the federal government to spend up to $10 billion a year to match state spending on pre-kindergarten. This is the AP article in the Washington Post. According to the article, Clinton praised Florida for its preschool program even though most experts and advocates consider it to be a low-quality, on-the-cheap effort that will accomplish little. According to the advocacy group Pre-K Now, Florida actually cut spending this year because fewer that expected students enrolled.

Talk to early education researchers for a few minutes and you're likely to hear an acronym that sounds like "eckles", rhyming with "freckles." What they are referring to is one of the sets of data known as the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, that are gathered by the federal government's Institute of Education Studies. The latest in the series was released this month and it's a good statistical snapshot of U.S. 4- and 5-year-olds during 2005-2006.

Some interesting data:

* Only 20% of children are cared for only by their parents. (Therefore, the conservative cry that expanded public investment in preschool is equivalent to yanking kids out of their parents' hands is silly. The vast majority of children already are cared for outside the home.)
*Preschools and pre-kindergartens, public and private, serve more than three times the number of children than does the Head Start program. (So this sector merits more attention.)
*About two-thirds of these children are know their shapes, numbers, and colors when they go to school. But math proficiency is more highly correlated with income than is language development. (Makes sense. Math is primarily developed in school and the more money a family has the more likely they are to be in preschool centers and less likely they are to be in Head Start programs.)
*Hispanic children are least likely to be served in centers and most likely to be cared for by relatives. The numbers for white children show the opposite.

Good descriptive data to feed into political and policy stories on pre-kindergarten. Also looking at the data may give rise to questions that may, with a little more work, lead to good solid stories in your community.

Douglas Besharov, a well-known scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, came out last week with a new study that found that the true cost of early education--when the cost of increasing the quality of current programs, providing others services, and administering the programs is added in--are much more expensive than the figures usually used by policy makers and advocates. Here are the amounts he and his co-authors calculated:

* For center-based child care, about $8,908--not the widely cited $4,388 to $6,582.
* For pre-kindergarten/preschool programs, about $14,026--not the widely cited $3,551.
* For Head Start, about $21,305--not the widely cited $7,467.

A blog called BlueNC that says it is "community-driven website that promotes progressive values and policies in North Carolina" has what appears to be a comprehensive analysis of the positions of the Democratic presidential candidates on issues of child care and preschool. Hillary Clinton's position has been talked about a lot but this breakdown looks at all the candidates.

Two reports within days about the South that, in a way, show two sides of the same coin. A report from the Southern Regional Education Board notes that the 15-state region leads the nation in offering publicly funded preschool and then quantifies that claim. Mississippi's Jackson Sun editorialized about the report. The Southern Education Fund this week issued a report saying that a majority of students in the region are poor. Seems like one is related to the other.

I was struck this past weekend by the number of television ads for toys aimed toddlers. Christmas selling and buying season starts right after Halloween. The ads caught my ear because they were talking about how babies develop skills with the right toys.

A couple of days ago I Googled eBeanstalk, the company whose ads for toys for infants I'd seen over the weekend. The philosophy of the company seems to be "teaching" begins at birth and that every interaction between a parent and a child requires a "lesson plan" and goal that can be measured. For example, the site sells socks for newborns with rattles " attached. The rattles "give him a first taste of cause and effect" because when he kicks his feet the baby will hear the sound. The socks will also spur emotional development and dexterity--all for only $10. What tutor charges so little?

Or, take the colorful child-safe mirror toys. (Basic: $18.95. Premium: $44.95. For those who REALLY love their children): These toys develop neck control, teach him that things disappear and reappear, aid in self-recognition and allow the baby to play peek-a-boo. Generations of babies have grown up without these "skills," apparently, because they lacked such devices. Helpfully, the site provides instructions for how parents can play with these toys. It turns out that playing "peek-a-boo" requires special training--for parents as well as babies. After a few lessons, babies will be able to play "peek-a-boo" with themselves, relieving parents of that chore after a long, hard day at the office.

Gender differentiation starts early. A package of bath toys--a pirate ship and shaving kit for the boys! Pink Tub Fashion and Princess in the Tub sets for girls!--can be had for $75 apiece. Perfect for 1 to 3 year olds. Spurs imagination, they're educational, and improve dexterity. (I hope parents don't leave their baby in the tub to work on their homework on their own.) Even Baby Einstein, a Disney company that sells toys and gear to make kids smarter, doesn't go as far as eBeanstalk in its educational claims.

The Wall Street Journal on November 1 carried a story about Eee PC, a computer aimed at first graders. It's just one of several companies selling computers to parents anxious to give their kids a head start on the technology of the future. (By the time they reach high school, of course, PCs will be the "technology of the past.") An Oklahoma company called Digital Dimensions sells a pink PC for girls and a red, blue, or black racecar PC for boys, both equipped with software for children as young as 2.

Journalists have written quite a bit about the phenomena of affluent parents willing to do just about anything to give their kids an edge. Cloaking consumerism in pseudo-science that makes natural development seem to depend on the right toys--rather than just loving, talking to, reading to, and playing with your children--helps fuel this unfortunate parental instinct. This impulse among some parents creates business opportunities and it's no surprise companies are out there capitalizing on them. Sometimes the universal pre-kindergarten movement overemphasizes education, as well, causing opponents to complain that schooling is more important than just fostering normal, healthy development. These issues are worth more critical attention, I think.

An editorial in the New York Times over the weekend commented ironically on "guides" that purport to teach kids the "basic skills" of childhood. With just the right note of sarcasm, the editorial suggested that such books (and, I would add, toys) make natural development seem like a take-home test.

“Lying on your back in your crib, point your knees outward and draw your heels toward your stomach. Using both hands, grasp your left ankle, if you are right-handed (or right ankle, if left-handed), and slowly draw your toes into your mouth. Chew with caution!”

I took note earlier this month of the intense focus of toy makers on making toys educational, to lure in parents who are predisposed to think the hunt for the best college begins in the womb. Latest entry on this theme is the story in the New York Times this morning on digital toys for the younger and younger set. Seems today's toddlers aren't satisfied with toy phones and cameras and computers, they want the real deal. The story quotes a woman from the San Francisco Bay Area who returned digital toy telephones because her twin year-old daughters preferred real cell phones. Gee, Mom, how can I text my posse during naptime if you only let me have a toy phone? "They know what a real cellphone is, and they don’t want a fake one,” the mother is quoted saying. Computers for toddlers are designed to help them learn "computer basics" but to what end?

Jeff Solochek of the St. Petersburg Times started off the new year with a fine example of journalism that mixes perceptive close-in observation of a classroom with a sense of the broader set of policy issues that surround pre-kindergarten. Here's an excerpt that in just a few paragraphs captures the mix of fun and academics that the best teachers achieve.

Hector approaches carrying a peg board where he's fashioned the letter E. He proudly holds it up for [the teacher Brenda] Roberts to see. She offers him praise, and more. What sound does E make, she asks, kicking off an impromptu lesson. Whose name in the class starts with E? After a few more questions comes more encouragement.

"Thank you, Hector, for making that for me," Roberts says. "I love that E."

No sooner does she turn away than Ruth appears, smacking rhythm sticks together, seeking her moment with the teacher. "What sound are you making?" Roberts, ever smiling, asks. If the noise irritates her, you can't tell.

"Choo-choo train," Ruth responds.

Roberts starts dancing. "You make that sound, girl," she says, making chugging sounds as Ruth happily keeps the beat.

I'd urge reporters to look at that passage carefully. The children are certainly enjoying themselves. They're also learning skills that will prepare them to read. Those who pooh-pooh pre-k by saying "why can't we just let them have a childhood" and those who say "let's teach those kids their ABCs!" should be challenged. Clearly, those goals don't conflict.

Thanks to Russo's This Week in Education just read a Q&A with David Kirp, the author of "The Sandbox Investment." Newsweek also touched down on the growing state investment in preschool here. Kirp made similar points here and here.">here and here.

Kirp's political analysis is compelling but he sometimes loses his footing and overpromises. Perhaps it was the editing of the Q&A (the media does this!) but he seemed to be saying that a dose of high-quality pre-kindergarten would solve all ills for all children. Journalists (and their editors) love quick fix, silver bullet, utopian policies but they ought to be a little more skeptical. (Not so skeptical that they assume a presidential candidate's emotions are a campaign trick, like the Queen of Nasty Maureen Dowd, but just a little more.)

Smart editorial in the Washington Post applauds legislation that would add 125 pre-k classes in the district. But the editorial also, rightfully, urges advocates and city council members to focus on quality and choice as well as quantity. D.C. has a higher percentage of its 3- and 4-year-olds in preschool that any jurisdiction. Those children may not be getting much out of the programs, though. The new bill is built to make sure community centers--which often feel threatened by a significant expansion of public spending on preschool--continue to get their share of the pie. It does this by limiting how many of the 125 new classes can be placed in charter schools, which are very popular with D.C. parents, or in regular public schools. The bill also restricts the training of the preschool teachers to the University of the District of Columbia. These are just the right issues for journalists to raise.

I must have been too busy shopping just before Christmas to follow the back-and-forth over the accuracy and fairness of a report in the Dallas Morning News on the early evaluation of a Texas program to raise the quality of Head Start and public and private preschool programs. The newspaper said the evaluation of the first 18 months of the now five-year-old program found that it "has yet to deliver on the investment." That language seems harsh, given that the evaluation report said its design and timing limited its power to make such statements that early in the program. Most of the evaluation had to do with implementation, rather than quality, questions. The evaluators wrote a letter to the Texas Education Agency disavowing the newspaper's conclusion. In fact, the report found that with one year of training provided through the state-funded program teacher performance improved significantly and those who received two years of training improved even more. Although the report acknowledged it was not possible to tell whether overall student performance improved the evaluators did detect gains in three important literacy related skills: rapid letter naming, rapid vocabulary naming, and phonological awareness (an understanding that words can be dissected into discrete sounds).

As journalists, we love rendering judgments, which is an important oress function. But good evaluations are tools for improving programs, as much as they are tools for rendering judgments. It's important that we not overinterpret such work--mistaking recommendations for improvement for fatal flaws. In addition, it's important that we step back and look at what is actually being evaluated. If a report looks at the first 18 months of a program that's operated for almost five years, and if the program today is dramatically different (it served 1,600 students in 03-04 and 27,000 today), caution is warranted.

Editorial writers in Mississippi in recent weeks have been pushing for increased spending on statewide early childhood education, noting that while Mississippi has the highest percentage of working mothers with children, it’s the only Southern state that doesn’t provide state money for pre-kindergarten.

A Jan. 5 editorial in the Clarion-Ledger noted that many pre-K programs in the state are “purely custodial, not educational,’’ and complained that too many children in the state are already behind when they start.

The Clarion-Ledger editorial urged lawmakers to approve the Quality Education Act of 2008, which doesn’t ask for statewide pre-k but calls for a continuation of a pilot program they consider “a modest step toward quality.’’

Like the Clarion Ledger, The Daily Journal of Northeast Mississippi also noted its support for a statewide advocacy organization of 36,000 known as The Parents Campaign which supports a $5 million increase to develop effective learning programs in child care settings and help improve the educational content.

The smaller steps are being considered a year after Mississippi’s Republican Gov. Haley Barbour told the Associated Press that he did not see Mississippi having a statewide, 4-year-old, state-funded pre-kindergarten program in the near future. The Southern Education Foundation, headed up by Lynn Huntley , an ES (EarlyStories) education hero, last year came out strongly in favor of universal pre-kindergarten in Mississippi last year as well.

Mississippi is ranked 48th in the nation in per pupil spending and 48th in student achievement; over 60 percent of Mississippi children are at risk of failing or dropping out of school due to poverty, The Parents Campaign notes on its website.

The editorial writers don’t have to look far to notice other ways Mississippi is falling behind in its approach to early childhood education. Neighboring Alabama Gov. Bob Riley, a Republican, has announced a plan to triple state spending on pre-kindergarten, and Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen, a Democrat, invested $80 million for the state’s voluntary pre-kindergarten program during the 2007-08 school year.

(Virginia Governor Tim Kaine during State of the Commonwealth address Jan. 9)

David Harrison of The Roanoke Times did a good job Sunday pointing out the obstacles to expanding pre-kindergarten programs in Virginia.

These are issues well worth exploration by reporters. Harrison found problems filling slots and finding space for pre-kindergarten classes in two areas of Roanoke and Roanoke County, and noted that it meant state money had to be left on the table. The issue is particularly important in Virginia because it comes at a time when Democratic Governor Tim Kaine is pushing to make preschool available to an additional 7,000 children over the next two years, at a cost of $56 million.

In his state of the state address on Jan. 9, Kaine noted that children who attend high quality preschool “are more likely to finish school, find good jobs and are less likely to commit a crime.’’ Kaine has already taken a step back from campaign promises to provide pre-kindergarten for all, after facing skepticism among Republicans in the General Assembly and state budget problems.

Kaine instead said he would focus on the neediest children in the state. Virginia now provides preschool for almost 19,000 Virginia low-income children. But Harrison found that some school districts can’t afford to pay for their share of the costs, or don’t have enough room for all the children who are eligible. Another district has problems getting parents of high-risk 4-year-olds to fill out the paperwork and come to the sites for screening.

Harrison went beyond making a few phone calls and told his readers why pre-kindergarten matters by visiting a classroom, watching what took place and interviewing parents. One father delighted in the fact that his son came home from pre-school and asked to be read to. It’s an example that gives readers a clearer sense of why early childhood education matters to parents rather than simply covering what the politicians have to say.

Katy Murphy of the Contra Costa Times writes a blog called "The Education Report" about happenings in the Oakland (CA) Unified School District. The hook for an item she posted on full day kindergarten was a letter written by a parent whose son attends a public elementary in the (very) pricey neighborhood of Montclair, up in the hills above the city. The parent wrote a letter asking the district to let Thornhill (and other schools, if they wish) out of the district's policy to offer full-day kindergarten. There is a strong class angle to this. Families in which both parents work, or who don't have transportation, and many others welcome full day kindergarten for the academic boost it is meant to provide. But some affluent parents, whose children have rich and varied learning opportunities, and in which mothers (or fathers) don't have to work, don't see the need for it. (Kindergarten teachers, by the way, often oppose all day classes.)

I used to cover the Oakland schools many years ago and I know that many Thornhill children are "flats" children (black and Hispanic) bused into the mostly "white" and "Asian" hills. If those children were sent back down the hill on a bus, to homes where no parent is home during the day, it would create quite a burden. I went on the site GreatSchools and found this comment from a Thornhill parent: "The school is not economically diverse and does not at all embrace cultural differences. If you are not a montclair stay at home mom, you and your child will feel like the bused in outsiders. The classist, superior attitudes are ever present."

Many of these pre-k issues cut along class lines. It's a good thing for reporters to keep in mind.

Teachers College Prof. Henry Levin and Clive Belfield of Queens College (formerly of TC) are getting attention for "The Price We Pay: Economic and Social Consequences of Inadequate Education," an interesting book they edited that tries to calculate the costs to the economy of school failure. It's worth checking out because part of it tries to find interventions that actually work and then tries to figure out if they are cost effective. (Of course that calculation gets into all sorts of non-quantitative stuff like values, one's philosophy regarding the role of government and society's obligations to its members.) For example, the economists calculate that offering preschool the quality of the legendary Perry Preschool Project of 40 years ago to 100 children would produce an additional 19 high school graduates. But the study concludes that a high school reform program called First Things First provides far better bang for the buck.

Strange things happening in politics these days: Rush Limbaugh hammering away hatefully at the soon to be crowned Republican presidential candidate John McCain; Ann Coulter, who has made a career out of childishly calling anyone not a card-carrying member of the John Birch Society stupid, saying she'll vote for Hillary Clinton rather than support McCain. And now, circumlocuting radio host Garrison Keillor, who over the past eight years has been one of the harshest critics of President Bush, is condemning Democrats (via Andy R. at Eduwonk) for failing to back one of the president's signature education programs.

I've always said that reporters often misunderstand the differences between Republicans and Democrats on education issues. On many issues, the usual alignments don't hold. Take the Reading First program, for example. Eight years ago Bush set aside $1 billion to help the lowest-achieving districts in each state use well-researched approaches to reading instruction. The program generated lots of controversy. Not because of the methods it supported but rather because advisors to the program seemed to benefit from it financially. Democrats in Congress saw it as a chance to hit Bush, even though independent evaluations said the program was achieving good results. So, they cut the budget by 70%, hurting not Bush but hundreds of thousands of children who were reading better because of it.

On Monday, Bush introduced his budget, which proposes to restore full funding for the program. It will be interesting to see this play out. Will Democrats really insist on cutting an effective reading program rather than address the real issues? Meanwhile, reporters will find a good story if they look into the Reading First program in their own state. What do the parents of children served by it, most of whom will be low-income and more likely to be Democrats, say? What about their teachers? (Also likely to be Democrats.) Here's one from the Birmingham (AL) News that identifies the state angle, although the reporter doesn't go out into the schools. Sometimes the usual political assumptions just don't hold.

Theo Emery of the Tennessean turns in a good story about Gov. Phil Bredesen's plan to expand pre-k spending that goes beyond the politics to report on research done on the effect of pre-K. Read it here. As newspapers work to make their Web sites interactive the comments on articles have become an important element of the coverage. In a very interesting twist, the debate generated by a story helps puts the story in context.

The Boston Globe's fine editorial page took note last week of Mayor Tom Menino's new 10-year civic initiative called "Thrive in Five" to to "turn all of Boston into a resource center" for healthy child development.The editorial notes that, to succeed, Menino's program "needs to go far beyond promoting public awareness. Thrive in Five has to beef up the quality of existing preschool programs. Home visits that send nurses and other trained staff to visit expectant and new mothers should be expanded."

This is a trend reporters should be watching. Years of strategic investment by the Pew Charitable Trusts (a supporter of this blog), the Packard Foundation, the Joyce Foundation and others put increasing spending on high quality pre-kindergarten firmly on the policy agenda of states and the federal government. Philanthropists have long had an abiding interest in promoting healthy and educational childhood experiences as a foundation for the future. But that interest is now on the rise. Menino's effort depends on private funds, the Foundation for Child Development in New York works on these issues, the Pew trusts is broadening its grantmaking to address all aspects of healthy child development, and a group of major foundations is about to provide a big boost to the movement.

Chicago businessman Irving B. Harris launched the The Ounce of Prevention Fund in the 1980s to work on preventing problems with children before they occur. The Harris foundation is also involved in the new effort, which will be called the First Five Years Fund. The purpose of the fund is to "significantly increase the life chances of at-risk children by making cost-effective investments" to promote "high-quality learning programs, beginning at birth."

Other funders include the Buffett Early Childhood Fund, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Tulsa-based George Kaiser Family Foundation, and the Children's Initiative, which is a project of the J.B. and M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation. The organization has already managed to lure Pulitzer Prize-winning Chicago Tribune editorial writer Cornelia Grumman away from journalism to head up the Fund. Look for more from them soon.

So many questions surround newly sworn-in New York Governor David Paterson that reporters have yet to examine his ability to carry out disgraced Governor Eliot Spitzer's universal pre-kindergarten promises.

As recently as September, Spitzer visited schools in Yonkers to tout an additional $79 million his executive budget invested in pre-kindergarten, along with his promise to expand pre-kindergaten access for every child in New York State within four years.

Spitzer resigned last week after being caught on a federal wiretap arranging to meet with a prostitute. On Tuesday, just 24-hours after being sworn into office, Paterson held a press conference to acknowledge infidelity in his own marriage.

When and if the storm surrounding Paterson's admissions subside, attention must focus on New York's $4.7 billion budget deficit and the April 1st budget deadline. Paterson has already proposed to cut $800 million in agency spending in the upcoming fiscal year.

One of the first reporters to notice possible dire consequences for education is Diana Costello of the Journal News in White Plains, who notes that a change in governors comes at a rough time and may derail promises Spitzer made.

Karen Schimke, president and CEO of the Schuyler Center for Analysis and Advocacy, hopes the press will scrutinize problems that have dogged pre-k expansion in New York, from lack of space to access for working parents and the inability of school districts to plan and implement pre-k programs.

"Bring on the questions," says Schimke, who is a great resource for journalists on early childhood education in New York. "Sixty to seventy parents of kids in New York State have mothers who work. What about full day programs? The research is very clear – a half day is better than none, but full day is best of all."

Like many education advocates in New York, Schimke is patiently waiting for the next round of questions -- and hopes they will focus on issues that really matter to New Yorkers.

The word “rigor,’’ is one of the new buzz words in education, used to describe everything from stringent new graduation standards many states are adopting to advanced placement courses that give college credit to high school students. Lately, the word has crept into the pre-k lexicon with little explanation.

In Washington D.C., for example, pre-kindergarten is about to get a lot more rigorous, according to a Washington Post article.

And…what exactly does that mean?

Earlier this week, the article points out, the D.C. Council committee unanimously approved legislation that would “increase the rigor of the curriculum for early childhood education throughout the city.’’ A quick google search found the term creeping into the pre-k conversation throughout the U.S.

The Post article did a fine job of describing some of the hurdles to expanding pre-kindergarten in the District of Columbia, where about 12,000 children are enrolled and another 2,000 or so are not being served. However, it did not question, examine or explain what a “more rigorous.’’ program would look like.

Shakespeare instead of sand box play? Early SAT preparation? Pre-pre-calculus? Degree requirements for teachers? The question really should be, does the program reflect high standards? And what does that mean? What is the student teacher ratio, for example? Is there a curriculum? What are kids expected to know and do?

Journalists – and the public – should challenge words that don’t say a lot. The next time a pre-k program promises to be “rigorous,’’ find out what it means.

Reporters covering pre-kindergarten often find obstacles to expansion programs, from budget cuts to lack of space that prevents all children who want a spot from getting one. Carrie Melago of the New York Daily News found another barrier this week, imposed by the New York City Department of Education: Language.

Nearly one third of the more than 1.1 million students in New York City public schools are immigrants and the proportion is rising steadily. Some 42% of New York City public school students reported speaking a language at home other than English last year.

Yet when directories and applications for a new, centrally managed pre-kindergarten process that requires parents to rank their top choices went out this week, they were posted online in English only. The action upset advocates for immigrants who worry that parents who can’t get the information won’t register their children for pre-kindergarten.

The New York City Department of Education promised to make the documents available in eight languages by next week: Arabic, Bengali, Chinese, Haitian Creole, Korean, Russian, Spanish and Urdu. They also said their translation unit can help parents in the meantime.

The other day I urged reporters to ask careful questions about the quality of a pre-kindergarten, and to go beyond simply repeating findings on a report. Last week, a story came up in Tulsa, Oklahoma that truly begged the quality question.

The Tulsa Tribune reported that a pre-k site was shuttered after three pre-kindergarten kids wandered off and ended up at a Sonic Drive-In about two blocks south of the YWCA.
(The ones that got away?)

To her credit, Tulsa World reporter Shannon Muchmore followed up the story, obtaining inspection reports from the Department of Human Services that showed the YWCA site had no recent violations.

So how did the three little ones manage to scamper off? According to Muchmore's story,
two YWCA employees, a certified teacher and an assistant teacher, were watching 20 children at the time. That's within the DHS-recommended ratio of one caretaker per 15 children.

The site is shuttered while the investigation continues. An explanation is called for, especially because Oklahoma has been considered a pre-k leader, according to Pre-K Now, the public education and advocacy organization.

How do you measure the quality of a pre-kindergarten environment where kids can run out the door, only to be found several blocks away?

Sara Mead at Early Ed Watch posted on this before I could get to it: A German, Friedrich Fröbel, created the first kindergarten (literally children's garden) in 1840 to honor the 100th anniversary of Gutenberg's discovery of movable type. Oddly, though, as Mike Estrel recounted on the front page of the Wall Street Journal this week, Fröbel wanted young children to grow up in nature, "cordoned off from letters and numbers." In Germany today parents are again trying to offer their children the chance to play, worried that kindergarten has become too academically oriented. So, they're sending them to what are called waldkindergärten, or "forest kindergartens" to splash about in the mud, dig for worms, examine lizards, and other activities that characterized

Photo from the Wall Street Journal/Mike Estrel

playtime before the Screen Age of computers, TVs, game consoles etc.

Here are some great quotes:

Iwao Uehara, a professor at Tokyo University of Agriculture, says he has been trying to set up such a school in Japan, but the project is struggling. Until there's evidence that Waldkindergärten graduates end up attending "famous universities," it's going to be a tough sell, he says.

Among the nature-based activities, children learn how to handle a real saw. "A plastic saw is no good," says Ms. [Marsha] Johnson. (Johnson set up a "forest kindergarten" in Portland, Oregon, the Journal reported.) "You might as well give them a plastic life." The worst that has happened thus far to the children is the occasional bee sting, she says.

I tried to find anything written about the school in Portland via Google but was unsuccessful.

By the way, the first public kindergarten in the U.S. was established in 1872 in St. Louis. Wikipedia's history is here.

...to promote the long-term value of high-quality kindergarten, Roy Miller, the affable president of advocacy group known as The Children's Campaign in Florida is trying to turn the video of a violent 30-minute beating of an ostracized Lakeland cheerleader into a lobbying opportunity. The video, taken by one of the attackers, briefly popped up on YouTube, which led to the involvement of the local sheriff and the video's removal. It also led to national coverage. "This horrific evidence makes it clear: we must do more for our children" Miller writes in a letter to supporters this week, urging them to write their state representatives. It goes on:

Should Florida make a $2-million subsidy to honor golfers while cutting infant mortality prevention? Can’t Florida close a $63.5-million recreational fishing tax loophole instead of eliminating child protection workers? Does Florida choose a $41-million tax exemption for advertising inserts over quality pre-k and before and after school programs? Now with the eyes of America on Florida, do we truly believe that a $72-million tax exemption for boats and planes is more important than prevention, intervention and rehabilitative services to Florida’s troubled girls?

I bumped into Steve Barnett, the co-director of the National Institute on Early Education Research, at the Education Writers Association conference in Chicago over the weekend. As we were being jostled by a scrum of p.r. folks, I asked him what he'd thought of the coverage of NIEER's 2007 State of Preschool yearbook. He said the report didn't get much attention from national outlets but that it was the hook for a lot of local stories. Catching up on the coverage I'd missed while on the road this morning I found a perfect example of what Barnett meant. The television station WYMT in Hazard, Kentucky used the report as the news hook for a visit to a preschool in Perry County, Kentucky. Reporter Heather Hale didn't quote any statistics or academic types. Nor did she talk about how much Kentucky actually spends. But the visuals and a couple brief interviews nicely illustrated high quality pre-k.

A Denver Post editorial last week noted that the universal pre-k program approved by the city's voters in 2006 is only serving 695 children and has prompted a new civic effort to speed expansion. The editorial notes that one reason for the slow growth is that the programs funded by the measure are required to be high quality. While the editorial says that's a problem, others might well disagree and call it a virtue.

A few days later a Rocky Mountain News editorial added the fact that the program is only spending about a third of the amount that was intended. The Rocky opposed the measure in 2006 but it says that it is rooting for its success. Given that the program was authorized only 18 months ago the Rocky said it needs to be given more time. But, the editorial said, if the program isn't running at full or near-full speed a year from now there would be reason to complain.

Here's the Post's news story, pegged to a new $1 million ad campaign to boost awareness. The Rocky published a much more useful story--including details about the program that might actually help parents--here. But neither

Linda Mcconnell / Special To The Rocky

reporter actually ventured into classrooms to explore the issue of quality or give readers a sense of what children are getting.

The program should be serving more students soon. In March it was announced that 1,100 families had applied during a six-week enrollment period and that 100 more centers had become certified to serve them.

While heading out of Chicago Saturday I saw that the early Sunday edition (at the L.A. Times we called this the "bulldog" edition) had a big front page spread delving into scientific, political, and economic issues related to how best to invest in early childhood education. It was an excellent piece that focused on how early some form of early education outside the home should begin. Brain research was cited but the piece also explored the competing interests and tradeoffs involved in early education policy. It was comprehensive, nuanced, authoritative, and balanced. Readers would come away knowing the parameters of key debates on early ed. Journalists should look to it as a model.

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.

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?

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?

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.

Look for full-page advertisements in the New York Times and Washington Post this morning laying out what the backers say is a "broader, bolder" approach to raising achievement levels and closing achievement gaps. The liberal Economic Policy Institute is the organizer of the effort, which involved a truly all-star line up of researchers, educators, economists and others. The main idea, as laid out by EPI scholar Richard Rothstein, is that schools alone can't make up for all the factors that tend to undermine poor children's performance in school. (Poor health, poorly educated parents, language differences, maternal depression, transiency.) Those factors overwhelm the effects of teaching, now matter how good it is.

That's an argument Rothstein has made eloquently and authoritatively for a long time. But it's controversial, however, because some education reformers argue that Rothstein is letting schools off the hook, blaming poverty for children's performance rather than weak teaching. The measures proposed by other authors hardly go beyond the usual in-school reform efforts. They call for better trained teachers, more supportive emotional climate, smaller class sizes, more data and accountability, better services for immigrants.

One policy prescription offered, however, does go beyond elementary and secondary schooling: high quality child care and pre-kindergarten classes. My TC colleague Sharon Lynn Kagan and co-author Jane Waldvogel summarize the evidence persuasively, saying that poor children will make greater gains from pre-kindergarten than will middle class children.

By the way, EPI will be hosting a conference call about the reports at 11 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time today.

(Different cities are trying new things to get kids ready for school)

I came across two very different stories about pre-kindergarten today, both illustrations of good intentions -- getting children ready for school. One illustrated a program that is working well, the other highlighted once again the tremendous problems New York City is having just getting kids registered.

St. Louis is offering a mini-program that teaches children to stand in line, raise hands and recognize numbers and letters. The story in the St. Louis Post Dispatch noted that some students need a little more help making the transition to school, and the month-long programs some school districts offer can give them a great start by the time they arrive in the fall.

I couldn't help note the contrast with a New York Daily News story that once again highlighted the mess New York City finds itself in, after using a new selection process to fill 15,000 pre-kindergarten seats.

The story showed the real impact this misguided process is having on children and families, who can no longer get a spot in neighborhood schools just steps from their home in many cases. Across the city, siblings are shut out and even families and students who registered on team and followed all the proper registration steps must tell their children they cannot go to pre-school next year after all -- even when the building is next door.

(Poll shows public favors public pre-kindergarten investment)

Candidates take note: Americans want publicly funded pre-kindergarten and believe in a federal role for it, according to a bipartisan poll from Peter D. Hart Research Associates Inc. and American Viewpoint. Nearly 7 in 10 voters said they wanted more federal support for state-funded pre-kindergarten. Highlights of the poll can be viewed here:

The poll released on Tuesday surveyed 800 registered voters and another 200 “swing voters,’’ and found strong support for federal investment in pre-kindergarten – particularly among such voters in the South, where governors like Phil Bredesen of Tennessee have been struggling to finance ambitious pre-kindergarten agendas.

The findings were hailed as good news by Pre-K Now, the Washington D.C. based group leading the movement for high-quality, voluntary pre-kindergarten for all three and four-year-olds in the U.S.

The results should serve as a reminder to journalists that pre-kindergarten is well worth covering as both an education and a political story. Simply reporting the results, however, is not enough. The findings should be a starting point for visiting high quality pre-kindergartens to see what is working, and for asking follow up questions about how graduates fare.

(An unintended irony in New York City: Fewer pre-kindergarten and gifted opportunities; unfilled seats)

Buried at the end of the fascinating New York Times analysis of a new policy that has effectively shut some of the city's poorest children out of gifted kindergarten programs is fundamental question about equity and access: How fair is it to test four-year-olds and make educational decisions for them based on those scores?

New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein's initial idea of screening all kindergartens has met with fierce opposition, including from Deborah Stipek, the dean of Stanford University's education school. She believes such testing only increases inequities.

Klein has since backed away from the idea due to budget cuts. Bu the concept remains on the mind of parents in New York City who have been furious with the Department of Education's attempts to centralize pre-school admissions. Already, that's led to several children being shut out of pre-school altogether and of siblings -- including twins -- being split up into different schools throughout the city, in many cases far from their neighborhood.

Savvy New York parents -- being New Yorkers, of course, where parenting can be a competitive sport -- would likely find a way to prepare for such tests, notes one participant on Insideschools.org, which is keeping careful track of the kindergarten issue.

"In a competitive world parents who have the access and the means will do whatever it takes to give their kids an edge--whether that means buying kits that teach skills similar to those tested .... having the child tutored, or even purchasing copies of the testing instruments themselves,'' the blog participant noted.

That same edge was not available to the many children who did not make the cut-off scores the Department of Education established for this year's programs.

(New study shows Oklahoma's public pre-kindergarten to be effective)

Two interesting and very different studies have emerged this week on pre-kindergarten quality and effectiveness, including a surprisingly critical finding from Georgia,the first state to offer universal pre-kindergarten.

The state once hailed as a model, it seems, no longer leads the the nation in enrollment, high-quality standards or per-pupil spending, according the report by the Southern Education Foundation, picked up in the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

Pre-school access in the state is limited by a new population growth, including an influx of new immigrants.Georgia's per-pupil expenditure now ranks 22 against 38 other state-funded pre-kindergarten programs, the report notes, leaving lots of unanswered follow-up questions for journalists.

A study of 3,500 children in Oklahoma, meanwhile, found that pre-kindergarten programs set children up for later success in school, by strengthening reading, writing and math skills. The study published in the journal Science also found the state's pre-kindergarten program to have relatively high standards, pay and benefits to well-qualified teachers.

Participation in Tulsa's public pre-school program increased cognitive development significantly, along with pre-reading, writing and math skills, the study found. Children who participated in Head Start also improved their cognitive skills, though less dramatically.

William T. Gormley, lead author of the study, is the co-director of the Center for Research on Children in the U.S. (CROCUS) at Georgetown University. He believes a strong preschool program can lessen "negative effects,'' of family and environmental risk factors. Copies of the report are available at the AAAS Office of Public Programs at 202-326-6440 or
scipak@aaas.org.

Oklahoma has been an interesting state to watch because more of its 4-year-olds attend public pre-school than in any other state. Other studies have also found that Oklahoma's program improves children's language, literacy and mathematical skills; including a December, 2006 report from the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) at Rutgers University.

Following up on the attention paid to the new Bill Gormley study of the effects of the state's $7,000 per year prekindergarten program I came across this ABC television report from May. It shows the power of television when done well. I particularly liked the video of a kindergartner who had attended pre-k writing letters (steady, clear, nicely formed) while, on a split screen, a kindergartner who had not gone to pre-k tried to do the same. (wobbly lines, some unrecognizable letters, slower).

The ABC report quoted candidate Obama saying he supported pre-k because it would return $10 for every dollar invested. I've now come across economic returns estimates of between $2.36 and $17 for each dollar invested. (See Clive Belfield's report as well as this oneby Steve Aos at the Washington State Institute for Public Policy.)

Not sure where Obama's number comes from but what's important is that each of these studies makes different assumptions, uses different methodologies for evaluating costs and savings, and covers different time periods. Point is that even the lowest estimate shows a better than one-to-one return. That return has to be evaluated against the returns from other social interventions, some of which are highly targeted and others, such as public schooling in general, that are universal.

(Budget cuts can lead families toward crowded, ad-hoc quality child care options)

A story in today's Newsday did a great job of illustrating how painful New York State's budget cuts are for the working poor, who depend in many cases on subsidized day care so they can hold onto their jobs.

Reporter Michael Amon found a particularly telling anecdote: a single mother who earns just $300 a week as an animal caretaker at a shelter and will no longer get assistance with the $150 in child care costs for her 6-year-old daughter. The key quote?

"It seems like it would be easier for me to just quit my job and go on welfare, because I can't afford the day care,'' a mother in the story tells Amon.

The situation Amon described is one increasing numbers of families across the U.S. are finding themselves in, as fuel and food costs rise and state budgets are slashed. While the program in Suffolk County is the only one to freeze the program as a result of $51 million in state child care fund reductions, many others across the state are being forced to make reductions.

Reporters covering early childhood issues and state budgets alike should find people to illustrate the impact of reductions and cuts on both the state and federal levels.

Such stories - especially if they come with an explanation of why cuts were made, and what the consequences are for families who seek alternative, and often substandard child care -- are important to help the public understand what happens to our youngest children during tough times.

The Patriot Ledger of Quincy earlier this year did a great job in a three-part series of explaining how and why parents make such decisions and balance finances around child care in Massachusetts -- and how and why they, and the programs they choose, often fall short.

(If presential hopeful Barack Obama had his way, schools would teach two languages in kindergarten)

Last week, an Associated Press story widely picked up about a Virginia school teaching Chinese in kindergarten caught my eye, and piqued my interest in President George Bush's National Security Language initiative aimed at teaching the youngest students foreign languages he deemed critical to U.S. security.

Spanish was not among those languages. But Presidential candidate Barack Obama believes it should be, and he's ignited something of a debate on blogs and other media after suggesting last week that every U.S. child should be bilingual.

Obama noted the importance of teaching languages earlier in school, and pointed out that being bilingual can be "a powerful tool to get a job.'' He noted that young children learn foreign languages far easier and acknowledged his own shame that he doesn't speak a language. Almost instantly, he found himself under attack by conservative media and right-leaning blogs along with groups advocating English as the official U.S. language.

Obama defended himself against the criticism earlier this week, but the debate over what languages should be taught when and who should decide has ignited further discussion and debate all week that is instructive -- and reveals how controversial the teaching of languages can be in the U.S.

Education Week has an interesting forum, asking how vital is it for schools and districts to provide opportunities to study another language?

(presidential candidates views on public funding for pre-kindergarten disappointingly vague)

While Presidential candidate Barack Obama offered his perspective on learning more than one language at an early age last week, Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain was readying his speech before the NAACP convention, which he delivered on Thursday.

Not one mention of his views on pre-kindergarten, a disappointment to advocates and duly noted and commented upon by Sara Mead in Early Education Watch. Mainly, McCain used his speech to make clear his support for school vouchers in largely minority and underperforming school systems -- an idea Obama is adamantly against.

"For all the best efforts of teachers and administrators, the worst problems of our public school system are often found in black communities," he told nearly 3,000 members of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People gathered at its 99th annual convention, according to the Baltimore Sun.

Both candidates have yet to full flesh out their views on early childhood education; Obama has said he'd put billions of dollars into early childhood education to make sure minorities and poor youth "are getting the help they need,'' and wants to increase Head Start funding, but specifics are yet to come.

Mead has her own ideas about some early childhood proposals should believes McCain might support; she's also taken a good look at Obama's.

(Sara Mead of the New America Foundation and Albert Wat of pre-k Now speak to reporters in New York City last weekend at Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media)

Journalists who write about education often find themselves bogged down in coverage of multiple school districts, and don't have the time or inclination to pay attention to early childhood education. They are making a mistake, two experts on pre-kindergarten told reporters who attended a Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media seminar aimed at helping reporters new to the education beat last weekend.

"Pre-k is where all the action is right now,'' said Sara Mead, whose own blog about the policies that impact young children is filled with resources and story ideas. Mead noted that 36 states have increased spending on pre-kindergarten and gave pointers on what to watch for in the coming election, along with ways the candidates might support an early education agenda.. Mead spoke about what to look for when visiting a pre-kindergarten classroom, and noted that what happens in such classrooms merits the attention of journalists because it "matters a lot and really resonates for parents,'' and for the public.

Albert Wat of Pre-K Now also offered tips and advice about covering early childhood education, and invited journalists to sign-up for a daily news clip service and monthly research roundup on the pre-k now website. He also presented a helpful powerpoint presentation aimed at providing reporters with a detailed look at pre-kindergarten trends.

(Siblings shut out of pre-k can now attend the same school as their big brothers and sisters)

It's been a long haul for New York City parents whose children have been shut out of pre-kindergarten -- in many cases, from the same schools their older siblings attend. That's led to months of anxiety, soul searching, protests and letter writing campaigns. It's also led to a resolution, according to the New York Daily News.

Daily News staff writer Carrie Melago, who has done a fine job keeping tabs on this difficult story, reported today that the New York City Department of Education has decided to honor its commitment to place siblings in the same school where parents wanted them to be. It's going to be costly for the city -- they'll have to spend $1.4 million on additional paraprofessionals to staff what will now be larger pre-kindergarten classes of up to 20 kids.

The DOE's policy calls for giving preference to highly coveted pre-kindergarten seats to those with siblings in the same school. For unknown reasons, that did not happen in many cases. The kids who were accepted for the spots that were supposed to be earmarked for siblings will not be sent packing -- they will just be in larger classes, but with additional staff.

In a city where the average price of renting a two-bedroom was $5,265 in March (caveat: that figure is for Manhattan, not the other four boroughs, and is in a doorman building) and where parents scramble to identify and find places for their children in decent public schools, the pre-k mess added even more worries. Private pre-kindergarten in the city can cost upwards of $23,000 a year.. The admissions process can involve securing letters of recommendations for toddlers, long waits just to get applications and multiple interviews.

In New York, It helped to have the press keep the pressure on education officials by asking repeatedly how the issue would be resolved.

(The trends in child well-being are well worth watching, as they reflect larger social and economic changes.

While studies are often just a starting point for journalists, it was surprising to find so little coverage of the new Duke University ">study of children's well-being underwritten by the Foundation for Child Development.

The study, released at the New America Foundation in Washington D.C. last week, found that progress in American children's quality of life has stalled after an eight-year upward trend -- and that a worsening economy is likely to negatively affect U. S. children for years to come. Areas to watch range from infant mortality rates to publicly financed childcare and health and education programs.

One interesting finding -- the eight year upward improvement trend may have been related to a post 9/11 sense of common purpose in the country. Another important -- and somewhat frightening -- trend to watch will be the many ways an economic downturn may worsen conditions for children.

The study is an excellent starting point, and hopefully will spur coverage and original reporting about these trends throughout the U.S. One mention came in a Houston Chronicle blog item. The study raises critical questions and introduces data that should be localized by journalists.

At the very least, much of the data can be incorporated into important stories on everything from birth rates and infant mortality to pre-school enrollment -- which, by the way, improved according to the report.

Winnie Hu's story in the New York Times over the weekend highlighted a barrier to universal pre-kindergarten that's not often discussed: reluctance of local school districts to participate. The front-page story reported that a third of the states nearly 700 school districts do not have programs and that only 38% of the state's 4-year-olds are being served.

School district leaders quoted said state funding, which according to the National Institute on Early Education Research yearbook amounts to only about $3,500 per pupil, is inadequate. Space is a problem. Contracting with private providers to offer the services requires administrators to oversee the programs---a cost that would come out of the district budget.

But the piece also highlighted another issue that's gotten little attention from journalists: many affluent parents think school district pre-k programs are remedial and will do little to help their kids. As the superintendent in the affluent Bronxville district in Westchester County said, parents there prefer to send their kids to private programs. A map
of the counties around New York City showed that about half the district's on Long Island applied, about a third in Westchester, and only a few in Dutchess County (a horsey county to the north) and none in Putnam County (just north of Westchester.)

Journalists in other states where district's apply for state pre-k funds, such as Wisconsin, Tennessee, Illinois and New Jersey, might well find similar patterns.

The New York Times reports that 10 NYC schools (Education Week says 11) will be trying the new literacy program developed by Core Knowledge Foundation, which was established by E.D. Hirsch Jr., the well-known proponent of the power of broad knowledge to facilitate learning. The early literacy program, which includes skills as well as information-rich texts, also will be piloted in seven other school districts nationally.

Most NYC elementary schools use the "balanced literacy" approach championed by Lucy Calkins, a Teachers College professor whose Reading and Writing Project trains teachers in NYC as well as across the country. Calkins advocates a "workshop" approach to reading and writing that teaches children how good readers and writers work. It has often been criticized for lacking substance. The Times' story quotes Calkins as saying that she hoped the Core Knowledge schools would continue to teach children to revise their writing and to develop inference skills in their reading. She also said, however, that "this could be calling us to a new and better balance."

The blog on the Core Knowledge Web site has a entry in which a progressive educator "confesses" that he had wrongly rejected the Hirsch approach. It's interesting because it illustrates the reaction of many educators who fear overemphasizing knowledge for fear that it undercuts understanding. Strange, I know.

Core Knowledge also has a pre-kindergarten curriculum.

Journalists might look into pre-kindergarten programs or elementary schools in their area that are using the Core Knowledge approach. Are the kids bored? Do their heads hurt?

I missed last Friday's Wall Street Journal op-ed piece by two policy analysts for the libertarian Reason Foundation that was headlined "Protect Our Kids from Preschool." But it's getting all sorts of attention in the blogosphere. (Sara Mead at Early Ed Watch hasn't weighed in yet. Like the rest of the world, she must be on vacation.) Just Google the headline and you'll get dozens of hits.

I'm trying to track down the research the Reasoners cite that they say shows preschool can be harmful for kids. I'll report back when I've read it.

The Journal blog called "The Juggle" excerpted the op-ed and set off a torrent of responses. Most comments on preschool articles elsewhere in the blogosphere are predictable, negative and positive. Negative comments are along the lines of: "Don't let the government brainwash your kids! Kids should be at home with their mothers! Mothers should quit their jobs and give up on frills!" Positive comments tend toward philosophizing about how good, caring societies spend money on children and education. Most of the comments here are thoughtful. The writers share the experiences of their children in preschool, which are positive. They also share how they decided to send their kids to preschool.

The New York Times' Elissa Gootman reports today on an unannounced initiative in NYC schools to assess children academically starting as early as kindergarten. Schools are not required to participate but the district is encouraging them to do so. Those who sign on can choose among five assessment options, including one in which children are asked to take timed paper and pencil tests. The story is predictable, warning as it does in the first paragraph about "standardized tests of children as young as kindergartners." All tests are "standardized," in the sense that there is some measure or scale to evaluate responses. But reporters and anti-testing folks love to use the word "standardized" to apply to any test, because it implies that children are being forced into a single mold. There's little about the program itself in the article. But it does provide the author a chance to recap a number of controversies related to assessment, and to make sweeping statements about "a Bloomberg penchant for quantifying."

There are legitimate concerns about testing, how to do it well, and the use and misuse of results. But given the small scale of this program and its exploratory purpose the "outrage" the reporter turned up in calling around and asking for reaction seems overblown. A thoughtful discussion of the assessment of young children was done last fall by a committee headed up by Sharon Lynn Kagan of Teachers College. The report of the task force she headed can be found here.

The anti pre-k arguments Lisa Snell and Shikha Dalmia of the Reason foundation made in the Journal last Friday were based on a paper they published two years earlier. When the first paper came out Steve Barnett of the National Institute of Early Education Research at Rutgers rebutted both that paper and also one by the libertarian Lexington Institute in a 2008 paper. Roy Bishop, the president of the Oklahoma Education Association, linked to Steve's rebuttals on his blog.

On the closing night of the convention last night, Senator Obama gave an inspired speech filled with specific policy proposals, something his critics, and even his supporters, had been looking for. As Keith Olbermann said on MSNBC over and over, he offered 29 specific policy proposals. Here are six related to education: 1. "invest in early childhood education" 2. "recruit an army of new teachers. 3. "pay them higher salaries." 4. "give them more support." 5. "ask for higher standards and more accountability." 6. "If you commit to serving your community or our country, we will make sure you can afford a college education."

"Now is the time to finally meet our moral obligation to provide every child a world-class education, because it will take nothing less to compete in the global economy.You know, Michelle and I are only here tonight because we were given a chance at an education. And I will not settle for an America where some kids don't have that chance."

Now it's John McCain's turn....

The authors of last week's Wall Street Journal anti-preschool opinion piece hung part of their analysis on research conducted by scholars at Stanford and U.C. Berkeley that included Bruce Fuller, Susanna Loeb, and Russell Rumberger. Here's a link to the actual paper, which found that the social skill development was slightly slower in children enrolled in preschool at least six hours per day. Here's a link to the actual paper.

Fuller sent this message regarding the Reason Foundation op-ed:

The study with Stanford's Susanna Loeb shows distinct gains from preschool centers for children from low-income families in terms of cognitive skills displayed in kindergarten. Very small gains for children from middle-class families were observed, which is consistent with other work by NICHD researchers and by Katherine Magnuson at U.Wisconsin. What's worrisome is that we found that after about six hours a day in a preschool center, a slow-down in children's typical rate of social-skill development was observed. The NICHD study of early child care and adolescent development found that this negative effect persists at a very small level of magnitude into the fifth grade. It's a small effect and one that is not clinically troubling (although it is statistically significant). It does suggest that preschools have lots of room to improve social skills, and that obsessing on preliteracy skills, or tightly aligning preschool "curriculum" with elementary curriculum and standardized tests may distract from social-developmental activities.

The authors of the WSJ commentary captured the meaning of our research, but they failed to emphasize the positive benefits of preschool centers for children from low-income families, and they failed to recognize that the slow-down of social development largely disappears by the end of elementary school, based on what we know empirically to date. My book, Standardized Childhood, details how this one-sided emphasis on narrow cognitive skills is playing out in parts of California and Oklahoma.

The New York Times' Tamar Lewin wrote about the Fuller et. al. research as well as two other studies of similar issues back in 2005. Here's the link (free login may be required).

Lewin put it in perspective with this quote from Jeanne Brooks-Gunn of Teachers College: "It isn't that these kids are more likely to have clinical levels of behavior problems...You're getting a slight uptick, but it's still in the normal range." See more from the article after the jump.

The Journal News of Westchester County, New York reports that 10 years of data from the Yonkers school district shows children who attended
preschool scoring well above their peers who did not attend, based on their scores on mandated English and math exams. The newspaper reports that "their performance improved regardless of ethnic group, disability, gender, English-language proficiency or whether they received free or reduced-price lunches..."

Yonkers is expanding its pre-k program this year. But the mayor of Yonkers says money may not be available to sustain that expansion, unless the state contributes more. New York provides only about $3,500 per pupil, which forces local districts to bear some of the financial burden. That's something many New York districts resist.

While you were away on vacation last week Andy Rotherham put Virginia Walden Ford, founder of D.C. Parents for School Choice, to work to blog on Eduwonk about John McCain's positions on education. Ford is a policy advisor to McCain and she notes in this entry that McCain supports "providing access to high quality care and education in all programs serving our youngest children with particular emphasis on high quality preschool for low-income students." This was the first time I'd heard of McCain's support for high quality preschool so I went to his Web site to find more details. I didn't find any mention of early education. In particular, Ford's entry says McCain supports creating a database of information about programs.

This week Obama advisors Jon Schnur, of New Leaders for New Schools, and Mike Johnston, a Denver principal, are blogging on Eduwonk about Barack Obama's education plans. At the top of the list is early childhood education. Going to Obama's Web site we find that he supports 1. A comprehensive approach to serving the needs of children from birth to age 5. 2. Expansion of Early Head Start and Head Start. 3. Affordable high-quality child care.

The response to the 10-point opening salvo from Schnur and Johnston was not very positive.

Roaming around the WWW in search of links to the Reason Foundation Wall Street Journal commentary I came across a Kindergarten, Pre-Kindergarten, and Head Start thread on a blog that was new to me: "Jerry Moore's School Talk" Jerry seems to compile full-text news coverage on a wide variety of education topics on the blog, without comment.

One of the articles he posts is an Aug. 29 Wall Street Journal piece on a British study that attributes significant advantages in early grades math performance to having attended preschool. The study is also interesting in that it attempts to isolate the
relative impact of various influences on children, such as a mother's education, father's education and so on. Interesting stuff.

Last night's hour-long comparative look at American education on PBS added to the growing renown of Harlem Children's Zone president and CEO Geoffrey Canada. The documentary had some scenes from the preschools HCZ operates and quotes Canada saying that his goal is to have the children who attend "on grade level" when they enter kindergarten. In his video on YouTube Canada talks about the need to take care of Harlem children from birth on, "at every developmental stage." Here's a video of Canada talking about the work of the HCZ.

Given the news of the past two weeks one would expect a group calling itself the "Partnership for America's Economic Success" to talk about credit availability, productivity or market regulation (or deregulation.) But as radio documentarian Emily Hanford reported this past weekend, the partnership of business leaders and foundations actually is devoted to expanding investment in early childhood education. In a piece titled "The Business of Pre-Kindergarten" for American Public Media's Weekend America service, Hanford reported that a founder of the group, Rob Dugger, is an economist and a partner in an international hedge fund. He is trying to get business leaders to think about the return of such investments over the long term. Hanford has great audio of Dugger using business rhetoric that can sound awkward when applied to investments in children.

Speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Dugger says: “Our goal for five years has been to informationally weaponize those of you in the early childhood development community so that you can compete successfully in a budget world in which evidence-based long term returns is what is going to be the deciding factor of who gets money and who doesn’t."

A number of foundations are investors, including MacArthur and the Buffett Early Childhood Fund. The Pew Charitable Trusts, which is a supporter of this blog, invests in and manages the partnership. Sara Watson, who heads up that effort, champions the economic arguments. But she also says: “There are some investments in children we should make that will never show an economic return but we have to do them or we should do them. So we want to be careful that we don’t set too high of a bar.”

Linda Jacobson has a story in this week's Education Week highlighting new research on a problem that rarely gets mentioned: chronic absenteeism in early elementary school. The study by the National Center for Children in Poverty here at Columbia University shows a correlation between missing school starting in kindergarten and poor academic achievement throughout elementary school and into middle school. The study, "Present, Engaged, and Accounted For," is not yet up at the NCCP Web site. But here's a page on that site that collects the center's earlier work on absenteeism.

This study tees up a number of good September stories for journalists. I recall seeing a newspaper story or a research study a few years ago that reported on a phenomenon I'd never thought about before: elementary school children who drift into school days or even weeks late. (I tried to locate it on the Web but couldn't. If I recall right, it was datelined CHICAGO) Parents stressed by poverty, drugs, alcohol, their own youth, language differences, or frequently changing residences may not see getting kids off to a good start on the first day of school as such a high priority. This would be a perfect time to get out to some elementary schools in urban or poor rural communities and ask to see how the enrollment numbers changed during the first month. Then ask to see the attendance numbers. Follow up some interviews of teachers, the principal, parents and ask the district superintendent what is being done to reduce the problem. The new study provides the perfect hook.

The Washington Post's Michael Alison Chandler has been doing some good work this month on math education. She's had pieces on math scores that are relatively weak compared to literacy marks, the challenges related to teaching algebra in the eighth grade, and what math lessons should look like beginning in pre-kindergarten. [She is also retaking high school algebra herself, to get grounded in it! What a great idea.]

The folks she talks to about the early math lessons, I must say, don't do much more than repeat the standard progressive line. You know the one: "relevant," "hands on," "concrete," math is "abstract." That's all fine. But, as another expert she quotes says, the activities need to contain some math that's talked about in explicit ways. Key math concepts such as place value and one-to-one correspondence between units and numerals need to be taught and spoken about using mathematical terms.

The other point is that the Virginia state standards she excerpts are not focused. As Michigan State University professor Bill Schmidt says, countries where math achievement exceeds that in the U.S. focus on only two or three key concepts in each of the early grades. But they do so with rigor so that students don't have to come back and relearn them in every grade up until they take algebra.

A good source on early math education is Herbert Ginsburg here at Teachers College.

Paul Tough and his book called "Whatever it Takes" on the Harlem Children's Zone is popping up everywhere these days. Who says there's no market for thoughtful, in depth reporting about education?

Here's a piece on the HCZ's "Baby College" that Paul did for Ira Glass' "This American Life." It is one of two pieces on a show titled "Going Big." The title comes from HCZ founder Geoffrey Canada's idea that he would need to "go big" to give Harlem's children a chance to have a life better than their parents. In this piece, Canada explains his insight that middle class parents had picked up important lessons about parenting from research on cognition and child development that most poor parents, themselves children of poverty, often have not. The voices of parents in this piece--especially the young couple who are at the center of it--tell the story so well. You can also download the podcast.

Paul also is blogging at Slate.

Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts announced a lot of grand education plans when he was elected in 2006, including free community college for all and an ambitious agenda to expand pre-kindergarten. This week, as the Boston Globe noted, his education secretary Paul Reville acknowledged the state's $1.4 billion budget gap means the governor will have to pull back on many of these initiatives, including his planned expansion of universal preschool and full-day kindergarten.

Further complicating his agenda is a ballot initiative before Massachusetts voters next week that would eliminate the state income tax and mean further cuts, according to USA Today

The budget crisis prompted op-ed piece by Jamie Gass, director of the Center for School Reform at the Pioneer Institute. The center "seeks more school choice for parents and an accountable system of public education for all students,'' and the piece pushes other alternatives it believes would be less costly.

As the economic crisis continues to unfold, reporters should take a closer look at other educational initiatives their states may be trying to see if they are truly less costly. Is interest in such initiatives growing as a result? What is the educational value? What are the obstacles?

Education reforms may be limited by tough economic times, but several state officials are putting their weight behind recommendations contained in The New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce and its “Tough Times, Tough Choices,’’ report.

Journalists from anywhere in the U.S. can call in between 10 and 11 a.m. on Thursday morning, Oct. 30 at 800-954-1051 to take part in a conversation that will include governors, state education commissioners and other policy leaders from a range of states. The press conference comes at a time when many states, including New Yorkand New Jersey, are seeking federal help to prevent devastating budget cuts.

The report, first released in December 2006, urged drastic changes to the U.S. education system and warned that it is way behind other countries. The report also recommended that states put in place a system of high quality early childhood education for all four-year-olds and for all low-income three-year-olds.

The call will provide journalists with an opportunity to ask about states and their commitment to pre-kindergarten programs in tough economic times. With many governors already scaling back planned expansion, what comes next? The report initially recommended a system of high quality early childhood education for all four-year olds and for all low-income three year olds.

The press conference itself takes place at the National Press Club in Washington D.C. at 529 14th Street N.W., Washington, D.C.

Marc Tucker, president of the National Center on Education and the Economy and co-chair of implemention, says states who take the recommendations seriously can build “internationally competitive education systems…their students will be competing with the best anywhere in the world.’’

It’s not clear yet which aspects of the report will be adopted, but so far, Utah, Massachusetts and New Hampshire are committed to building support for the new agenda, Tucker says.

New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein may have sounded all the right notes when he pushed to provide equal access to gifted programs for all city children and revamped testing criteria for the sought-after program.

Instead, the number of children entering the city's gifted classes dropped by half this year -- and were less diverse than they were a year earlier, according to the stories in both the New York Times and the New York Daily News.

Data released by the New York City Department of Education show the number of white students in citywide gifted programs jumped from 18 percent in 2007-08 to 52 percent in 2008-09 -- exactly the opposite of what the new policy was supposed to accomplish.

Klein defended the city's efforts, nothing that his program led to more outreach and more testing of students, although he did not specifically say what he would do next. Journalists covering this story should press for answers.

What happened in the nation's largest school district shows how important it is for journalists to ask for data and follow-up. The data the Department of Education released -- and the New York Times analysis of it -- clearly shows a program that failed and is a reminder of how numbers tell a story.

Had the press failed to follow-up -- and simply reported the Department of Education's rhetoric and promises -- the public might not have learned that nearly half the year's new gifted students are white. That's a significant unintended consequence of a program intended to equalize access to gifted minority students in a system where just 17 percent of the kindergarten and first grade students are white.

.

I'm really sorry I missed a talk at New York's 92nd Street Y by child psychologist Michael Thompson last week, because I would have enjoyed the chance to see preschool teachers squatting on the floor and pretending to be cave men. The scene was described in an Associated Press story carried by USA Today.

Before a packed audience of early childhood educators, Thompson made an impassioned plea for more play-time, taking up a cause endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics two years ago. Somewhere along the line, he noted, play-time has slipped off the agenda for U.S. children, resulting in eight to 12 fewer hours of free play per week since the 1980s.

Thompson told the crowd that play has been replaced by video games (a form of play kids I know would vigorously defend if given the chance), television and an emphasis on formal learning in preschool, along with pressure from parents to push their children into more structured activities.

Fretta Reitzes, director of the Goldman Center for Youth & Family at the Y, told the crowd it is up to preschool teachers to lead by example. It's probably why the conference included pre-school teachers drumming and pretending to be cave-dwellers.

I'm all for play, but I found it amusing that a conference advocating more of it took place in a building that houses what might be among the most competitive -- and expensive -- nursery schools on the planet. Spots at the 92nd Street's program are so hard to come by that parents start speed-dialing the number the day after Labor Day just to get an application.

They are so coveted that stock analyst Jack B. Grubman told a friend in an e-mail message that Citigroup Chairman Sanford I. Weill, his boss at the time, helped him get slots for his twin children after he recommended investors buy AT&T stock, according to a New York Times story in 2002.

For the record, tuition at the Y this year is $23,000 for 4 and 5-year-olds or $18,780 for 3-year-olds who attend three hours a day. That's awfully pricey play.

Without knowing all that background, I might simply have been able to enjoy an evening with early childhood educators pushing fantasy play and recess instead of phonics and banging on musical instruments.

Journalists don't always have time time to visit preschools while covering the weightier academic battles in their districts, but this story reminded me of some really excellent questions to ask. Just how much time is devoted to play these days in an age of accountability? Is play for play's sake okay anymore?

Turns out a puppet named Twiggle the Turtle has an important lesson to teach us about how preschoolers learn: Social skills matter.

An Associated Press story this week described the results of a study by Karen Bierman at Penn State, who took at a look at Head Start programs in Pennsylvania. The study concluded that weekly social skills lessons and sessions with puppets like Twiggle can teach young children specific problem solving skills and improve both vocabulary and behavior.

I particularly liked the story's use of examples to bring the study alive. A description of Twiggle's emotional reaction after a friend knocked over his block tower, for instance, helped illustrate the unpredictable nature of 4-year-olds. As part of a conflict resolution lesson, an older, wiser turtle puppet urged Twiggle to go inside his shell after having his blocks knocked down -- and then to take a deep breath and talk about his feelings.

The teachers then urged the students to cross their arms to be like Twiggle in his shell, which, according to Bierman, became a habit more helpful than the old "use your words,'' approach.

The study -- funded by the National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies -- divided about 350 students from 44 Head Start classrooms. About half of the four-year-olds were in classrooms that added puppets and problem solving skills sessions.

The study is another reminder of the need for reporters to go and visit preschool classrooms and find out what is being taught -- and why. It comes at a time when educators are under pressure to show that preschools provide a strong academic foundation. As Bierman noted in the article, though, a focus on the just-the-facts in preschool will miss "the engine that's going to drive the desire and motivation for learning."

Score one for Twiggle.

Protests and a police presence at a kindergarten Thanksgiving celebration?

While recent research is shining a spotlight on the value of role play in early childhood education, a California community found itself so divided over a time honored tradition of having kindergarten students dress up as Pilgrims and Native Americans this week that the students got a different kind of lesson entirely.

The costumes first came under attack in the college community of Claremont, after a parent complained they "demeaning and dehumanizing,'' according to an article in the Los Angeles Times.

Seems even play has political and racial implications, and the school decided to take the objections of a parent seriously and ban the costumes. Parents who disagreed protested and sent their children to school in Pilgrim hats and other garb nonetheless.

All of it led to a spirited protest and the presence of police at the school.

The clash left the superintendent claiming he was threatened and other parents angered at school officials for bowing, as they put it, to political correctness.

Lessons learned, anyone?

With new evidence every day that the U.S. economy has run off the rails, there apparently is much talk in D.C. education circles about including a big federal investment in early childhood education as part of the Obama administration's stimulus package. Andy Rotherham of Eduwonk fame surfaces the idea here. He wonders, however, whether spending money to build new classrooms wouldn't provide more immediate stimulus.

While it's true that a lack of space hinders the growth of some pre-k programs, and it's also true that, as Rotherham notes, charter schools need better facilities, I think helping states expand or maintain existing pre-kindergarten programs would provide a more immediate stimulus. It also would show Obama's commitment to helping the middle class.

Why? Because states may be forced to cut back on their pre-kindergarten programs without federal help. A Wall Street Journal article reports that, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, states have cut $53 billion from their 2008 and 2009 budgets and 43 states will have to make additional cuts. During a Hechinger Institute-organized discussion with reporters last month, Michael Bird of NCSL reported that 17 states will have deficits of between 5% and 10% in the coming year. Over the next couple of years, he said, states may have to cut as much as $150 billion in spending.

So far, pre-k has mostly been spared. PreKnow, the policy advocacy and analysis organization, reported last month that 32 of 38 states with pre-k programs maintained or increased their spending for this year. But can that last in the face of such deficits? Another PreKnow reporthighlighted the trouble middle class families are having paying for high quality pre-k and said that 20 of the state program determine eligibility using income. As incomes fall, more families will qualify. If the federal government invested in expanding existing high quality programs--and raising the quality of those that are subpar--it could keep teachers on the job and help parents working two or three jobs to make ends meet. Pre-k shouldn't be viewed as an employment program, as Rotherham notes. But supporting such programs would not only help parents work it would pay long-term benefits, as would investing in infrastructure.

Linda Darling Hammond, who is heading up the Policy Working Group for the Obama transition team, said at a National Academy of Education gathering in Washington Nov. 18 that Obama would hold true to what he said during the campaign regarding spending on early childhood education. Asked during debates which of his initiatives would have to fall by the wayside due to the recession, Obama answered that one thing he would not cut would his spending plans for early childhood education. Darling Hammond assured the 500 people attending the National Academy event that he would not falter in that commitment. Here's the Obama plan as laid out during the campaign. If he can get this through Congress (perhaps as part of a stimulus package), the federal government would spend $10 billion a year to expand pre-kindergarten, and spending on Head Start and child care would go up substantially. With many calling for a stimulus package of $700 billion or more, the $30 billion Obama wants to add to education spending is, as Darling Hammond has called it, "decimal dust."

As the economic crisis deepened in late December, Obama indicated that early education would be part of the recovery package, along with school construction, and tuition assistance. Details to come in January, perhaps before the inauguration. Congress will get involved. Look for strong support. But, as everyone knows, the child care-early learning-preschool landscape is a complex and crowded one. Don't expect that the federal money will all go to public entities. Several of the federal revenue sources, such as Child Development Block Grants, now support public as well as private service providers. Looking at Obama's platform, he'd like to devote some of the money to helping states coordinate all of these various services. All of which is an overly bureaucratic way of saying that tracking where that federal money goes and how it is used and whether it supports high quality learning environments.

By the way, another good source on these issues is the Ounce of Prevention Fund. Contact there is Jelene Britten.

An important new federal research report out today looked at 500 research studies to conclude, just as most parents would, that knowing the alphabet, the sounds of letters, the colors and other basic nouns (car, tree, house, man) and being able to write one's name when a child goes to kindergarten predicts how well children will read later on. The six-year study also found that kids who can write individual letters when asked to do so, who can remember what they've been told, and who can break words down into their sound components do better, too.

The panel's report is careful to say that its conclusions are limited by the limitations of the studies it reviewed and more research is needed on critical issues. Even so, the report raises some interesting issues that go against conventional wisdom.

--The highest impact teaching methods involved a teacher teaching a child a literacy-related skill either one-on-one or in a small group. Letting children do art or play in the kitchen area or other activities are what get more attention from preschool teachers and experts. "Many of the high-impact instructional strategies involved activities and procedures different from those typically seen in early childhood classrooms," the executive summary of the report said.

--Experts often talk about the importance of having classrooms that are "language rich" or literacy rich." The panel found few studies that looked at how much that mattered. Not that it doesn't. But the panel could not find much of a research base for it.

--The report's authors also say that the learning patterns of poor kids and better-off kids are the same. Again, that finding goes against other research that has found that poor kids need focused, more teacher-directed instruction.

There are certainly other views on these issues. Deborah Stipek at Stanford, Susan B. Neuman at the University of Michigan, and the National Center for Children in Poverty at Columbia are sources I'd consult in writing about this important report.

As always, of course, get out into preschools and Head Start centers to talk to them about this.

With all the learning and socialization that needs to take place in kindergarten, it's hard to imagine a school district getting caught up in a struggle over how long a child's hair can be. It's even harder to imagine a child being ordered to learn in isolation because of his hair.

Yet that's exactly what happened in rural Needville Texas, according to a story in the Houston Chronicle, The paper has been following the case of a five-year-old American Indian boy who was kept out of class for several months because of the length of his hair.

The school district maintained the boy had violated the school's dress code, which forbids boys from wearing their hair long. The boy was told he could wear his hair in one long braid tucked into his shirt, but when he arrived wearing two braids outside his shirt he was ordered to attend classes in isolation.

It took the involvement of a federal judge to rule that the Needville School District had violated state law and the U.S. Constitution by punishing the boy for his religious beliefs. The boy's father maintained that the part-Apache Indian child considered his long hair sacred, and held to a tradition of not cutting it except during major life events.

The case drew the interest of the American Civil Liberties Union after the boy was suspended for not complying with a school's dress code policy that required short hair. The boy's parents had sent him to school in braids. The ACLU lauded the judge's decision.

It's refreshing to see newspapers stay on top of the many ways the economic downturn hurts small children and their families. In ailing Michigan, the Heritage newspapers reported some startling data from the annual Kids Count survey in the Michigan Data Book, finding that poverty affects one out of every four children in a state hit hard by auto industry layoffs.

The report, produced by the Michigan League for Human Services, found "stark disparities for minorities in Michigan threaten the well being of large numbers of young children and their families.''

EarlyStories would like to see journalists go beyond reporting the depressing but not surprising numbers and talk to some of the families about how they are coping. What government efforts, if any, are there? What programs are being cut? Who is hurt? What are nonprofits, also struggling, doing to help?

Are any leaders emerging during these terrible times? Journalists might want to look for inspiration at the story Paul Tough, a New York Times wrote this week in Mother Jones Magazine about the efforts of Geoffrey Canada of Harlem's Children Zone to combat poverty and educate children in a poor New York City neighborhood.

The piece describes the efforts of Canada and Harlem Children's Zone to educate poor parents and children in ways large and small, including a simple trip the Harlem Children Zone aimed at exposing young children to everyday language.

"The point wasn't to learn about nutrition, but rather about language—how to fill an everyday shopping trip with the kind of nonstop chatter that has become second nature to most upper-middle-class parents, full of questions about numbers and colors and letters and names,'' Tough wrote, describing what he saw on the trip with parents to a local supermarket. "That chatter, social scientists have shown, has a huge effect on vocabulary and reading ability.''

Tough's magazine piece looks at an effort to solve some of the most intractable problems of poverty, and grew out of his new book on the Children's Zone.

The supermarket anecdote is great example of the kind of show-don't-tell journalism needed more than ever right now, alongside the data and statistics quantifying the ways children are hurting in tough economic times.

Columnists can freely give their opinions without explanation, but Early Stories would have liked to hear the thinking behind David Brooks' op-ed piece in the New York Times in which he "fervently hope[s]'' that a Head Start expansion is dropped from the stimulus package.

Brooks clearly articulated what he believes is wrong with the $819 billion tax-and-spending bill, but he didn't say why he wants to jettison the $2.1 billion proposed for Head Start, the national program to promote school readiness. The package calls for giving $2.1 billion to allow the longest-running anti-poverty program in the U.S. to serve an additional 110,000 children. The National Head Start Association had hoped for a $4.3 billion boost for both Head Start and Early Head Start.

The NHSA noted that the $2.1 billion "would create new jobs and provide safe, high quality services for children as parents go back to work,'' and would provide help to children and families who most need it.

Early Stories decided to find out what David Brooks' objections to Head Start are, since he omitted them from his piece, and discovered a column from 2005 where he declared "there is little evidence that it actually transforms lives.''

The piece had links to a 2005 study that Brooks used as the basis for his dislike of Head Start.

If Brooks wants Head Start money out of the bill now, he owes us a cogent explanation of why Head Start should not get help in this bill. Others have expressed skepticism of the bill's education spending, but few have addressed Head Start. Sara Mead over at Early Education Watch, meanwhile, has done a good job of analyzing what the provisions could mean for early childhood education.

Early Stories did find some more objections -- not surprisingly -- from Chester Finn Jr. at the Fordham Foundation, whose conservative views may have influenced Brooks: "Forty years of evaluations have demonstrated that Head Start does next to nothing to prepare its young charges....to succeed in kindergarten and beyond,'' Finn noted.

Finn went on to describe what he dislikes about the program, which Brooks now has an obligation to do. The view may not be a popular one during this economic crisis, but it should be explained.

Sara Mead at Early Ed Watch is keeping track of the money in the economic stimulus legislation for early education. She notes that 15% of the $13 billion in the bill for Title 1 would be set aside for pre-kindergarten. The Senate bill cuts $500 million from Head Start and $500 million from Early Head Start. It's hard to know the potential impact of these cuts. Besharov (see next entry) argues that Head Start now costs $22,000 per child, far more than pre-kindergarten. On the other hand, Head Start offers a comprehensive array of services to children and families that pre-k programs don't.

Steve Barnett of the National Institute for Early Education Research says Besharov is way off in his claim that Head Start costs $22,000 per child. He says the cost is $8,000. A fact sheet on Head Start from the Administration for Children and Families, which runs the program, says it costs about $7,300 per child.

Although the increase in Head Start funding will be smaller than the NHSA wants, and maybe even smaller than the House of Representatives wants, it will still be an increase. Steve Barnett is very concerned about the $40 billion the Senate compromise cuts from direct aid to states to prevent reductions in services. He says the number of children in publicly funded pre-kindergarten classes is now about the same as are in Head Start. States are already slashing spending on preschool and more are no doubt on the way. Won't that make it all that much harder for parents to get a job?

As educators and policy makers sort through the meaning of the slimmed down compromise stimulus, journalists are trying to figure out the meaning in their own communities. How much of what was promised was cut? What will any new money be spent on? Who is setting the priorities?

A few good resources -- beyond speaking to school officials, Head Start operators and other early childhood education providers -- can be found on the Ed Money Watch blog.

Economist Steve Barnett of the National Institute for Early Education Research has also weighed in, and it's likely that schools of education are watching the developments closely.

Early Stories had a chance to listen to one of the top experts in the U.S. this week,
Sharon Lynn Kagan of Teachers College, Kagan emphasized that what matters about the stimulus spending is the quality of early childhood education it may be providing money for, from child care to pre-kindergarten. The vast majority of existing programs are mediocre, she noted.

"There are very, very few high quality programs and those are the ones that produce the high effects that we tout in the research literature,'' Kagan said.

NIEER has some quality markers. Most states now have early childhood education standards. The National Assn. of Early Childhood Education has its guidelines. So does Head Start. Kagan noted one element of quality that concerns her greatly. Only 36% of Head Start teachers and 30% of child care workers have a bachelor's degree. She also worried that, as these programs expand, the teachers they hire will not have the background and training they need. "Those coming in often are less qualified than those leaving," she said.

Linda K. Wertheimer of the Boston Globe reports that a number of districts in Massachusetts are reconsidering plans for full-day kindergarten classes. Fifty of the state's districts do not offer the classes. Of those that do, more and more are charging parents for the extra time. In fact, the average fee has gone up 10-fold in four years, from about $300 to about $3,000. Massachusetts is one of the most affluent, high-tax, high-spending states in the country, a state whose students score well on both state and national tests. But it charges some parents for full-day kindergarten. This is a puzzle that just doesn't fit together in my head.

For journalists nationally, you should ask whether states are planning to cut back on these classes. We already know states' pre-kindergarten classes are feeling budget pressure. Now it looks like kindergartens are as well.

Consider this statement, which tops an entry on a Web site called Science Daily:

Parents and educators who favor traditional classroom-style learning over free, unstructured playtime in preschool and kindergarten may actually be stunting a child’s development instead of enhancing it, according to a University of Illinois professor who studies childhood learning and literacy development.

Are there really parents who favor "traditional classroom learning" (bad, bad) over "unstructured playtime?" (Good! good!) Good-bad, black-white statements such as these are a staple of education discourse. But journalists need to see them for what they are. The fact is that no reasonable person would favor having four- and five-year-olds spend their days sitting in chairs, filling out worksheets and taking notes. It may occur, but I'm sure it's very rare and not a matter of policy. But education experts also do not believe that unstructured play is as educative as some believe. This is what Teachers College's Sharon Lynn Kagan, one of the world's top experts on early education, said in a talk last week: "Play cannot be an excuse for lack of intentional teaching and setting high standards for children."

The bigger problem in preschools is that the children are frequently just plain bored, not engaged in anything fun, interesting, or educative. That's what journalists who visit preschools will see a lot.

EarlyStories applauds journalists for looking into the connection between education and the economy, and it's natural that the New York Times would want to see how private schools and the parents who pay for them are faring. What new financial struggles might be emerging for the many formerly flush Wall Streeters and other now hurting professionals who once lined up eagerly to pay more than $30,000 a year for kindergarten?

Unfortunately, the lengthy article contained almost no description of how private school differs from public school (described as "unthinkable,'' in one particularly memorable passage). Private school is viewed as as "a marker of educational values, religious identity, social standing or class aspirations."

It's possible that such stories make fascinating reading, but at the same time EarlyStories expects a lot more. It's not exactly news that some families can no longer afford hefty tuitions, even if it may be comforting to pick up the newspaper and read about the money woes of others. What parents and the public really want to know is why the education at private schools merits such soul searching and angst, to the point where one unnamed (naturally) parent declared that her decision to choose private school amounted to "financial suicide.''

How big are class sizes at private schools compared with their public counterparts? (sometimes half as big). Are the teachers trained any differently? Are they hand-picked by the principal? Is their quality (a well known key to effectiveness) higher and if so, how is it measured? Is it the fields, facilities, sports and arts programs that draw parents to private school? Are new charter schools and other efforts to provide competition having any impact on private school enrollment? Also, what are the private school children learning, especially at a younger grade, that makes the education superior (if in fact it does) or at least so coveted?

Why not visit a public and private school kindergarten and ask to see the curriculum. How is it different? How do assessments differ? Can the backgrounds of the teachers be compared? Private school teachers often don't need to be certified and the schools can hire young, recent college graduates who don't have master's degrees. What kind of support and training do private school teachers get and how do they differ? How do parents view the quality of the education in both settings?

To the Times credit, the story did point out that of the more than three million families with at least one child in private school, almost two million of them have a household income of less than $100,000. Some are struggling just as mightily with tuition bills of less than $4,000.

Still, private school should not be seen entirely as a class entitlement issue, particularly as the recession economy blurs the lines. It's far more important to thoroughly compare and evaluate how such schools differ from public offerings. Cash-strapped families really want to know what their dollars are buying.

The social class issue, however, cannot be ignored. When asked about the financial struggles of parents and the additional requests for aid, George Davison, the headmaster of the Grace Church School, told the Times: “We’ll say, ‘You can’t really go to Vail this year and ask for financial aid.....And they look surprised and say, ‘But we already paid for the tickets!’ ”

As President Barack Obama pledges to invest in early childhood education, it's important for journalists to keep the focus on the thousands of children across the U.S. who could truly benefit from public pre-kindergarten programs but are not being served.

That's what WYPR radio reporter Joel McCord did this week by spending some time with four-year-old Wyatt Fowler and his mother in Prince George's County, Maryland. You can listen to the program here:

Wyatt's parents don't earn enough to send him to private preschool, but they earn too much to qualify for state or federal subsidies. So his mother is trying to get him ready for kindergarten on her own.

"He's not getting that interaction with other children his age to know how to act in a group of peers, to know how to sit and take direction from another adult besides myself, to be able to know a consistent routine and follow it,'' Donna Flowler told McCord. She also told him that the two years one of her older sons spent in pre-k greatly improved his academic performance.

The stories of individual kids and families really bring home how and why such programs are important. There's lots of coverage of the push for universal pre-k from advocates and lobbyists in Maryland, which offers a state-funded program for at-risk four-year-olds.

There's a big expansion push now, a universal pre-k bill in the General Assembly that comes at a time when the state -- like many others in the U.S, -- is experiencing a budget crisis.

There's plenty of coverage about the state's finances, but not enough stories about children like Wyatt, who was playing at his mom's knee instead of learning to identify letters, sing songs and play early math games with children his own age.

EarlyStories blogged yesterday about ABC News' partnership with a libertarian foundation to produce a so-called "news" report that, guess what, espouses libertarian anti-government ideas. The item was based on a Reason.tv video on the same topic. The program segment (to air tonight) mainly features Mia Levi, the operator of a string of private preschools who is worried about having competition if the government supports preschool. Levi advertises herself as one of leading opponents of universal preschool in Southern California. (Here is the response from Pre-K Now, which advocates for universal preschool. Download file

Here is a link to one of those schools, the Manhattan Academy in Manhattan Beach, California. Manhattan Beach,
for those who aren't familiar with it, is a very affluent beach town in Los Angeles. A place where small homes sell for seven figures. That's her market. Her school is preschool-to-sixth grade. Not surprisingly, enrollment tails off after kindergarten, because, despite her comments in Stossel's report about failing public schools, the schools in Manhattan Beach are terrific. It's hard to sell a product for $12,000 or more per year when parents can get a much better product--i.e. the public schools--for free.

Here are some comments about the Manhattan Academy
posted by parents on the Web site Greatschools.net:

Individual teachers are great while they last. Director is very difficult to work for or deal with. Parents have no input and those who complain are troublemakers. Lots of drastic staffing changes happen at school year end, but parents can't comment or question, and those who dislike the way the school does things can just leave, since there's a pre-school waiting list.

Frightening turnover. Wonderful teachers/staff disappear suddenly leaving parents and kids stuck with an administration that cares only about $$. They put on a good show, until they rope you in, then forget you're paying the bills. Parents & staff jumping ship as fast as they can. Almost no kids left beyond upper primary (kindergarten).

The teachers at this school are dedicated and the curriculum is good, but unfortunately the school is run as a business first and educational facility second. Parent participation is not always appreciated by the directress.

Diane Flynn Keith, a homeschool advocate who runs an anti-public school listserv and an online site for homeschoolers, reported in a message to her listserv that the ABC producer for the Stossel show had contacted her and asked her to put together parents who would oppose universal preschool. She said the producer contacted her again today and asked her to stir up her base to have them comment on the Good Morning America version of the show . Here's what she wrote in her message:

just spoke to the producer and she tells me that they've
already received "a ton of negative feedback" on the ABC
website. She wrote, "Some positive feedback would be great!"
She said the more feedback - the more likely ABC would be to
revisit the subject.

The comments on the Good Morning America segment show that her base responded. Most of the comments on the site that support the show's conclusions say things like: the government wants to brainwash your kids and turn them into socialists, the government ruined K-12 and it will ruin pre-k, public pre-k programs will do nothing but test kids to death. One comment jumped out, though: "Most of the people commenting on this have never been in a good pre-kindergarten and have no idea what they're talking about."

Visit any preschool and you are likely to hear lots of praise and encouragement from teachers. The children, pleased with themselves, may smile in return.

Turns out, all that praise may not be such a great idea.

In fact, it might be furthering a new generation of narcissists, according to a BBC news report.

Carol Craig, chief executive of the centre for confidence and well-being in Scotland, recently warned educators that they are praising children too much, an idea she said had been imported from the U.S.

Craig told educators at a conference that "an obsession with boosting children's self esteem was encouraging a narcissistic generation who focused on themselves and felt entitled.''

EarlyStories remembers visiting a preschool where the instructor pointed out to parents that merely praising children for, say, drawing a beautiful picture of a castle wasn't terribly helpful. Instead, the praise should be targeted and specific; ie, "I like the way you drew that flag on top of the turret.''

That made some sense at the time. Craig is more about keeping educators on track as educators; they are not, she said recently "surrogate psychologists or mental health professionals.''

EarlyStories became curious about the whole issue of praise in the classroom and decided to see what some U.S. experts have to say. It would be interesting to hear what early childhood educators in the U.S. think of Craig's views.

Getting into one of New York City's reputable private nursery schools has in recent years become something of a competitive sport for the wealthy and connected. The competition has intensified with more parents choosing to raise their progeny in the city and competing for the small number of high quality preschool programs. A few years back, Bloomberg News ran a story entitled "Manhattan Preschools Become Harder to Get Into Than Harvard."

The story described how an average of 15 applicants vie for each spot in about 200 private city preschools -- which can cost over $25,000 a year -- compared with the 11 students who compete for each of Harvard University's 2,030 slots. It noted that New York has the biggest preschool population among U.S. cities, with 557,526 children under age 5 in 2003, according to the latest U.S. Census data.

Turns out that the city's public preschools are feeling equally pinched, although it's not clear that the private programs are any less in demand. A headline in Monday's New York Daily News noted that a Brooklyn pre-kindergarten "is tougher to get into than Harvard,'' and noted that only 10 general education students, or just five percent, were able to secure spots; a nearby Park Slope school accepted just 6.8 percent of all its applicants.

The New York Times followed with a story about New York City kids being rejected from public kindergartens in some cases across the street from where they live -- with little explanation.

EarlyStories decided to call Andrew Jacobs, a spokesman for the New York City Department of Education, in search of an explanation.

Jacobs noted that the DOE had changed the process for accepting pre-kindergarten students and is now running the admissions centrally instead of having different schools with different priorities and deadlines make their own decisions.

"This is the first year we have clear data on how many parents are interested in each program, which is information we can use going forward,'' Jacobs said. He added that pre-k programs are hoping to get additional money from the state to create as many as 500 new full-day seats starting in September.

All that has to be small comfort to the legions of New York City parents of all income levels who simply want to place their children in a pre-kindergarten program or a kindergarten close to their home, free or not.

It's not surprising that parents expressed their enormous frustration about the public school kindergarten selection process in the Times story. Why did they just learn, for example, that their kids may not be able to attend their zoned kindergarten?

The larger question is one of supply and demand: With so many young families raising their families in the city these days, why are both the public and private school providers so radically unprepared? Saying these programs are tougher to get into than Harvard make for catchy headlines, but it's more important for journalists to push public officials and find out what is being done to make sure the littlest urban dwellers and their families don't abandon the city out of sheer frustration. Are enough new schools being built? What plans exist to deal with the overcrowding? Will families ultimately be guaranteed a spot in their zoned schools?

And of course, in this newly tough economy, are the private preschools still as desirable and are they being expanded as well? And what will become of the kids who are shut out of both public and private programs?

EarlyStories has been keeping a close eye on coverage of the stimulus package these days. There's no shortage of news to follow; for example, Head Start and Early Head Start centers will soon get some of the $2.2 billion in promised funding to expand their services.

Yet in Alaska, one of just 11 states with no publicly funded pre-kindergarten, Republican Gov. Sarah Palin is poised to reject almost half of the federal stimulus money available. And this week, the once vice-presidential candidate got some unwanted attention about an early story of a different kind when Palin's teenage daughter's ex-boyfriend boasted that the governor likely knew the teenage couple -- who have a baby -- were sleeping together. The interview -- to be aired on Monday -- came during an appearance on the Tyra Banks Show, not usually a source for EarlyStories.

Just last month, Bristol Palin told Fox News the abstinence preached by her mother "is not realistic at all,'' and said she wished she had waited 10 years before having a child.

So why bring all this up, when the presidential election is long over? For this reason: Alaska's educators and advocacy community are pushing hard at the moment for the state to improve its early childhood offerings, and some were hoping that stimulus money might be used.

Alaska superintendents are lobbying legislators to reverse her decision to reject $172 million for Alaska's schools. Much of the money was designated for poor schools and children with special needs. Some educators had also hoped it would be used to expand pre-kindergarten offerings for low-income children in Anchorage, along with those with special needs.

Palin -- who called education "near and dear to my heart,'' while on the stump with Sen. John McCain - did not attend a summit meeting in Alaska last November on early childhood education, and her budget proposal this year called for only a state-funded pilot program to serve some 500 pre-kindergarten children, nothing more. Alaska has also fared poorly in the way it pays teachers.

Palin also exposed a bit of hypocrisy when did not hold back her criticism of President Barack Obama for his gaffe in "Tonight with Jay Leno,'. Palin, the mother of a special needs baby who once pledged to look out for special needs children, let it be know that was "shocked,'' by what she termed his "...degrading remark about our world's most precious and unique people.''

For the record, Obama compared his bowling score of 120 with being "like Special Olympics,'' and quickly apologized.

Both Democrats and Republicans have disagreed with her decision to turn down stimulus money in tough economic times, as have many Alaskans.

Some supporters have said they admire Palin's courage in turning down money they fear could expand government. It will be interesting to keep an eye on what happens to Alaska's education budget and to any of its limited pre-kindergarten programs as the stimulus story continues to unfold. Journalists should pay close attention, even as the more sensational story of Palin's unmarried daughter, ex-boyfriend and illegitimate grandchild grab the spotlight.

EarlyStories knows this much about Brooklyn: Certain neighborhoods are known for "stroller gridlock,'' a term that sometimes carries derision from those who cannot cross a street or find a spot in a local restaurant without tripping over the toddler set and their gear. As more and more families in recent years have decided to raise their offspring in New York City, the baby population of Brooklyn has exploded. A somewhat alarming piece in the New York Daily News found that the under five set in the popular Brooklyn neighborhood of Park Slope has grown by 35 percent since 2000.

It follows that the well educated families who chose this leafy, artsy neighborhood bordering the lovely Prospect Park would naturally want to send
their children to pre-kindergarten, hopefully to one of the better known public schools nearby.

As the neighborhood and its schools continue to grow more popular, the Department of Education in New York City has struggled to find a way for supply to meet demand.

The result? Enormous anxiety and one pre-k where 263 little applicants vied for just 18 spots. Nearby schools had spots for fewer than one in six pre-kindergarten applicants.

There is no question of support for public pre-kindergarten in this neighborhood, where there is also a shortage of spots in private nursery schools. More than 400 families signed a petition requesting an early childhood center, aware that the problem extends to kindergarten, according to the Daily News. Schools in the area are at 93 percent capacity.

The Department of Education told the Daily News they hope to add full-day seats, but were waiting to base decisions "on the availability of space and the demand from parents who apply this year."

EarlyStories understands the need to find space, but clearly the Daily News story -- and the many parents who signed the petition -- document the demand.

EarlyStories was hoping Florida journalists might pick up on this week's NIEER 2007 report card, which found that Florida's voluntary pre-k program is among the poorest quality in the U.S. The state earned high marks for access, as it is open to every 4-year-old, regardless of income. News about the program is hugely important in Florida's tough economy, where more and more parents are taking advantage of it; some 61 percent of the state's four-year-olds enrolled last year.

The Tampa Tribune noted in a piece this week that Florida educators are worried that the findings did change much over the course of a year. EarlyStories would now like to see journalists spend some time examining Florida's pre-k programs and explaining to the public how to tell the difference between a high and low quality program.

It's not enough to tell us that a program is of poor quality. What are the kids -- and teachers -- doing, or not doing? Are they being prepared for kindergarten? Are they learning letters, numbers and sounds or just playing on a playground? How is quality measured -- what do the standards look like -- and how can parents steer clear of poor programs? What -- if any -- efforts are under way to improve Florida's pre-k's?

The NIEER report should be a starting point for journalists. What are the stories that come next?

Margaret Ramirez of the Chicago Tribune did an admirable job of reporting on the many challenges Latino families face in gaining access to early childhood education.

Ramirez started her story in a place few education reporters have been venturing lately -- a Head Start program, a key place to be at a time when the federal stimulus package is earmarking billions of dollars to grow Head Start programs and as President Barack Obama has expressed concern about the achievement gap that leaves African American and Latino children behind.

The story described how Latino families with young children are less likely to enroll in early childhood education programs, facing barriers from language to transportation to a shortage of slots. And she noted that as a result, Latino children are often lagging in critical math and reading skills once they enter kindergarten.

Ramirez took a look at both the reasons for low attendance among Hispanics in pre-school programs along with the fractured landscape of early childhood education in both Illinois and the U.S. It's the kind of story worth doing in many communities that are home to fast-growing Latino populations. The number of Hispanic students in the nation's public schools nearly doubled from 1990 to 2006, accounting for 60% of the total growth in public school enrollments over that period, according to the Pew Hispanic Center, an excellent source for journalists. And those numbers are likely to continue climbing -- making it all the more important for journalists to find out if schools are ready for the influx.

The downturn economy is taking a toll on grown-ups, with a confluence of stressful events: rising unemployment, a housing crisis, income cuts and an overall sense of fear that is permeating everyday life. But how are children faring? EarlyStories was reminded why journalists should be paying closer attention, after reading Bob Herbert's column in the New York Times this week.

Herbert didn't speak to any children for his column, nor did he focus on any particular family. He wrote rather broadly and stated some obvious facts that really could be the starting point for taking a closer look at the lives of children in just about any U.S. community: "Official statistics are not yet readily available, but there is little doubt that poverty and family homelessness are rising, that the quality of public education in many communities is deteriorating and that legions of children are losing access to health care as their parents join the vastly expanding ranks of the unemployed," Herbert wrote.

He went on to describe the efforts of a Dr. Irwin Redlener, a pediatrician who also is a professor at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health and president of the Children’s Health Fund in New York. Redlener is headed to Detroit this week with a medically equipped mobile operated by the Children’s Health Fund that will provide free health and dental care to children whose parents cannot afford to pay for care. Just imagine the stories he will hear along the way.

It's important for journalists to delve into the health and well being of children in these tough times, along with covering local school news and pre-k battles. What kinds of stories are teachers hearing? Have requests for free lunch doubled and even tripled? What are schools doing in particularly hard hit communities to help the many newly laid off families along with those that have struggled in poverty for years? And how are children faring? Are they displaying signs of stress, and are schools dealing with more discipline issues, more children coming to school hungry, angry and stressed? Are they looking for these signs and providing any kind of help or assistance?

Journalists who spend time speaking with and listening to children and their families right now will find some terribly sad -- but important-- stories, just waiting to be told. EarlyStories would like to hear them.

Stories about the insanity of finding the right nursery school spots in New York City have become more than legend; now they are the stuff of movies: Nursery University, a movie about the frenzied nursery school application process in Manhattan, is out in movie theaters this week.

But from the Christian Science Monitor comes yet another harrowing tale, one of Tokyo's nursery schoolers doing worksheets and attending special classes to win a seat in the best primary school.

According to the story, "many parents are ever more relentlessly seeking competitive advantages, especially as the economic downturn makes competition for jobs more intense."

The story quantifies the competition: "For the class entering Tokyo's Keio Gijuku Yochisha elementary school in 2008, for example, there were 2,468 applicants for 144 spots. In recent years, applicant numbers at Keio have steadily increased, up 10 percent over 2006."

And it includes a telling detail: what the mothers wear to the interviews are apparently as critical to getting in as a child's cognitive abilities:

"The school's counsel reaches beyond the merely academic," the story says. "In one corner of a classroom are enlarged photos of "winning" suits mothers wore to elementary school interviews and the names of the schools where their children were accepted. The mothers and children are clad in dark-colored garb, with what look like black Italian handbags and matching shoes. Fukuda says that many families custom order their suits so they won't look identical."

Of course, like many of the stories done about the insane competition for prestigious schools, this one mentions little about what the children actually learn or study once they get in. What's the quality of the education everyone is vying for? How are the teachers trained? What methods are used to get these little children to learn? If the right suit is worn and the kid gets in, what knowledge will they gain and how will that help them later on in life?

Moving to a neighborhood with a fine and reputable public school in New York City can be enormously complicated. Not just because of the cost, although it's difficult to find a decent family sized apartment in Manhattan near a good public school for under $4,000 a month in rent. The real difficulty has become getting in -- and no, we aren't talking about the same old tired competition for the $30,000 plus kindergarten.

We are talking about public schools in neighborhoods like Greenwich Village, TriBeCa and the Upper East Side that have become so popular and coveted that even people who specifically rented or purchased apartments directly across the street from them are finding themselves on waiting lists. Many of these schools are bursting with more than 28 children in a class and some of the buildings house middle school students several floors above.

EarlyStories has been watching and commenting on this trend for months, and the New York Times is really picking up on it now that parents anxiety has morphed into full blown fury. According to the Times, not the first news outlet to report the story, "middle-class vitriol against the school system — and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg — is mounting."

All of this comes at a bad time for Bloomberg, who wants state lawmakers to renew mayoral control of the city school system after it expires in two months. In addition, the mayor is seeking an unprecedented third term, staking some of it on his education record and what he says is a turnaround of the largest school system in the U.S.

For more than five years, journalists in New York City have noted the trend of a growing middle class seeking to raise their children in the city instead of fleeing to suburbia. With competition and cost putting private school out of reach for many, it's natural that parents would turn to public schools and seek out those with the best reputations -- which are often in desirable neighborhoods, or have the effect of making a neighborhood desirable.

In the next few weeks, rallies, letter writing campaigns and protests will heat up in New York City and the mayor and Department of Education will be pressured to find spots for these families.

There is likely one group applauding this trend -- suburban realtors with lots of inventory on hand in areas outside Manhattan with fine public schools.

As parents in New York City prepare to protest overcrowded schools on the steps of City Hall today, many are grappling with an unpleasant new reality: coveted spots in next year's public pre-kindergarten classes may disappear to make room for more kindergartners, according to the New York Times and Insideschools.org.

Scores of parents are on waiting lists to get into their locally zoned kindergartens, "a product of a kindergarten admissions procedure held earlier in the year, and according to parents and politicians, they also result from an increase in children in neighborhoods flush with new condominiums at a time when the construction of new schools has not kept pace,'' according to the New York Times story.

There is plenty of anger and blame to go around, but EarlyStories can't help but examine the origins of this mess by looking at New York State's committment to pre-kindergarten education. A great way to do that is via the "Leadership Matters,'' report available now on the Pre-K Now website. The report notes that New York Governor David Paterson has decreased the amount of money proposed for universial pre-kindergarten by $49.6 million, and has pushed back a plan to phase in pre-k for all children by 2011 to 2014.

The study found 27 governors had either increased or maintained funding for pre-k, while five -- including Paterson -- proposed cuts; criticism for his position can be found here.

In the meantime, New York City parents are furious at having to choose between fitting pre-kindergarten or kindergarten programs in their neighborhood schools; according to the New York Post, , it's "The Wait of the World,'' to find out if there will be room for their children.

EarlyStories often sees articles proclaiming that pre-kindergarten is the new kindergarten, first grade the new kindergarten. What those catchy but somewhat cliched phrases mean is that early childhood programs are becoming too focused on academics at the expense of play, a key way young children learn. Of course, both are important and necessary -- but the quality of both is equally important.

Taking a look at what experts have to say on these issues is one way to make such stories a little more informative and useful. The Harvard Education letter synethesizes some interesting recent reports by some of the top early childhood experts in its May/June Issue, in a piece entitled "Developmentally Appropriate Practice in the Age of Testing."

On the issue of play, for example, the article points out that skilled adults must be in charge of guiding play for children so that it becomes a learning experience. "It’s a misinterpretation to think that letting students loose for extended periods of time is going to automatically yield learning gains,” Robert Pianta, dean of the Curry School at the University of Virginia, is quoted as saying.

There are a number of other useful resources cited, including a report from the Alliance for Childhood describing how kindergartens are spending 2 to 3 hours a day instructing and testing children in literacy and math, with 30 minutes or less for play.

The report is featured prominently in "Kindergarten Cram,'' a piece by Peggy Orenstein in The New York Times Magazine who took the issue further lby visiting kindergartens to ask about homework policies. She was assured (wrong answer in her mind) that five and six-year-olds were assigned it everyday.

EarlyStories would love to see journalism that highlights examples of kindergarten programs that successfully combine ways to play and learn, along with the stories showing that kindergarten has become all work and no play. Surely it is possible -- and desirable -- for early childhood learning to provide the best of both worlds?

New York Magazine's Jeff Coplon laid out in great detail something EarlyStories has noted for months: New York City has a serious kindergarten overcrowding crisis, one the New York City Department of Education did not anticipate or plan for.

Here's an excerpt from Coplon's excellent story...." whole neighborhoods are overrun. On the Upper East Side alone, a thousand extra children are crammed into seven elementary schools. And now hundreds of rising kindergartners had been told that there simply wasn’t room in their zoned schools for the fall...''

How did this happen? Coplon lies out several reasons, most having to do with demography, a post 9/11 baby boom, and the desire on the part of more parents to raise their kids in New York City.

And how are families taking it? “Enrolling kids in kindergarten is like picking up the garbage and making the streets safe,” Clara Hemphill, the founding editor of Insideschools.org,, a site that guides parents through the public school system, told Coplon. “It’s a basic government service that anyone expects.”

Having way too many middle class parents wanting to support the public school system might seem like a "happy problem,'' but Coplon points out the enormous anxiety and anger that has resulted from a severe lack of planning in the Bloomberg administration .

He also notes that overcrowding has been a huge issue in the outer boroughs for years, where parents are often left with "the worst of all worlds; underperforming zoned schools that have no room."

EarlyStories for months has lamented the lack of substantive reporting on Head Start, , the program the United States Department of Health and Human Services started in 1964 that provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families.

It's an area few journalists delve into, leaving the public without the benefit of understanding what happens inside Head Start programs. That's why it was refreshing to see a story appear in the Danville News in Danville, Virginia, where a reporter actually attended a Head Start graduation and attempted to find research that addresses the effectiveness of such programs. The Danville program received more than $1 million in federal and state funding and donations for the 2007-08 fiscal year, so it makes sense to find out what kind of impact it is having on the lives of small children.

The reporter tried -- but could not find -- local data about the program. She was also unable to reach the school superintendent to hear more about what happens to the graduates later on and how they perform in elementary school. She did include the results of a national Head Start impact study by the Society for Research in Child Development for the Department of Health and Human Services, which found that "nationally, Head Start reduced the achievement gap by 45 percent in pre-reading skills between Head Start children and the national average for all 3- and 4-year-olds.''

At a time when President Barack Obama's budget allocates $800 million in grants and incentives for states and local districts to invest in early child programs, it's more important than ever for journalists to visit and and ask questions. Interviewing parents and educators and watching the young children in action, along with seeking out research, is an important way of explaining the effectiveness of investing in these programs to the public.

EarlyStories often takes the position that journalists should be out visiting pre-schools and Head Start programs to tell the public what is happening. It would also be nice if journalists could find the time to attend the many debates and press conferences on the issues they care about, but unfortunately, as news organizations scale back on staff and coverage, that is not always possible. That's why it's terrific when audio or video are available later on, as they are of a debate hosted last week by the Thomas B. Fordham foundation and live-blogged by Michael Petrilli.

The video discussed the pros and cons of universal preschool, spurred by the new book written by Chester E. Finn Jr, entitled "Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut."

So if you couldn't attend the event, you can watch it here and get a good sense of some lively and differing viewpoints. The debate was moderated by Richard Lee Colvin, director of the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media.

As cash-strapped states continue to debate expanding early childhood programs and struggle to finance them, EarlyStories credits Patrick Riccards of Eduflack with laying out some important questions about quality. For example, is it possible to quantify results, he asks?

Journalists covering these battles would do well to ask such questions at a time when the public is waiting to see if President Barack Obama follows through on his campaign commitment to improve early childhood education through a major federal investment.

The demands of covering a K-12 beat make it easy for journalists to ignore what is or is not happening in early childhood education, although most are covering budget battles and the proposals of governors who have had to scale back promises. Riccards makes the excellent point that it's all too easy for the pre-k programs that exist to escape scrutiny.

"If we expect to transform every child into a successful learner, we also need to implement the quality, accountability, and teacher effectiveness into our preK systems,'' he notes, adding that the public must demand quality and results.

For that to happen, journalists must remember their watchdog role and find time to visit an array of early childhood programs and ask questions about the results. It's an important way of helping the public understand what good programs can -- or cannot -- accomplish.

Journalists are about to start hearing a lot more of the phrase "The Race to the Top.'' It's important to start examining what this phrase means, because it could start taking on a life of its own the way "No Child Left Behind,'' did and creep into the lexicon of education reporting without explanation.

The term has been used by U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan to describe $5 billion in the stimulus bill aimed at backing new approaches to improve schools and push states to raise their standards and reward top teachers. According to the Democrats for Education Reform, it represents "a historic opportunity to establish clear reform priorities and to back them up with significant resources to bring change to America's schools.''

So what would it mean for pre-k programs? DFER posted an issue brief this week that is a helpful guide for journalists trying to understand the new federal investment in early childhood education (which is also the subject of a webinar the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media will hold on June 24; sign-up here.)

The brief, written by Sara Mead, who writes the excellent Early Ed Watch blog, calls for states "to enact policities to encourage the creation of pre-k charter schools to deliver high-quality early education to 3-and 4-year-olds,'' and gives several good examples of how such programs would work and what states can do.

This is a relatively new idea and one worth watching and asking about. The brief provides examples of existing programs that get little coverage, including The Accelerated School in Los Angeles, KIPP McDonough 15 in New Orleans, and dozens of charter schools in Washington, D.C. that she believes provide high-quality learning and help improve outcomes for disadvantaged children later on.

Mead also notes an important trend that many journalists who are covering pre-k battles in their states are familiar with. Even though states have more than doubled spending on pre-k since 2002, "the current economic downturn and state budget shortfalls threaten this progress; nine states have already announced cuts to their state pre-k programs and more are likely to do so in the coming weeks,'' the brief notes.

The state of Georgia spent more than $216 million on a program to help low-income children get ready for kindergarten, and yet state auditors cannot find any proof that the program is working, according to a story in the Atlanta Journal Constitution.

The program in question is aimed at “at-risk” children -- a number that applies to about 40,000 of the 78,000 children enrolled in the state's pre-k program and whose families qualify for welfare or other similar programs.

That story raises questions about the audit and its methods in Georgia, which in 1995 became the first state in the country to provide pre-k to all four year olds in the state who want to participate.The story notes that state auditors could not evaluate how effective the program is because it did not track how well the children served in the program performed in kindergarten.

The study follows yet another inconclusive study by Georgia State University researchers in 2005-06, although other studies have described many benefits and Georgia is still considered a leader in early childhood education.

What is happening in these programs? Along with auditors, journalists need to ask questions about the quality of programs in the state. Why aren't children being tracked more efficiently to yield answers and what kind of research is needed to make sure answers are forthcoming? According to Pre-K Now,
Georgia served some 74,000 four-year-olds during the 2008-09 school year. What difference will it make to children now that the state is requiring all teachers to have a child developement associate certificate>? How will programs that serve poor and needy children be evaluated in the future so lawmakers, taxpayers and the general public understand more about how they are working?

Every now and then a high quality editorial appears that helps fully explain the many components of pre-school education and why it is important. At best, editorials take a strong position, provide some background and back up the opinions with lots of background and context. Early Stories came across an excellent editorial in the Star Tribune that described the battle to expand and improve early childhood education in the state of Minnesota.

The editorial noted that the state's children are not doing as well as they should by the time they enter kindergarten, according to a recent report card. "Fewer than half of the 6,310 kindergartners surveyed -- 10 percent of the state total -- were deemed "proficient" and fully ready for school. About two out of five were rated "in process" toward readiness. On two key measures, language/literacy and mathematical thinking, one child in eight was judged "not yet" prepared,'' the editorial noted.

It also pointed to progress -- a preschool voucher pilot project, a law the 2009 Legislature approved and Gov. Tim Pawlenty signed that provides a quality rating system for preschool and child care providers, the promise of $26 million for child care-related services in this state. The editorial concluded that recognizing the importance of early childhood education and finding ways to fund it is key. "Minneapolis and St. Paul schools have recognized something important: Their own success, and that of many of their students, is vitally connected to the quality and availability of preschools. They're backing their resolve with resources."

EarlyStories spends a great deal of time commenting on the way early childhood education is covered by journalists, and pointing out new ways to think about the issue and get inside classrooms for visits. Now there is a new guide available with a wealth of resources all in one place: "Covering the Pre-K Landscape: New Investments in Our Littlest Learners,” the newest publication from the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media. The 20-page publication includes guidance for covering all aspects of the rapidly expanding pre-k landscape, from Head Start to state-sponsored pre-k programs.

Barbara Kantrowitz, staff editor for the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media, edited the guide, conceived by the Institute's director Richard Lee Colvin and written largely by longtime former Education Week assistant editor Linda Jacobson, along with Karen Springen, formerly of Newsweek and Hechinger Institute staff.

Kantrowitz notes that the guide is important because education reporters for years neglected coverage of preschool in favor of k-12 or higher education issues. But in the last decade, early childhood education has jumped to a prominent place on the national agenda with huge increases in state and federal spending for the littlest learners. The Obama administration is accelerating that trend, by allocating billions for Head Start and other programs that reach young children. Suddenly, preschool is on the front pages. What brought about this dramatic change? And what’s the wisest way to spend the new federal dollars?

A major message is the importance of skepticism when covering preschool. Policy makers and advocates often cite studies showing that every dollar spent on preschool returns as much as $17 in savings on future social services. The guide points out that much of this research was conducted on high-quality programs and many preschools today do not meet those same standards. There’s a useful list of things to look for in assessing whether a preschool is doing a good job (and signs that the school is failing its students). The publication also includes a rundown of experts and research studies to guide further reporting. The publication was funded with a grant from the Pew Charitable Trusts.

To request a copy, email Hechinger@tc.edu.

EarlyStories was an early admirer of Sophia Pappas, a Teach for America recruit whose blog about her pre-k classroom in New Jersey provided tremendous insight into the lives of children. Pappas now has a new book based on the blog, entitled "Good Morning, Children,'' about her experience, and it's well worth reading.

A lot of what is written about pre-kindergarten is framed around academic research, policy debates or budget battles. The book allows Pappas, now a graduate student pursuing a master in public policy at Harvard University, to describe the lives "of the 14 incredible four-year-olds,'' in her class and what they learned, from sharing space to solving problems. The blog, and the book, showed first hand the impact that early childhood education can have and why it matters. In Pappas words, "...I gave my students and their families a voice in this country's discourse on how best to serve our youngest and most impressionable learners."

Most stories about early childhood education these days contain references to painful budget cuts that are forcing the elimination of programs. That's why it was refreshing for EarlyStories to see that Alaska, a state that has not funded pre-kindergarten, is moving in a new direction.

An article in the Daily News Miner noted that state government will spend $2 million to bolster preschool programs in a number of communities.

A statewide education summit last November called for Alaska to begin offering preschool classes to families of every 3-, 4- and 5-year old in the state. Stimulus money means there can now be more preschools in areas with large numbers of low-income students.

It will be fascinating to see what kind of an impact these programs will have in rural Alaska. The state is one of 12 that has not offered any state-funded pre-kindergarten and has been under some pressure to increase fhe offerings.

School districts will have to develop programs "with a strong cultural component,'' according to the article. "The state also wants districts to foster parental involvement and help parents who choose to home school their young children,'' the story notes. Will a pre-school education change that, as children learn how to adjust socially, make friends and gain important early learning skills?

Since EarlyStories examines a wide range of pre-kindergarten coverage (there isn't always a lot to choose from) it was nice to see a little item that probably means a whole lot more to the community in East Texas than a few lines convey.

The Kilgore News Herald reported that federal stimulus money will cover a funding shortfall and will allow the Kilgore school district to continue the program it has run in the past. The story notes that the stimulus money "will save approximately seven jobs for district employees.''

EarlyStories wishes that the paper would take a look at what this pre-k program meant to the community. How many children did it serve and how many would not have been able to come without the new funds? How important is it to families? Is there a waiting list? Is anyone tracking how well the students who come out of this program perform later on, and what difference it makes in their education?

It's easy to report on numbers, far more difficult to find the story behind them. Budget cuts are forcing the cancellation of pre-k programs across the U.S. If a program is saved, it is worth looking at its value. The story notes that the stimulus money will allow the program to be run "as it has run in the past.''

Has it been well run, though? Valued? Appreciated? A little more reporting might yield a worthwhile story.

While EarlyStories is pleased to see attention focused on the Harlem Children Zone and Geoffrey Canada's efforts to combat poverty with education, it would be nice to see some other examples of early childhood programs that work. Do they not exist, or are education journalists too caught up with other stories to visit them? What research is available on such programs?

Here's why it's important:President Barack Obama has said to be a great admirer of Canada's model, and he hopes to replicate it in 20 cities, according to a front page article in the Washington Post. A closer look at just about every aspect of Canada's quest can be found in Paul Tough's excellent new book, "Whatever it Takes,'' which should be required reading for anyone who is covering early childhood issues.

The Post piece laid out Canada's approach, which starts in the womb and includes programs "that begin before birth, end with college graduation and reach almost every child growing up in 97 blocks carved out of the struggling central Harlem neighborhood,'' according the the Post story.

The U.S. Department of Education is poised to offer applications for grants that could expand the program in 20 cities, in so-called Promise Neighborhoods. Some $10 million in the 2010 budget has been set aside for planning.

It will be interesting to see what other kinds of programs emerge from this and whether the Harlem Children's Zone can be replicated or emulated elsewhere.

Depression seems to be a big media topic lately, and not just the economic kind. The New York Times Magazine in May featured a front page article by Daphne Merkin entitled: "A Long Journey in the Dark: My Life with Chronic Depression. The Today show just featured a segment on anti-depressants. And now comes a new study reminding us that pre-schoolers also get depressed.

Dr. Joan Luby of the Washington University School of Medicine found that depression among preschoolers is a real disorder, and that preschoolers with depression were four times as likely to develop a major depressive order.

"Our study is the first available, to our knowledge, to follow-up and describe the 2-year course of preschool major depressive disorder in a large systematically assessed sample,” Luby was widely quoted as saying. The study, published in n the latest issue of Archives of General Psychiatry, got a lot of play and made for some alarming headlines.

EarlyStories would like to see some follow-up. The study, for example, did not examine how depression is treated in children, or address any controversy about medication. It said little about what course of action teachers should take when they see children who exhibit symptoms of depression.

At least one article about the study voiced some skepticism: University of Massachusetts psychologist Lisa Cosgrove said she is skeptical about the accuracy of labeling preschoolers as depressed, because diagnostic tools for evaluating mental health in children so young aren't as well tested as those used for adults.

EarlyStories remembers well what it's like to drum up school stories during the summer. Typically, education journalists focus on administrative changes and budget matters. That's why it was nice to see Gregory Trotter of the Springfield News Leader delve deep into an important early childhood initiative in the state of Missouri. The state lags in its support for early childhood education, ranking 33rd out of the 38 states that provide funding for preschool programs, according to the National Institute for Early Education Research.

Trotter's story described "Kindergarten Camp,'' as "a Community Partnership of the Ozarks summer program and a pivotal part of a new federally funded community initiative designed to prepare more children for kindergarten.''

The story pointed out that about 20 percent of children in the Springfield Missouri area show up to kindergarten ill-prepared for learning, and described (by visiting the program and spending time in it) how the various lessons help get children ready for what they will experience when they enroll in school.

It's important to see such efforts highlighted in the state if Missouri at a time when the state's new education commissioner is touting the benefits of early childhood education. Journalists play an important role in describing how programs such as Kindergarten Camp work. How do they help kids get ready for school and why are they important? Is it the best use of public money in tough financial times? How well run are they and is the staff well trained and prepared? Kindergarten camps exist in many states, and are often well worth a visit and a story.

Tough economic times have made the concept of back-to-school shopping particularly painful for needy families. That's why it was at first heartwarming to read a New York Daily News story about a $200 gift to New York families who receive food stamps or welfare, courtesy of billionaire philanthropist George Soros. The gift was supplemented with $140 million in federal stimulus funds.

The News story interviewed parents who are plenty grateful for the cash, and who were planning to buy backpacks, school supplies, notebooks and clothing they could not otherwise afford. The money is intended to be a grant for children ages 3 through 17, and it comes with no restrictions.

But EarlyStories stumbled across one troubling quote from Ana Barcos of Corona, Queens, where according to the story some 200 people waited outside a check-cashing business.

"Times are really tough right now. The situation is bad with money. So it's easy to want to use the money for other things," Barcos said.

How can anyone be sure just how the money will be used?

Critics have complained that money should be used instead to create jobs or reduce property taxes, but EarlyStories wonders instead why the money wasn't instead doled out as gift certificates, to make sure the littlest learners come to school prepared with the supplies they need to learn.

The not-so surprising, but disturbing results of a survey reported by the Detroit Free Press quantified an argument that advocates for pre-kindergarten often use: Turns out many kindergarten teachers in the state of Michigan are finding that the littlest learners aren't ready for school.

In some ways, it's hard to imagine not being ready for kindergarten -- after all, isn't kindergarten a time for lots of play and socialization? Just how challenging is it to be ready for ring around the rosy and block building? But wait -- kindergarten these days, it turns out, is much more academic and teachers want their students to already know letters and numbers.

The Free Press based its story on a survey released by the Early Childhood Investment Corporation, which found that only 65% of children entering kindergarten classrooms were ready to learn the curriculum. The survey comes at a time when Michigan, like many states, is under enormous economic pressure and is bracing for major cuts to pre-kindergarten programs.

It's important to report the results of such surveys, but even more important for journalists to get into kindergarten classrooms and speak to teachers and observe children. What kind of advantage do those who have attended pre-kindergarten have? Can they catch up? What concerns do teachers have and are they about behavior, academics or both? What is the curriculum that these students aren't ready for? What does it ask children to do and how can they get ready?

As the budget battles and political fights over pre-kindergarten continue in economically depressed states like Michigan and elsewhere, it's more important than ever for journalists to get inside the classroom, observe and ask deeper questions so the public gains an understanding of why early education matters.

EarlyStories is always intrigued by stories about kindergarten, which often include phrases such as "Kindergarten is the new first-grade,'' No such phrase existed in an Omaha World-Herald News Service story, but the concept -- that kindergarten has become too academic -- was up for debate, as it surely should be.

The story noted that kindergarten teachers in the state of Nebraska are calling for more playtime in kindergarten, and noted that both teachers and children "feel intense pressure to perform and meet increasing standards and expectations.''

The story did not get inside a classroom to describe that pressure, but there is plenty of room for follow-up, since the story was based on the draft of a report written by the Nebraska Department of Education, with input from kindergarten teachers statewide and many others.

The story did include a concrete example:kindergarten students in Nebraska used to work on printing letters of the alphabet and their names, and now must work on words and sentences. They also are expected under new state standards to leave kindergarten reading fluently.

Are such goals realistic? Since standards vary from state to state, it's worth visiting kindergarten classrooms this year to get a sense of the expectations. Are students struggling to meet them? Are parents upset about what their children are being asked to learn? Do teachers believe the goals they must set are realistic? Finally, is there enough time for play, and does the play have a purpose?

Typically, stories about pre-kindergarten focus on one school district or the cuts and issues facing one state. That's why EarlyStories is a big advocate of seeing the big picture, something that is particularly difficult for journalists who cover early childhood education as part of a larger K-12 system to do. Education Week had a story this week that does a good job of describing some of the new and major trends in early education that provide a context for what is happening locally.

The story noted that "the worst recession in decades has certainly taken a toll on state budgets,'' citing figures from The National Conference of State Legislatures showing that states faced revenue shortfalls of $143 billion collectively -- a figure that won't come as a surprise to those who have been covering statehouse budget battles. At the same time, though, President Barack Obama is attempting to push an ambitious early childhood agenda that will include many new sources of funding.

Education journalists should be looking for local angles and ways to follow the money within the Early Learning Challenge Fund bill which is expected to provide $8 billion over the next eight years to improve early learning programs.

A Washington Post story noted that bill will "help states improve a hodgepodge of early education programs from birth to kindergarten,'' via a state grant competition akin that will push reforms and aim "to raise the quality of child-care and preschool programs that often provide highly uneven educational results.''

EarlyStories has been watching The New York Times blog "The Choice,'' with great interest, waiting for Harvard Admissions Dean William Fitzsimmons to be asked about the connection between "the right pre-school,'' and getting into Harvard. Inevitably, it just had to be among the flood of angst-filled queries that in many cases read like an out and out plea for Harvard acceptance.

Two such questions were posed, but even the parents who asked them seemed bewildered by the concept of Ivy League dreams for the toddler set. Fitzsimmons, however, has been asked about the pre-school connection before; he once assured Bloomberg News of a fact that he's often repeated to parents: Harvard ultimately admits, in addition to countless valedictorians and peerless scholars, students who have never set foot in a formal classroom in their lives.

Fitzsimmons made the remark in the context of straightening out parents who bring a similar mentality to finding "the right preschool.'' In New York City, the quest has become something of a competitive sport, as the hilarious documentary "Nursery University,'' detailed last spring.

The early learning questions to The Choice unfolded as follows: "How do you manage to deal with all these Harvard-obsessed parents and students, who begin a mindless academic death march in kindergarten with the sole purpose of being the last one standing at the end of the admissions process? " A second parent described attending a preschool admissions tour where a parent actually asked how many of the preschool’s graduates had attended Ivy League colleges.

Fitzsimmons did not address them head on, to his credit instead focusing on a more important and far reaching issue in education: equity.

"As important as it is to help students cope with the pressure found in many (usually more affluent) communities, a bigger public policy issue is how to assist the 30 percent of students who want their parents to be more involved in their college search,'' Fitzsimmons responded. "The waste of talent in America—the denial of the American dream for a large portion of our youth—is a serious threat to our nation’s future. A student from the top income quartile is more than six times as likely as a student from the bottom income quartile to graduate with a BA within five years of leaving high school."

Imagine if instead of obsessing over how to get one's progeny into the most selective schools, parents, policy makers and the press would turn more attention to the challenges facing needy students and their efforts to attain a better education in the United States. President Barack Obama is pushing degree completion and access, and focusing on community colleges as a way of meeting the goal of getting more Americans to graduate from college.He also is pushing an early childhood agenda that would raise the quality of early learning and care programs that serve children from birth through age 5.

Still, far more children want to get a high quality pre-school experience than can afford it, and cash-strapped states are finding it difficult to forge ahead with promises of expansion.

These issues should take center stage and are far more critical than the make-up of the class of roughly 2,067 talented and able students Harvard will accept this spring. The more than 22,000 highly qualified applicants they will turn down are not the students we need to be worrying about either.

Has kindergarten become too "rigorous?"

EarlyStories could not help but wonder at the meaning behind a recent headline: "Increased academic rigor in kindergarrten questioned.''

The word rigor is one of the new buzz words in education, and it is often misused. The Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media produced an entire guide aimed at understanding academic rigor.

But the idea of a kindergarten being academically "rigorous,'' left much to ponder. Turns out, though, according to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review , that many schools now expect kindergartners to read and write complete sentences and count to 100 by ones and tens. And of course, the story included the stock phrase EarlyStories sees way too often: "Kindergarten has become the new first grade."

Is it reasonable in the post No Child Left Behind era to expect so much of five and six-year-olds, if indeed those expectations aim high? The topic has been getting a fair amount of debate lately, particularly with the release of "Crisis in the Kindergarten,'' by the Alliance for Childhood -- which included a plea for more play time.

The Tribune Review story noted that "the impact of academic rigor in kindergarten is not yet well-researched.''

But first, what evidence exists that kindergartens throughout the U.S. have indeed become more rigorous? And what specifically does academic rigor look like for the five and six-year-old set? EarlyStories would love to see some examples.

Every now and then, EarlyStories stumbles across an early childhood story that truly stands out. A piece by Sara Carr last week in the Times Picayune of New Orleans is a great example for many reasons, including solid writing and reporting that included a great deal of context. The story described in detail the plight of many parents attempting to find a decent education for its little learners in a city still recovering from the ravages of Hurricane Katrina.

A quote from one frustrated parent summed up the situation perfectly: "The low cost of living in New Orleans is all well and good, and works fine if you want to own a dog, " a parent told Carr. "But it's not so great if you want to send your child to prekindergarten."

Carr described how some 1,300 New Orleans children are languishing on a wait list for the federal programs Head Start and Early Head Start in the city, and how early childhood education has managed to take a backseat and become "the Achilles heel of the educational-reform effort in New Orleans,'' according to one professional.

Carr also did a masterful job of summing up two major trends -- and a major dichotomy -- in early childhood education. One is a willingness among states to invest in prekindergarten programs and a recognition that it can help students later on. The second involves the harsh economic reality of a recession that is forcing many states to scale back planned expansions.

Carr's story has another unique context, as she points out: Post-Katrina New Orleans is "widely considered the nation's school-reform capital of the moment.''

Journalists who write with context and authority tell better and bigger stories, and that is what Carr did. It's worth the extra effort.

Two recent articles shed light on some of the pressures our youngest learners are facing, not through any choice of their own. The first was a fascinating piece in Sunday's New York Times magazine by Paul Tough, the author of "Whatever it Takes.'', which focuses on the Harlem Children's Zone's efforts to improve education for children from birth on.

Tough's piece, entitled, "Can the right kind of play teach self control?'' examined a relatively new way of getting little learners ready for the world they will one day face, via a curriculum that addresses a cognitive ability known by the non-child friendly term "executive function.''

According to Tough, the "new buzz phrase has emerged among scholars and scientists who study early-childhood development, " although he acknowledged that the phrase "sounds more as if it belongs in the boardroom than the classroom.''

EarlyStories enjoyed reading all about the concept, but could not get past the photographs that told their own story: the children looked positively grim, and in some cases deeply unhappy.

On Monday, Meredith Kolodner of the New York Daily News broke a story about an assessment regime for three and four-year-olds in the city's public pre-kindergarten programs, aimed at getting information about developmental delays.

The story raised questions about the relability of testing for children so young, and included the voices of parents who wonder why their children would be tested.

Reading the two stories comes at a time when the press has been focusing on the need for early childhood education to become more playful, so it set up some interesting questions.

What do we want from our next generation of learners, and what are the best ways to get them there?

Diane D'Amico of the Atlantic City Press in New Jersey went where few journalists venture last week, when she took a close look at New Jersey's state nurse family partnership program. The story notes that by age three, children from low-income families "are lagging behind their middle- and upper-class counterparts in vocabulary development," and describes a program that is attempting to reach younger children.

It showed how a nurse with the program worked with a young mother throughout her pregnancy, encouraging her to graduate from high school and providing tools and tips, including a book, to help the mom give her baby a jump start on learning.

The issues D'Amico points out are timely, in part because President Barack Obama pushed an agenda that included an emphasis on early education. The higher education bill the House of Representatives passed in September includes $8 billion over eight years for the Early Learning Challenge Fund -- aimed at improving programs for infants, toddlers and preschoolers, D'Amico points out.

Journalists should be on the lookout for ways this money will be spent. D'Amico wrote about the state's nurse family partnership program, and Family Success Centers that provide various services; she even attended a Baby Bounce program at the Atlantic City library. Similar programs exist or may be starting throughout the U.S.

EarlyStories suggests reaching out to see what kinds of new programs or money might be available for youngsters, even before the enter pre-school. Who are the funders? What is the agenda and the reach? Are families taking advantage -- is there a documented need, or waiting lists? The EarlyEd watch blog is also a terrific resource for following early childhood policy and funding developments.

From one of the new websites aimed at covering education came a comprehensive and well reported piece that put together the many challenges facing early childhood education in Pennsylvania, specifically Philadelphia. The Notebook describes itself as "an independent voice for parents, educators, students and friends of the Philadelphia public school system."

The story by Dale Mezzacappa, a former longtime education reporter for the Philadelphia Inquirer, described the many obstacles to getting more young children into pre-kindergarten classes in the city and the state, along with providing a progress report that detailed many state developments.

Despite an increase in quality and access, Mezzacappa wrote, "early education options in the city remain a confusing hodgepodge. While spending for child care subsidies has gone up, less than half the eligible low-income families actually get them, and thousands are on waiting lists."

The lengthy, well reported piece reminded EarlyStories of what is missing in education coverage, as beat reporters struggle in many cases to cover both multiple school districts and higher education at the same time. Too often, important developments and stories about what happens even before children enter a classroom are neglected.

Mezzacappa's piece contained important information about an array of programs and services, described lengthy waiting lists for slots and detailed confusion and uncertainty that exists around early childhood education. She performed an important public service -- one that is more needed than ever as newspapers cut back on education coverage.

One of the country's top experts on early childhood education made an interesting observation during a discussion of equity in after school programs this week: Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, the co-director of the
National Center for Children and Families noted at a forum sponsored by the Campaign for Educational Equity that after school programs have a lot to learn from what has happened with early childhood programs in the U.S.

Brooks-Gunn, the Virginia and Leonard Marx Professor of Child Development at TC, found similarities while working on study of after school programs that "remind me of early childhood education, like a time warp.'' Both are moving toward improving quality as well as "continuous improvement.''

The packed forum at Teachers College included observations by TASC (The After School Corporation) and prompted an interesting discussion of how and if after-school programs can level the playing field for disadvantaged youth -- especially because their participation in such programs is so low.

The forum came during a week after school programs or the lack of them has been in the news, due to a report by the After School Alliance , which found that some 15 million children are alone and unsupervised after school, and that the parents of some 18 million would enroll their children in after school programs if they were available.

EarlyStories enjoyed the discussion, especially because it prompted an opportunity to think about where early childhood education has been and where it is going in the U.S. After school programs, like early childhood education, can play an enormous role in the lives of children, yet neither issue gets the attention it deserves from the media.

Remarks made at the forum also led to the re-discovery of an important resource for education journalists and others trying to get a helpful overview and handle on early childhood issues: a June 2009 report entitled "American Early Childhood: Preventing or Perpetuating Inequality?"

The report is authored by Brooks-Gunn' colleague, Sharon Lynn Kagan,, who is also the Virginia and Leonard Marx Professor of Early Childhood and Family Policy at TC and with Brooks-Gunn co-directs the National Center for Children and Families.

A re-read of Kagan's report served as a reminder of why what happens in the early years is so critical right now. The report spells out both important historical developments in early childhood education as well as sketching out the urgency of the current landscape.

As Kagan noted, "...expectations and investments are soaring now as never before....domestically, early childhood is on the agenda of every governor; bills are in the hopper in early every state legislature...internationally, other nations look to America to see if and how we are education our youngest children."

With all the attention focused on the eating habits of New York City's public school children, from bake sale restrictions to new vending machines, EarlyStories was struck this week by an over-the-top example from, of all places, Great Britain.

It seems that parents at a school outside of London can actually log onto a computer to check up on what their children had for lunch, according to a story in the Daily Mail.

Children who attend St John's Church of England School are issued photo ID cards when they buy their lunch, the story notes. A list of all the items are then sent to a website, and parents can then log on and see if their children ate, say, nothing but chips and cookies.

A school official in charge of the program defended it to the Daily Mail: 'This isn't a case of Big Brother but we think it is important that parents can see what their very young children are eating during the day so that they can help them make better nutritional choices,'' the official said.

It's not clear how such a system would go over in New York City, where Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been somewhat obsessed with health issues, and where school vending machines will soon contain no sodas, candy or sweetened drinks.

Studies have shown the importance proper nutrition plays in early childhood academic success, but the electronic check-up idea the London area school is trying has yet to show up in the U.S. -- or has it? Are extreme measures needed to make sure our littlest learners are getting the nutrition they need?

EarlyStories has heard journalists say they don't know how to figure out what is happening when they visit an early childhood classroom. In a room filled with toys and toddlers, it can be difficult to tell what kind of learning, if any, is happening.

That's why it was so refreshing to read the excellent piece by Cathy Grimes of the Daily Press in Newport News, Virgina, which described in great detail how one school district weaves assessment of its littlest learners in its early childhood centers.

The topic, in the era of No Child Left Behind and standards, is extremely important to parents, educators and the public. And any mention of testing little children can arouse opposition and misunderstanding.

"From the moment they walk in the door until the time they leave, students are gauged on their mastery of a wide range of skills outlined in Virginia's Foundation Blocks for Early Learning, sometimes called the PreK Standards of Learning,'' Grimes wrote in a story that truly explains what kind of skills are important for the age group and how they are monitored.

Preschool teachers, Grimes notes," watch for more than budding academic ability. They also keep tabs on the students' social, emotional and physical development. That includes large and small motor skills, self-control and self-reliance, and the ability to work with classmates and communicate.''

The story notes that ""Even activities such as dress-up or playing with puppets are linked to skills.''

In other words, the play is purposeful; designed to help teachers see what students need to progress to where they should be.

Not all early childhood classrooms are as purposeful or as structured as the one Grimes visited. And journalists don't get inside them enough to let the public know what is happening. The story Grimes did -- which will be part of a series -- is aimed at describing what testing, or assessment, looks like across the grades.

If the rest of the stories are as descriptive and telling, the public will get an excellent glimpse at what is happening inside their public school classrooms. The school district should also be commended for giving a reporter access -- such stories cannot happen without it.

While the U.S. is pushing early childhood education and an expansion of publicly funded pre-kindergarten, some in Britain are politely saying no thanks. A BBC report this week shed light on a review panel's recommendation that children should continue to learn by playing, and not start a formal education until they are six.

The review found no evidence 'that an early introduction to formal learning has any benefit,'' and noted that "it can do some harm."

The BBC has asked for, and is posting, responses from around the world on the question of what the right age is for children to begin formal learning. The responses should provide a fascinating glimpse at how this issue is viewed around the world.

It wasn't overuse of the word "rigor,'' and "rigorous education,'' without explanation that bothered EarlyStories this time (it's a common complaint here) in a New York Times story about little gifted students. The story described how a new $28,000 a year pre-school is providing an alternative for the parents of young "gifted,'' New York City students who may have been denied admission to some of the most competitive schools on the planet. (Example; some 1,832 four-year-olds compete for 50 kindergarten spots at Hunter Elementary School.

What set EarlyStories off this time was a quote from Gabriella Rowe, the director of the Mandell School, a preschool on Manhattan's Upper West Side. "Some of the most rigorous independent schools spend the first years of an elementary education catching students up, and the gifted kids sit around and wait a while,” Rowe told the Times.

EarlyStories could not help wondering how schools that charge close to $30,000 a year are spending so much time "catching students up,'' and was imagining a bunch of bright kids sitting around and waiting. Waiting for what?

What should little students come into these schools prepared to do? What are these schools teaching in the early years that requires so much extensive preparation and catch-up? Should their pre-school educations (or lack of them) be blamed?

The article reminded EarlyStories once again of the need for the term "gifted,'' to be better defined and explained to the public in stories. The Times noted that an entrance exam makes the determination at Hunter and city public schools (although it did not describe what is on such tests)

The Speyer Legacy School "also considers reports from preschool teachers, and has applicants participate in a sample class to identify children who are advanced in vocabulary, spatial reasoning, mathematical ability and creative expression,'' the story explained.

That detail was useful. Journalist often write about gifted program and tend to focus on the competition to get into them. How do they differ (the Times story does note that in public schools teachers are trained in gifted education and "usually add more complex themes and content.''

What does gifted training consist of in education schools? What research exists to show what happens to those who have received a gifted education -- such as their college and career choices? What kind of difference does such an education make in their life, ultimately? Are gifted teachers gifted themselves?

And what about very talented young students who don't test into gifted programs or have opportunities to attend pricey programs like Speyer Legacy? Are they more likely to get restless in school and drop out later on? Do public schools ultimately afford them the opportunities they need to excel? Is anyone tracking this?

Stories about gifted education bring up a host of equity issues at a time when many public school systems that are scrambling to make sure all students meet the requirements of the No Child Left Behind law. There are many important questions to ask and feature -- even more important than the mission of one new school of 26 students that is sure to be in far more demand now that its mission has been published.

Michigan is state that knows the benefits of high quality pre-school. As the Detroit Free Press pointed out, the state is known nationally for the research on the Perry preschool program in Yipslanti, a 30-year-old study that is frequently used to tout the benefits of early childhood education.

Thirty years later, in the midst of an economic recession, the state is struggling and so are the young learners whose parents can no longer afford programs that are now being forced to raise rates and charge tuition as they lose state funding.

"A 50% cut in grants, part of the school aid budget that became official last week, means more than 20 programs won't get their funding renewed and 2,000 slots will be lost. Also, just as many new programs won't get funded at all,'' Lori Higgins of the Free Press wrote.

Other programs are being eliminated altogether, the Free Press pointed out, and advocates who spoke to the paper are incensed.

"The more disadvantaged kids we have in high-quality learning environments, the fewer kids we have needing special education and remedial education, the fewer kids being" held back, "dropping out, committing crimes. It's indisputable. We should be leading the way on this," Jessica Gillard of the Early Childhood Investment Corp., a Lansing-based advocacy group, told the Free Press.

It's good to see the Free Press keeping on top of this issue and interviewing parents along with advocates and pre-school directors. If the cuts are going to hurt families and remove one of the few bright spots in the lives of their children, the word has to get out. There are lots of choices that have to be made in tough times and the public needs to understand the consequences.

Every now and then EarlyStories come across a reminder of how important early learning is, even when there is an agenda attached. This reminder came from an article in the Washington Post about the sad condition of America's youngsters, age 17-to 24.

It seems some 75 percent of this age group is ineligible for military service "largely because they are poorly educated, overweight and have physical ailments that make them unfit for the armed forces,'' according to a report by Mission: Readiness, a Washington-based nonprofit organization.

The proposed solution? Greater investment in early education, to boost both academic achievement and social development.

EarlyStories would like to propose a modest amendment: why not add a mandatory fitness regime for all pre-schoolers? Couldn't a dose of push-ups, sit-ups and say, wind sprints be used as a counting exercise as well?

Mission Readiness, for the record, is pushing Congress to pass President Barack Obama's Early Learning Challenge Fund, which would grant states $1 billion annually for early childhood development programs.

Anyone involved in covering pre-kindergarten issues at some point hears a reference to the Perry Preschool study, which examined the lives of 123 African American children who were born in poverty. The study was the first of its kind to quantify the impact a high-quality preschool program had on the lives of children, and it is still widely quoted.

Over the years, EarlyStories has heard countless references to the study, but never really thought more deeply about what the actual experience was like for the people involved in it before listening to Emily Hanford's excellent broadcast on American RadioWorks. Hanford's "Early Lessons,'' report should be required for any journalist -- or anyone, really -- with an interest in preschool.

Hanford, a producer at American Radio Works, acknowledges she didn't know much about preschool issues, or about the Perry Preschool Project until she tackled the same question the study attempted to answer: Can preschool boost IQ scores and prevent children from failing in school?

In three visits to Yipslanti, Michigan, where the study took place, Hanford grew fascinated with both the history of the study and the profound questions it attempted to raise about equity in education. She learned a great deal about David Weikart, the Perry preschool founder who died in 2003. Weikart started the Perry preschool in 1958, according to Hanford, "in response to frustration with what he describes in his memoir as "the pace of needed changes in a small, local school system.''

Hanford tracked down at least three of the teachers at the school, who share stories about visits to apple orchards and other ways the children learned about the world around them. The Perry preschool, Hanford's report notes, focused "on cognitive development – stimulating children’s brains, increasing their vocabulary, teaching them letters and numbers.''

Hanford's piece is filled with powerful interviews and descriptions of what life was like at the school: “I would do whatever we needed to do,” former Perry teacher Evelyn Moore told Hanford, “to prove that this many African-American children were not retarded.”

Hanford noted in an interview with EarlyStories: "This is history that is going to go away soon. "The researcher is dead. The teachers will be gone -- most are gone already -- and even the kids are going to be gone, so it was a great thing to capture this history at a moment in time.''

Hanford had not heard of the Perry study before she began the project, made possible with support from the Spencer Foundation which investigates ways in which education can be improved around the world and believes research is part of the equation.

"I literally spent a month just reading and talking to people and trying to figure out what education research has had an impact on policy,'' Hanford said. "I was more interested in the question of how research effects policy...and whether and how research informs public policy in a positive way. It's an open question -- sometimes research doesn't do what it should.''

A transcript of Hanford's project is available here, and the program can also be downloaded.

It is sad fact of life that in a time of economic crisis, as states are scaling back on promised expansions of publicly funded pre-kindergarten, that a few upscale Washington D.C. parents are whining.

In some ways, it's even sadder that their concerns have become a story, but indeed they provide a window into the unfounded fears that may accompany thinking about education.

And why are these parents whining, according to the Washington Post? It seems that a blog posting about the new academic focus in kindergarten set off waves of fear about how prepared their offspring might be, according to the Post's Valerie Strauss.

Strauss writes that parents have been begging school directors to let their 1 1/2 -year-olds into programs for 2-year-olds. In interviews with a few dozen preschool directors, Strauss learned that parents have been, among other things, demanding to know why their 2-year-old isn't being given the alphabet to copy over and memorize and enrolling their 3-year-olds in so many activities "that the kids are falling asleep on their preschool desks.''

Why all this anxiety? "Unknowing parents see their kids playing at a water table and think they are wasting their time,'' Strauss notes.

To her credit, she notes that there is an enormous amount of research showing that play has great developmental benefits.

In this case, it seems like the pre-school directors need to do some educating of parents. Several told Strauss they were afraid of offending them. As educators, they need to be clear about how and why play matters, and if they don't explain and defend the value of play, they might as well just start assigning homework to two-year-olds.

EarlyStories read the New York Times piece on an outdoor kindergarten in Saratoga Springs New York with interest. Finally, a story about something other than how kindergarten has become so academic: "It's the new first grade.''

Ultimately, though, the story was disappointing. It noted that 23 children in upstate New York are spending three hours each day outside, no matter what the weather, and that it is an extreme version of outdoor learning that is taught at Waldorf schools -- which are largely private and emphasize nature and the arts. The story noted that forest kindergartens are "increasingly common in Scandinavia and other European countries like Germany and Austria.''

It's nice that a handful of kids whose parents can afford it are enjoying the great outdoors while in school. But the story gives no context for what the nature-based curriculum can and cannot do, nor does it compare the Waldorf program to what kindergarten looks like for millions of U.S. children.

What goals do we have for these four, five and six-year-olds? (The age range varies according to district entrance requirements). What evidence is there that tramping about in the woods for several hours a day will make for a better thinker or reader later on? What does the research show?

A cute woodsy feature story about one program can and should go further at a time when the U.S. is seriously considering national standards and much debate is taking place about what children should learn and when. Is the program prompting urban schools to consider taking more field trips, for example? Do the kids who don't get outdoors suffer? Is anyone proposing a different approach for city schools, based on the Waldorf's results? And what are those results?

At a time of unprecedented federal involvement and investment in education, coverage of the issue is so lacking it makes up only 1.4 percent of national news coverage, according to a new report from the Brookings Institution.

The report, entitled: "Invisible: 1.4 Percent Coverage for Education is Not Enough,'' finds scant coverage of critical issues like teaching, learning and curriculum; most stories "dealt with budget problems, school crime and the H1N! flu outbreak,'' according to the report, funded with support from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The findings are not surprising, coming at a time when newspapers are under pressure simply to survive and other news outlets are struggling due to declining ad revenues and other economic pressures. And there were some bright spots: local reporting still produces quality journalism about important education topics in cities like Providence, Minneapolis and and Phoenix.

At EarlyStories, we often lament the lack of substantive reporting on pre-kindergarten and early childhood issues; the Brookings report did not isolate the issue, but noted that budget issues dominated coverage of pre-school programs. The report zeroed in on wire service coverage of education and noted that much of it "focuses on stories that have nothing to do with education itself,'' and instead are about crime, sex and scandals involving educators.

You can watch a webcast of the event, which includes recommendations, on the Brookings website:

With so much debate and discussion over charter schools lately, EarlyStories found it fascinating to read the New York Times style piece Sunday, entitled, "Scholarly Investments.''

First thought: What on earth is a story about charter schools doing on the style page? The answer of course, can be seen in the picture of Ravenel Boykin Curry IV, who helped found two Girls Preparatory Charter Schools, posing with six uniformed young students in the Bronx.

Turns out that well connected, socialite hedge fund managers like Curry are are embracing charter schools as their new cause; these maverick investors have decided they like this new model -- whatever that means. So now it's in vogue to be supportive of charters in the largest school system in the U.S., with more than 1.1 million public school children -- although according to the story, only about 30,000, or 2.5 percent of them, attend attend charters.

So why are the money folks choosing charters instead of embracing some of the other struggling public schools, many of which could use an infusion of hedge fund cash at a time of deep budget cuts?

Because, according to Nancy Hass of the Times, "their obsession — one shared with many other hedge funders — is creating charter schools, the tax-funded, independently run schools that they see as an entrepreneurial answer to the nation’s education woes.''

Curry himself explained that hedge fund mavericks see charter schools as “exactly the kind of investment people in our industry spend our days trying to stumble on.''

The story did not explain why the wealthy fund managers are attracted to the type of education that charter schools offer, or how it differs from what happens in some of the 1,600 New York City public schools. Are they excited about the quality of teaching and learning, and the success of students? It did point out that studies on the effectiveness of charter schools differ in their conclusions.

One manager suggested the attraction has to do with the way charter schools rely "on metrics and tests to measure progress,'' -- a concept that is also deeply ingrained in the public school culture in the aftermath of No Child Left Behind, and also part of U .S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan's education agenda. (He is also a big fan of charter schools)

The hedge fund managers appear to be excited by the notion that charter schools are “scalable,” with models that could be emulated in many communities that have long waiting lists of parents looking for free alternatives. Charter schools, for the record, also pay their employees differently and don't choose their staffs from teachers unions.

There are many good questions that should be raised here, and the style piece attempted to raise some of them. EarlyStories can't help but want to see more journalists spending time in charter schools, starting in pre-kindergarten if at all possible, to let the public know how these schools are different. Are they changing lives for children? How so?

Head Start, which doesn't get a lot of media attention, is back in the news for offering preschool children in its program a chance to establish healthy eating habits. The federally funded program is now pushing fresh fruits and vegetables, along with low-fat milk,and making sure children spend time playing, according to an article in USA Today.

The article is based on a survey of Head Start directors that serve some 829,000 children, and had some frightening conclusions: Some 30 percent of kids in Head Start are overweight or obese. Findings were published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, based on the work of researchers from Temple University and Mathematica Policy Research.

Directors are aware of and concerned about these issues and are offering healthier food when they have their own cooks or work directly with food services, the article noted..

A key quote in the story summed up why it's important for journalists to look in on Head Start programs from time to time and find out what is actually going on in the classrooms of the largest federally funded early-childhood education program, which serves about a million low-income children:

"Currently, there aren't any federal standards for Head Start that limit kids' TV time, specify how much time they need to spend each day being physically active or the kind of milk that is served," said Robert Whitaker, professor of public health and pediatrics at Temple University in Philadelphia, the lead author of the study, supported by supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation through two national programs, Healthy Eating Research and Active Living Research.

So what is happening in many of these centers? Are the kids watching television? Are there play areas or designated outdoor space?

Picture this: A four-year-old boy is isolated in a library during the two and half hours he is supposed to be in pre-school, and is on the verge of being kicked out completely.

And just what did this four-year-old do to face expulsion? It's about his hair, according to articles in the Dallas Morning News.

Taylor Pugh is in Big Trouble for making an end run around the dress code rules at Floyd Elementary School in Mesquite Texas, the kind of place where students "can't go to class out of dress code,'' according to the associate superintendent. It's also the kind of school district that sent a 19-year-old boy home back in the seventies because his hair touched his collar, and told a boy wearing skinny jeans he had to change or go home.

EarlyStories likes to remain neutral and balanced, but can't help in this case wondering why the length of a four-year-old boys hair -- and in this case the boy is of Native American heritage and has a legitimate cultural reason for keeping his hair long -- should prevent him from getting a pre-school education.

Where is the outrage? Free Taylor Pugh!

Just how much math are little children capable of learning? For years, it seemed educators and scientists did not believe little brains could handle much math at all before the age of five. But now new research is showing they can, according to an interesting piece in the New York Times. EarlyStories immediately wondered what kind of impact the research might have on the way math is taught in pre-schools across the U.S.

The story pointed to new studies from the world of neuroscience showing that preschoolers can perform far more complicated math problems than initially thought. It noted that about a dozen states are using a program that helps the youngsters develop their frontal lobes, and that the new findings are fusing the fields of brain science and education for the first time, The story also described how a program in Buffalo already has a track record for teaching early math.

Herbert Ginsburg at Teachers College has also done some groundbreaking work on teaching math to young children, another terrific resource for journalists trying to figure out what -- if any -- math is being taught in pre-kindergarten and even kindergarten classrooms. The article also pointed to the interesting work that Sharon Griffin is doing with Number Worlds, a research-based math program for young children.

Journalists don't usually venture deep into the world of education research when covering pre-school issues, but there is clearly a rich world to tap and ask about when visiting classrooms. What sort of math, if any, is being taught, and why? Do the teachers have any sense of what the children could be capable of learning? How do school officials explain the math curriculum, or the lack of one?

EarlyStories found it impossible not to feel a sense of anger and outrage upon reading the tale of yet another youngster left alone on a bus in New York City. Thanks to Gotham Schools for providing links to the story from both the New York Daily News and the New York Post .

It's difficult to imagine a driver leaving a bus without checking. Even tougher to fathom is how depressingly familiar the story is. Two years ago, the New York Daily News published a major investigative series on problems with city school buses, devoting an entire part to students left behind or dropped off far from their home

In October 2009, an autistic boy was left alone on a school bus for six hours. A kindergarten girl in Brooklyn arrived home after her first day at a new charter school after spending more than four hours on a bus with a lost driver.

An account in the Associated Press found up to 75 school bus strandings every year across the U.S.

In New York City, the driver and matron are facing charges for abandoning the girl in yesterday's incident. What will prevent it from happening again?

This is not okay.

A potentially fascinating fight could be underway in Tennessee, where Democratic Governor Phil Bredesen, who has pushed to expand pre-kindergarten in the state, is finding himself at odds with the state's teachers union.

At issue, according to several accounts, is Bredesen's plan to have student test scores account for at least 50 percent of how teachers are evaluated. The Memphis Commercial Appeal noted that he called for a week-long special session of the legislature in hopes of getting the law that bars use of student data in teacher evaluations changed. He's also asking for the support of business leaders to try and change the law.

Bredesen's goal is one governors and educators in cash-strapped states across the U.S. can relate to -- the deadline is looming for states that hope to get a piece of the $4.35 billion in stimulus dollars outlined as part of President Barack Obama's Race to the Top plan that could give Tennessee as much as $400 to $500 million. States must meet criteria for reforming their education system to get the money, though, and that's why Bredesen is pushing to take advantage of the state's vast collection of student performance data that measures academic gains.Under state law, that data cannot be used to evaluate teachers for either licensure or tenure.

Bredesen has had to scale back some of his plans to expand state-funded pre-kindergarten in the state, which has been hailed as a national leader. Bredesen wants to expand the program, but first he is calling for changes in state education law, including requiring student performance data to be used in evaluating teachers and requiring annual performance assessment of teachers.

States that win the competitive grants will get much needed cash to improve their education system. But can Bredesen meet his goals without support from the teachers union?

EarlyStories will be keeping a close eye on what happens in Tennessee.

Every now and then, EarlyStories runs into a piece of journalism that attempts to answer what could be perhaps the most important -- and mysterious -- question about the U.S. education system: What makes an effective teacher? It's a question with implications for students of all ages and sizes, and it matters from the minute they enter a classroom.

At a time when journalists who cover education are focused intently on Race to the Top applications and impending deadlines, it's critically important to stop and think about how children are being taught and what they learn. And that's exactly what Amanda Ripley's illuminating story in the The Atlantic this month does.

In clear prose, Ripley explains why the question of what makes good teaching is so important at this point in time.

"Parents have always worried about where to send their children to school; but the school, statistically speaking, does not matter as much as which adult stands in front of their children,'' Ripley notes. As states are competing for money, they must also "try to identify great teachers, figure out how they got that way, and then create more of them."

Along with the politics of covering the Race to the Top grant program, it's important to really think about how teaching might be improved and examine the most recent rsearch and data. Reporters covering early childhood education rarely focus on the topic of teachers and teaching, and indeed the credentials and qualifications required are often different.

Regardless, the questions Ripley raises and examines thoroughly are the right ones. Properly trained, effective teachers are key to improving the quality of education in the U.S. How are we going to get there?

It's interesting to see the evolution taking place in North Dakota, a state that has notoriously resisted publicly funded pre-kindergarten. According to an article in the Fargo Forum, federal aid in the form of some $30 million in stimulus funds has spiked enrollment in early childhood education programs, including pre-kindergarten.

And teachers are starting to notice the difference, according to the Forum article -- they can tell which students have had some pre-school education as soon as they walk in the door.

The pre-school issue is particularly fascinating in North Dakota because of the state's consistent resistance to the concept of funding it. For the last three years, just seven school districts in the state had pre-kindergarten programs, this year, there are 40.

Those programs will be watched closely now, as federal aid lasts only two years. If there are any studies or ways to quantify the results, it will be important information, as opponents of pre-kindergarten have fought loudly against pre-kindergarten and called it little more than subsidized babysitting.

That's why it will be important to track what is happening in the programs this year and next -- and why journalists should visit them and help give the public a sense of how they get children ready for kindergarten and what comes next.

One of the more interesting chapters in Paul Tough's "Whatever it Takes,'' -- a book about the Harlem Children's Zone -- describes how young parents go to school to learn how to be parents. The Harlem Children's Zone is the brainchild of Geoffrey Canada, whose goal is to "end the cycle of generational poverty.''

The book describes in detail the nine week parenting workshop known as "Baby College,'' aimed at expectant parents as well as those with children up to the age of three. One of the major goals of the program is to improve the lives of children born into poverty -- all part of the Harlem Children's Zone attempt to surround children within a 97-block section of the city with social services and educational advantages from birth through college.

Baby College instructors promote everything from teaching early reading skills to lessons on how to turn a trip to the supermarket into a learning experience. Tough's book on the program weaves in a great deal of research showing that what happens during early childhood is key to building a foundation for a child's educational future.

All of this is a very long introduction to a piece in the Times-Union of Albany, New York that described how the Harlem Children's Zone's efforts in New York City captivated parents and educators in upstate Albany, who are already moving forward with a similar plan and will be launching their own Baby College in the coming months. Already, there are waiting lists.

EarlyStories is trying to keep an eye on any expansion of the Harlem Children's Zone because President Barack Obama said he'd like to see it expanded to 20 cities nationally -- and he set aside $10 million in seed money to develop a national model. Journalists should look out for applications and see if communities are finding ways to address and improve the quality of early childhood education -- and what existing models they hope to emulate. Are new programs to be offered? Will they be eagerly embraced? How can the public know if they are of high quality?

(photo from "This American Life")

EarlyStories has been waiting, watching and wondering what would happen to Taylor Pugh, the suburban Dallas boy suspended from prekindergarten because of his long locks. With so much national attention focused on the issue, it seemed the school board in Mesquite might, perhaps, back off and decide the time spent in a classroom would be more important than the length of his hair.

Not so. On Monday, night, the board voted unanimously to enforce its ban; they offered a compromise that would have allowed him to braid and pin his hair up, according to the New York Times, which caught up with little Pugh's plight.

Quote of the day comes courtesy of school board member Gary Bingham, an insurance agent who told the New York Times: “It’s a trade-off....do the parents value his education more than they value a 4-year-old’s decision to make his own grooming choices?”

EarlyStories would like to reframe the question: Is the length of a child's hair more important to the school board then the benefits of early education?

And add one more: Are the clocks in Dallas still set for 1963? The desire to enforce its ban on what they still call "Beatles haircuts,'' can mean only one thing: They are still mad about the moptops.

Thanks to our colleagues over at Early Education Watch for raising iquestions about the important new study that may not bode well for Head Start, the national school readiness program that is integral to President Barack Obama's early childhood strategy.The study made its way to Congress on Wednesday.

The study found that while Head Start had a positive influence on school readiness after one year, the gains were minimal by the end of first grade. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services immediately announced plans to strengthen Head Start programs, and it will be important for journalists to follow up.

Early Ed Watch concluded that the study points to the need for giving disadvantaged children more than a a year of high quality education, and that improvements in teacher training for Head Start and all pre-kindergarten programs are needed. W. Steve Barnett, director of the National Institute for Early Education Research, offered another perpective: he noted that the findings "are based on comparing children who went to Head Start with other children who likely also received some kind of preschool experience – sometimes Head Start in another place or a state-funded pre-K program. It is especially significant because that kind of comparison will not likely show big differences."

He also pointed out in a press release released by NIEER that "the promises of Head Start can only be fulfilled if the program is funded and staffed at the levels that have proven to make a real difference in the lives of children, something that has not happened in the entire 40-year history of the program.''

HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius noted in a press release that Head Start must be improved. “The program provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition and social services to low income children and families,'' she noted. “Still, for Head Start to achieve its full potential, we must improve its quality and promote high standards across all early childhood programs.”

How will questions and concerns about the future of Head Start be addressed? EarlyStories has noted repeatedly that this is an issue worth paying attention and too often ignored by the press.

Children need to read more in and out of school and they need more challenging materials, conversations and discussions to help their skills blossom into academic competence later on, new findings show. And along with decoding letters, "systematic early attention must be paid to developing oral language skills."

These are among the interesting ideas on how children develop literacy skills and language in a piece entitled "Ensuring Early Literacy Success,'' found in Research Points, a publication from the American Educational Research Association.

The piece pointed out the need for children to develop oral language skills to improve their reading, with some key suggestions for policy makers about how to make this happen. Some suggestions include a target for schools to have 90 percent of children fluent in decoding words by third grade, along with earlier intervention for children who are not on track. In addition, instruction for children from third grade up must focus on writing, comprehension and language development.

Visiting classrooms to watch and see how reading is taught is vitally important, but it's also a good idea to keep an eye on the latest research and thinking about how children learn and how they actually acquire language skills.

Teachers College professor Herbert Ginsburg recalled a story on Tuesday about a very young child who walked into a day care center and gave the teacher an urgent command:

"Teach me something."

The teacher asked the child what it was they hoped to learn, and got the reply: "You are the teacher, tell me!"

Ginsburg described the incident before a packed audience at Teachers College during a discussion about a new National Academy of Sciences report that calls for a major national initiative to improve early childhood mathematics education.

The story underscored a major point in the report: Young children are capable of learning and often want to learn a lot more math than they are offered. Low income children in particular have few opportunities to learn math and teachers aren't adequately trained or prepared to teach them, Ginsburg said as he walked through the reports findings. He also showed several videos of low-income chidren using a calendar to count by two, even without any direction.

"We need to think about how we teach and what we teach,'' Ginsburg said. The report notes that the amount of time and attention devoted to math needs to be increased in all preschools, and suggested that training of teachers must be dramatically improved so they have the confidence and the background to teach early math.

One reality check in the discussion came from Sharon Lynn Kagan , the co-director of the National Center for Children and Families at Teachers College who also served on the National Academy of Science panel that produced the report.

Kagan pointed out that nearly half of young children in the U.S. are in family day care settings where there is even less of a chance they will be exposed to early math concepts.In addition, early math plays a low priority in any standards that do exist for early learning in the U.S. and little is known about the teaching of math at the pre-school level.

There is hope that some states will revamp and revise their early childhood standards and curriculum, she noted. "It may be limited to a given number of states but it will be a great opportunity for them."

A full copy of the report -- which is a terrific roadmap for story ideas -- can be found here.

A number of fascinating issues came up in "The Myth of the Gifted Child,'' a cover story in New York Magazine this week by Jennifer Senior that looked at intelligence tests for gifted programs. The story had lots of information that will be welcome to wealthy, connected New York City parents obsessed with getting their kids into the right private schools, including statistics on what percent of the students who graduate will attend Ivy League colleges.

It also made a point that might be welcome for parents willing to do whatever it takes -- copies of the tests can be purchased in advance for a few thousand dollars.

Far more interesting to EarlyStories, though, were interviews with experts like Samuel Meisels at Erikson Institute, who helped Senior cement the point that tests perpetuate stratification instead of really determining a superior intellect.

"Instead of giving IQ tests, you could just as easily look at zip codes and the education levels of the parents to determine who gets the better schooling -- you get a very high correlation between IQ and socio-economic status in the first seven or years of life,'' Meisels, an assessment expert and president of the Institute, told Senior. His take? Several observations of a child in a classroom setting would be a far better way to determine a child's intelligence, along with an examination of their work.

One of the more interesting observations in the story came from the director of the Calhoun School, which charges $31,240 for kindergarten. The director prefers children with a slightly rebellious and even cynical streak, and told Senior he wanted "a school full of kids who daydream....who don't want to answer the questions on those tests in the way the adult wants them to be answered, because that kid is already seeing the world differently."

But is that kind of child born, or nurtured with money, connections -- and perhaps the right zip code?

EarlyStories was both horrified and heartened by an expose in the Journal Sentinel of Milwaukee that looked at ways thousands of children from low-income families in Wisconsin are being kept out of kindergarten.

The horrifying part were the facts laid out in the story, which found that the $350 million Wisconsin Shares program lets parents keep their 4-, 5- and even some 6-year-olds in day care centers all day - at taxpayer expense - rather than enroll them in accredited kindergarten programs.

"In some cases, unscrupulous parents are participating in an easy scam,'' the story noted. "They sign up their children with friends or relatives who provide child care. The state then pays the providers roughly $200 a week, and providers give parents a kickback."

The story found that the state's neediest children "often wind up in loosely regulated environments where little learning takes place. Day care providers aren't required to meet the standards of teachers, nor are they accountable for what children learn."

Naturally, by the time they do start school, they are lagging way behind.

The heartening part? That newspapers are still able to produce the kind of journalism that brings situations like this to public attention.

In an unusually blunt answer, the founder of Harlem Children's Zone recently described how he defines success at the anti-poverty program he started in Harlem in 2004.

"The only benchmark of success is college graduation,'' Geoffrey Canada told Helen Zelon of City Limits magazine, where Zelon's excellent series appears this month. "That's the only one: How many kids you got in college, how many kids you got out. Everything else is interim."

Canada's remarks were particularly instructive because the "cradle to college,'' program he began in Harlem in 2004 has been cited as a model for President Barack Obama's "Promise Neighborhoods.'' Obama wants to see 20 poverty reduction campaigns in areas around the country that, like the Harlem Children's Zone, offer services to new parents even before the child sets foot in a school. The best programs support children all the way to college.

There's a great deal of interest in how Canada's program works, and the best source for truly understanding both the ideas behind Harlem Children's Zone and the difficulty of succeeding are described in "Whatever it Takes," by Paul Tough, a former New York Times writer.

Journalists throughout the U.S. should be learning more about Canada's programs as the communities they cover contemplate similar models, and Zelon's pieces are another great jumping off point. Hope or hype? Zelon asks.

Zelon perfectly captured the lockstep approach to Canada's pro-college philosophy in an interview with Patrice Ward, who teaches ninth-grade English language arts, African-American film, and college prep.

"Everyone is here for the same greater purpose,'' Ward said. "Everyone exudes it and will support you in it. So the students, from every person they encounter, are going to get the same message: That they can succeed, that they can go to college, and here's what you need to do. No, you're not going to fall apart—no, we're not going to let you have a bad day—we want you to succeed, we're going to push you in that direction."

Can how well a baby crawl yield information about how well they learn once they reach kindergarten? A recent story from the BBC about new research on the topic in England found that babies who did not reach expected milestones in areas like crawling and holding objects were more likely to have learning and behavior problems once they started school.

The research from London University's Institute of Education looked at 15,000 children in the United Kingdom and concluded that delays in the first year of their lives had a significant impact on their behavior and cognitive development. The researchers also found a gap in ability "between children growing up in persistent poverty and those in families that had never received means-tested benefits."

The researchers noted that similar conclusions had been reached in previous research, but said their new work showed for the first time that development delays -- along with the "psychological characteristics of the mother and the quality of her relationship with the child,'' are tied into both cognitive and behavioral development, even in poor families.

Some of the research is included in a new book by The Policy Press, Children of the 21st century, available here:

After years of frenzy, it appears that the insane world of New York City private kindergarten admissions is finally ebbing, just a bit.

A baby boom, some good years on Wall Street (before the bad years) and a new vibe of hipness around raising kids in the city contributed to years of unlimited demand for schools that could charge close to $35,000 annually for kindergarten, according to Bloomberg News.

The demand started in pre-school, as documented by the hilarious "Nursery University,'' documentary that portrayed the insanity as -- well, insanity.

New Yorkers are hardly shunning private schools entirely and flooding into the public system, the largest in the U.S. But with the economy tanking and the city's 9.7 percent unemployment rate, the Bloomberg story notes, fewer children are taking entrance exams for private school and applications in some private schools declined.

Does this mean just anybody can get into private kindergarten in New York City? Hardly. The exclusive Trevor Day school still interviewed about 400 applicants for only about 30 to 35 open seats, the story notes.

The Bloomberg story did a good job of quantify the issue in the city, but EarlyStories always finds something missing when reading -- and writing -- about this issue.

And that question is as follows: What can these private schools do so much better to prepare and education children?

They do offer smaller class sizes and quite often better facilities, including gyms and swimming pools and science labs. But the number one factor that contributes to improving a child's education is known to be the quality of the teacher.

What evidence is there that private school teachers are better qualified, trained or do a better job? EarlyStories would really like an answer.

Some troubling research emerged last week from the think tank Demos in England, including a frightening finding: More than one in 10 children begin primary school unable to learn and unwilling to build relationships with their peers. The research has enormous implications for their ability to function in school in years to come and shines a spotlight on how crucial the early years are.

The study finds a "disengaged generation waiting in the wings" and recommends far more early intervention even before children enter school. Proper pre-school support, the report says, can help younger children concentrate, connect with others and behave better. The children of parents who are poorly educated and have low income levels gave a greater chance of lagging cognitive development, the report found.

Some of the data should not come as a surprise to U.S. researchers who have found similar connections between poverty and early school success.

According to the Demos report, the difference between in the success of children from the poorest and the richest families is stark, with a fifth of those identified as "starting school without the behavioral skills" coming from the poorest section of society, and only 4% coming from the richest.

The report criticizes the government for not spending enough on pre-school children, according to an article in The Guardian

"We have seen from programmes in the US how effectively these schemes work, and there's plenty of evidence now that the first few years are influential in forming habits later on," Anne Longfield, chief executive of children's charity 4Children, told The Guardian.