For Jean Rimbach and Kathleen Carroll of the Bergen Record for their series on waste and fraud in New Jersey preschools, this time from the Casey Center on Children and Families. The series had picked up other awards earlier.

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.

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.

Alyssa Haywoode of the Boston Globe attended the Hechinger Institute/NCEW seminar both as a participant and as a presenter--she's written numerous pro-pre-k editorials over the past year. This editorial came out in the Globe the other day. She takes a look at Hilary Clinton's proposal for a federal investment in pre-k--the most detailed of any of the candidates--and finds it wanting. Rarely do journalists focus on the possible federal role in supporting early education. The Globe did.

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."

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette's Eleanor Chute wrote up an elegant little study paid for by PNC Financial Services Group. The basis for the study was a national survey of parents and teachers, asking them what they thought were the most important aspects of school readiness and how well they thought kids these days were to start kindergarten. Teachers thought being able to listen and follow directions and play well with others (also a trait of those who succeed in newsrooms!) were roughly twice as important as more academic skills, in terms of predicting future success. But elementary school teachers thought that very few children were well-prepared academically or socially. You can find more on the study here. PNC is paying for other research as well. More details on that, here.

PNC, based in Pittsburgh, has been a leading corporate advocate favoring bigger investments in pre-kindergarten. The company was one of the sponsors of a big 2006 conference of economists and corporate leaders in New York that drew a lot of media coverage. It's also putting its money behind the effort, planning on investing $100 million in an initiative it calls PNC Grow Up Great.

Leave it to the Wall Street Journal to (subscription required) label the national trend toward expanded public spending on pre-kindergarten for what it is: "one of the most significant expansions in public education in the 90 years since World War I, when kindergarten first became standard in American schools." The Journal's front page article Thursday did what the paper does so nicely: allow a reader who hasn't been following a developing trend to drop in and get a good sense of who the players are, why they're doing what they're doing, the obstacles, and controversies, and what lies ahead. The story notes, for example, that not everyone is on board with the push for "universal" public preschool. Nobel Prize-winning economist James Heckman, for example, warns about overdoing preschool and says that "scarce resources should be directed to the problem areas." Mr. Murdoch, don't mess with success, ok?

Full disclosure: the Journal article describes the important role The Pew Charitable Trusts and the Trusts' director of education, Susan Urahn, have played in fueling the national movement to expand public spending on preschool. The article also mentions that the Hechinger Institute is a grantee, and that our role is to help journalists become knowledgeable about the issues surrounding pre-k. As I always say, though, we're not advocates for anything other than good journalism about education.

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.

The Washington Post's Maria Glod used Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine's decision to downsize his "universal" pre-k program to a targeted one as a news hook for a solid roundup of what's going on with the expansion of publicly funded preschool nationally. The article, which ran on A-1, had a glimpse of a good classroom, regional specifics, national sweep, details of Kaine's new approach, research, and quoted the strongest voices on both sides of the "universal" vs. "targeted" debate.

All in all, a fine example of going beyond a news development to provide readers with a useful context in which to understand that event. It wasn't necessary to go into it in this story, but one aspect of it made me think about what the next story on this might be for the Post.

Kaine says he decided to scale back on his idea because he was advised to "take the existing network and focus on the goals of increasing access and increasing quality" rather than start a new program from scratch. That's inevitable when a state expands its spending on preschool. It's not as if three and four year olds are not already going somewhere. But Kaine also may have been responding to pressure, because it is often existing private providers that lobby the hardest against expanding public spending, for fear that they'll be forced out of business by the competition. But Kaine's public-private approach creates another challenge. The state has to figure out how to push existing low-quality programs to improve. That's a hard job. Money helps but, as in New Jersey, public money poured into private centers sometimes leads to more money in the pockets of operators without any improvement in quality. Kaine suggests a rating system that parents will be able to use in choosing a preschool, in effect trying to tap market forces to maintain quality. The fact is, though, parents usually want their young children as close by as possible so the market forces are going to be weaker than they would be if true competition were unleashed. Kaine's right that it's the quality of programs not necessarily who provides them that's most important. But it's harder to ensure that quality in the private sector.

Staci Hupp of the Dallas Morning News did a comprehensive job of examining a new certification system for public and private preschools in Texas. She included many different voices, including parents and skeptical preschool operators.

But based on what I could find out about the certification system, the story makes it seem a bit more scientific than it probably is. Centers apply for certification and then submit information about the center's teachers and learning environment. Children from the center are tested in kindergarten and their scores, combined with the self-reported information, determines certification. Susan Landry of the Texas State Center for Early Childhood Development, which developed the certification system, is quoted saying it will be able to identify classroom practices which predict kindergarten success. Attributing causation in education is a very, very tricky thing.

Secondly, the story had only a smidgeon of (one graf, down low) context. States are spending more on preschool and so are trying to find ways to measure quality. Head Start has been struggling with accountability for several years now using tests and the tests, which were not useful for centers or anyone else, are likely to go away in the Head Start reauthorization. Several states give letter grades. Also, Florida tests kindergartners and judges the preschools they attended by the results. Most observers think that method is badly flawed.

Sharon Lynn Kagan of Teachers College gave an excellent overview of early childhood education and accountability and assessment at the Hechinger Institute seminar for editorial writers in June. She offered a really nice image, saying that, regarding assessment, early childhood education is moving from caring teachers who wore smocks and carried cards in their pocket to write down loving observations about children to be "highly standardized, highly regulated, and much more consistent." She said she didn't think that was necessarily bad but that it's difficult to do and that the necessary assessment tools do not yet exist. Would have been good to talk to someone like Kagan for this story.

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.

Here's a couple letters in response to the frontpager in the WashPost last week on the dilemma of targeted vs. universal pre-k. Both letters argue the universal side. The second letter, from a parent who applied for Head Start but was put on a waiting list, is particularly poignant and illustrates the argument universal advocates make all the time, that the income cutoffs for eligibility in targeted programs are sloppy proxies for need.

In a post on the HuffingtonPost blog Sen. Edward Kennedy describes the key characteristics of the long-delayed Head Start reauthorization bill. He doesn't mention that the bill eliminates the National Reporting System, the test-based accountability system that Head Start advocates hated and many early childhood education and assessment experts said was so badly flawed it was a waste of time. But the National Head Start Association says the demise of the NRS is one of its most important provisions. If President Bush signs the bill or not it's a big story with plenty of localization possibilities. The program itself would be expanded slightly, teachers paid more, and spending on Early Head Start increased. Watch for it.

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.

The children's advocacy group Children Now has on its Web site a very useful overview of what's known about the effects of interactive media use on 3-5 year olds. Although much remains unknown this clearly written publication sums up what is. For reporters who are considering writing about the controversy over children who are younger and younger using computers, the review of research provides many good experts as sources and also lays out the position of a number of non-profit and professional groups on these issues.

Back in 1995, Walter Gilliam of the Yale Child Study Center published a report documenting the problem of expulsions from preschool. The concept was so eyeopening--we usually associate expulsions with kids like the drug corner kids featured in the fourth season of HBO's brilliant show "The Wire"--it generated lots and lots of headlines. Now Gilliam has put out a new report that focuses on what can be done to help preschool teachers better cope with the needs of disruptive young children. The report, which was supported by the Foundation for Child Development, suggests reducing the size of preschool classes, bringing in mental health professionals as a resource, and giving teachers time for breaks may all be helpful.

Was glad to see that many newspapers picked up on the follow up report. Read stories in The Courant of Hartford by Arielle Levin Becker, the Plain Dealer of Cleveland by Angela Townsend, the Los Angeles Times by Carla Rivera, and Lori Higgins in the Detroit Free Press.

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.

I admire the way Jay Mathews, the Washington Post's education columnist and reporter, takes on the real stuff of education and does so in a plain-spoken, non-wonky, real-world way that is always interesting. Good example is a column he did focusing on Levin and Belfield's new book (see previous entry). A book on the
economics of education sounds daunting but Jay lays some of the important ideas out quite well. He notes, for example, that Levin and Belfield calculate that providing the equivalent of the Perry Preschool Project from 40 years ago to 100 children would produce an additional 19 high school graduates.

As governors continue to push expanded pre-kindergarten programs, journalists are right to do some reporting and find out what may stand in their way.
That’s what Josh Bean of the Press Register in Alabama did earlier this week, noting that Republican Governor Bob Riley’s plan to expand the state’s highly praised but small pre-kindergarten program may be hampered by a lack of qualified teachers.
Bean’s story noted that the majority of teachers who attend education schools earn degrees that certify them to teach kindergarten through sixth grade instead of the separate early childhood designation they need to become pre-kindergarten teachers.
He also pointed out that Riley’s expansion plan comes at a time when eighteen percent fewer people are graduating from the state’s teacher-training programs than a decade ago. Only 13 percent of the state’s 3,700 annual education graduates earn the early childhood certification they need to teach pre-kindergarten, his story says.
Reporters covering the big push in their states for pre-kindergarten can’t simply report on the big speeches and promises their governors make. They should find out what it will really take to make such expansions work and whenever possible spend time in pre-kindergarten classes to help educate the public about what takes place in them.
Bean’s story notes another obstacle Riley’s plan faces – the public’s lack of understanding. He quotes Marquita Davis, Alabama’s director of the Office of School Readiness. "Many people still think it's baby-sitting.’’

The Associated Press coverage of Alabama Gov. Bob Riley's budget announcement highlighted two of his ideas related to early education--a tripling of the state's investment in pre-kindergarten and expanded support for the Alabama Reading Initiative. (You will recall that the reading initiative in Alabama, as in many states, has gotten support from the federal Reading First program, which the Democrats in Congress cut by more than two-thirds.) But Riley is no big government, budget busting Republican. He also wants to cut income taxes to spur the state's economy.

Editorial writers at the Rapid City Journal are pushing for voluntary pre-kindergarten school standards in South Dakota, one of only nine states that doesn’t provide state funding for pre-k.
Pre-kindergarten standards have been a tricky topic for journalists in the state, even though, as the Feb. 13 editorial pointed out, a poll by the advocacy group Voices for Children found that 73 percent of likely South Dakota voters support them.
The editorial favors a measure that would allow the State Department of Education to establish standards for preschool accreditation and staff training. It came out a few weeks after the South Dakota Senate voted 23-11 for the measure known as SB26, which now goes to the House for a vote.
. On the news side, the paper has covered heated sessions on the topic including comments from opponents like Senator Bill Napoli, a Rapid City Republican,
who said pre-school owners should decide how pre-schools are run and that it is “flat out wrong for the state to get involved in people’s private lives yet again.’’
The editorial disagreed, noting the law “keeps participation in pre-kindergarten programs voluntary and does not intrude on private providers who don’t access public funds,’’ while bringing public accountability to programs that do utilize them.
“Not everyone, including some private daycare businesses, think government should be involved in regulating pre-schools,’’ the editorial notes.
As the debate continues, it will be interesting to see more coverage of pre-classrooms in the state and how the approach to education differs – along with an explanation of what the standards might change.

When Professor Robert Lynch appeared before Congress Tuesday to testify about the economic benefits of pre-kindergarten, he hoped it would focus more attention on an issue he believes is dramatically under covered by the press.
“Pre-kindergarten doesn’t get the attention it deserves, although now that there is more activity on the state level, it is starting to get more,’’ said Lynch, an economics professor at Washington College and the author of “Enriching Children, Enriching the Nation, (Economic Policy Institute) 2007.
Lynch detailed why investing in early childhood education is one of the best ways to “improve child well-being, increase the educational achievement and productivity of children and adults, and reduce crime,’’ in testimony before the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services and education.
He believes press coverage of the issue is “woefully inadequate,’’ and offered a few theories about why.
“Obviously, children don’t have a strong political voice, as they aren’t a voting group,’’ he said. “And I still think there is a general misunderstanding of the importance of investing in children in the early years.’’
Lynch, who has served as a consultant to private businesses, labor unions and government and research organizations, told Congress that children who participate in pre-kindergarten not only end up with higher scores on math and reading achievement tests but have higher employment rates once they enter the labor force “and their incomes are higher, along with the taxes they pay back to society.’’
Lynch’s analysis of the issue is also explained in a briefing he wrote for WestEd, the national nonprofit research and service agency.

Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen keeps stumbling into opposition as he pushes voluntary, full-day pre-kindergarten program for all county school systems in the state. On the surface, it would seem to be a natural extension of the state’s high quality program and Bredesen's already acclaimed efforts to expand pre-K.
But not so fast, the Tennessean reports. Bredesen, who invested $80 million for the state’s voluntary pre-kindergarten program during the 2007-08 school year, is facing opposition from Republican legislators who say the program’s success is untested and are making their voices be heard as well.
Bredesen wants to earmark another $25 million to pay for 250 new pre-kindergarten classrooms before opening it up to all 4-year-olds in Tennessee. The Tennessean last month reported that Bredesen has been surprised by the opposition of Republican lawmakers and their remarks likening pre-kindergarten to glorified day-care, an argument that has come up in several states. Bredesen is fighting back; last month he met with editors of the Times-News in Northeast Tennesse to defend his education program and budget requests.

The state of Florida has the second-largest pre-kindergarten enrollment in the country, but that doesn’t mean journalists – and the public – should not be asking questions about the quality of the offerings.

The opinion pages of the Daytona News Journal online debated the issue this week, first with a piece by Monesia T. Brown, director of the Florida Agency for Workforce Innovation.

Brown touted the success of the program in a Florida Voices piece noting that the state’s voluntary pre-kindergarten served more than 124,000 children last year.

Two days later, a piece by Roy Miller, president of the Children’s Campaign Inc., a nonprofit advocacy group, noted that “quantity should not be confused with quality.’’

Miller contends that Florida’s pre-kindergarten program lags behind other states in meeting national standards of quality and that 4-year-olds are being expelled at a high frequency. Both pieces provide a roadmap for the kinds of questions reporters should be asking about Florida’s program as it moves forward.