In the Hartford Business Review, reporter Diane Weaver Dunne examines the partnership between Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell and two of the state's top advocates of economic development. The story also traces the evolution of business interest in early education nationally, going back to the work of Art Rolnick, an economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Rell is proposing spending $63.7 million over the next two years to promote school readiness.

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.

Joel Waldfogel, a business prof at the Wharton School, bases a commentary on Slate on the James Heckman/Dmitri Masterov analysis of the economic returns of preschool from high quality programs serving the disadvantaged. He says government programs are needed to make up for the weakness of many families, which makes them unable to function as caregivers and nurturers of children. He concludes:

A sales problem remains: These programs invade the traditional province of the family, and in Heckman and Masterov's conception, they would target disadvantaged populations that are disproportionately minority. Wanted: a credible and sympathetic pitchman. Paging Barack Obama

Obama, the Illinois Senator running for president, has yet to announce his position on expanding the federal role in pre-kindergarten. Hilary Clinton, the New York Senator and presidential candidate, though, supports phasing in a $10 billion federal fund to match new state investments in high quality preschool.

Advocates for universal pre-school have to be careful about overselling. And media skepticism should help the advocates avoid that. Police chiefs seem particularly prone to this behavior. In Pennsylvania, where there's $75 million in new preschool monies being debated by the Legislature, the state's police chiefs have been among those leading the charge. A Pittsburgh Post-Gazette story the other day quoted Pittsburgh Asst. Chief Paul Donaldson saying, "Quality pre-kindergarten programs are our most effective weapons in fighting crime." Really? More so than community policing?
The story also said the $75 million would generate a 17-to-1 return on investment, which is a figure that's tossed around far too easily.

Such statements have to be qualified and journalists have to do it--if the advocates are unwilling to do so. The 17-1 figure is based on the return over more than three decades from a program called the Perry Preschool Project that lasted for five years back in the 1960s. So, for Legislatures worried about balancing a budget today, the returns will accrue long after they've left public service. Also the program that would be expanded in Pennsylvania is not like the Perry Preschool, which was of much, much higher in terms of quality and cost. [See Update below] Plus, the Perry Preschool was aimed at very disadvantaged kids. It wasn't a universal program available to all. A universal program would not get rates of return anywhere close to these. Finally, it's true the Perry Preschool reduced crime but it didn't eliminate it. Those who went through Perry Preschool were, on average, likely to be arrested fewer times, not that they were not likely to have been arrested.

UPDATES: I checked out the Pennsylvania Pre-K Counts website. The state program looks to set quite high programmatic standards, relative to other states. Also, the new money that Gov. Rendell is pushing IS targeted to disadvantaged children. Still, the program wouldn't measure up to the Perry Preschool, which cost in 2007 dollars about $15,000 per child and had one teacher (trained in special education and early childhood development) for every seven children. (Pennsylvania requires one certified teacher and an aide for every 17 children.) It's true that most of the cost-benefits from the Perry experiment came from a reduction in crime: in fact, about $13 of the $17 return came from that source alone. A good, clear, dispassionate analysis of the economic returns of preschool programs can be found here. It's something every journalist who covers these issues should keep close as a resource.

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.

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."

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.

Two of the articles should be of particular interest to journalists interested in how education can help address issues of poverty. One, by economist Greg J. Duncan of Northwestern, Jens Ludwig an economist at the University of Chicago , and Katherine J. Magnuson of the School of Social Work at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, proposes an intensive two-year, education-focused intervention for all three- and four-year-olds that would charge fees on a sliding scale. The article is unusually specific. One key part of the idea is that the feds would offer incentives to states to participate rather than funding the program directly. The authors are more cautious than some advocates and researchers in that they don’t put a ratio on the return on investment. But they do say that the program’s $20 billion cost would be more than matched by the benefits—in the $2 or $3 per $1 spent range rather than the $7 to $14 that economists have calculated for other comprehensive programs in the past. They do, however, say such a program aimed at poor kids would reduce poverty by 5% to 15%, a very healthy gain.

Any journalist interested in understanding how policies related to poverty, health, mental health and education affect children should make sure they see the quarterly publication called “The Future of Children.” The theme of the current issue is “The Next Generation of Antipoverty Policies” and it focuses on solutions and the progress made in reducing poverty over the past 40 years. Our current political climate downplays the potential for public policy and investment to address entrenched poverty. The articles in this volume are edited by Ron Haskins and Isabel Sawhill, both of whom are senior editors of the publication as well as scholars at the Brookings Institution. Here’s the web page.

New American Media, the California non-profit collaboration that provides news and commentary to ethnic-focused media and offers various services to help those outlets make money, has a Q&A with David Kirp, author of the pro-Universal Pre-Kindergarten book "The Sandbox Investment." The questioner mostly asks good questions but the premise of one is questionable. The questioner can't understand why the U.S. doesn't invest more in preschool because, as she says, "so many people in America go to college, so many more than in other countries, and education is stressed so much in this culture." It's true that Americans overall are more likely to have completed post-secondary education. But the trend on this is downward. Among 25-34 year-olds the U.S. is 17th among the countries that are part of the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development. Other nations are improving on this measure while the U.S. has been stagnant for many years.

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.

With the economy fizzling and the U.S. appeared headed for a recession, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich calls for good pre-schools, small class sizes and higher quality education in low and moderate income communities.

Reich, now a faculty member at Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California, made his remarks in an op-ed that appeared in Tuesday’s New York Times, entitled “Totally Spent’’.

“Over the longer term, inequality can be reversed only through better schools for children in lower- and moderate-income communities,’’ Reich wrote. “This will require, at the least, good preschools, fewer students per classroom and better pay for teachers in such schools, in order to attract the teaching talent these students need.’’

Reich, whose remarks drew nearly 200 comments to the Times website, also called for increasing the wages of the bottom two-thirds of Americans. He noted that while the number of working mothers with school-aged children has almost doubled since 1970 to more than 70 percent, “there’s a limit to how many mothers can maintain paying jobs.’’

Reich maintains his own blog at http://robertreich.blogspot.com/

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.

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.

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.

(New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson says pre-kindergarten is working)

Pre-kindergarten is not often a favored topic of business writers, and even reporters who cover K-12 are so often bogged down in covering district politics, test scores and the comings and goings of superintendents that they don't have much time to devote to pre-kindergarten.

That's why it's a nice surprise to run across stories in places like the New Mexico Business Weekly, which ran a piece on June 4 highlighting a study by the National Institute for Early Education at Rutgers University, which found the state's pre-kindergarten program helped boost math and reading scores for participants.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson hailed the study, noting that it highlights why the investment the state made in early childhood education in 2005 is paying off, as Sara Mead noted in Early Education Watch.

The Roanoke Times in Virginia published a piece this week by education analysts Robert Holland and Don Soifer that links to a paper they published analyzing federal pre-kindergarten programs, available at the website of the Lexington Institute , a conservative think tank.

Their argument comes at a time when Virginia Governor Tim Kaine is having trouble finding support for his plan to offer tax-funded preschool to all of the state's 4-year-olds, calling it "a large tab for scant investments.''

While most advocates for pre-kindergarten vehemently disagree with this view, reporters covering the pre-kindergarten story need to be familiar with arguments both for and against public investment in such programs as they pursue stories and keep on eye on both local and national legislation.

The Virginia story has been worth watching because Kaine has been unable to fulfill an ambitious campaign promise for universal pre-kindergarten access. He's instead shifted to trying to double the number of underprivileged 4-year-olds who might be eligible. Kaine is among the governors who have started out with big expansion dreams for pre-kindergarten, only to face economic and budget realities in their states.

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.

Early childhood expert Jeanne-Brooks Gunn of National Center for Children and Families at Teachers College offers new research on program effectiveness)

As ambitious state-funded pre-kindergarten programs are stalled or halted by fiscal woes, early childhood education experts gathered with government officials and business leaders from 14 states last week to learn more about child development and gain a deeper understanding of children's learning, behavior and health from top experts.

Such partnerships are a positive development at a time when budget uncertainties are halting plans for pre-kindergarten expansion in states like Virginia and Tennessee.

The conference -- sponsored by the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University -- included findings of A Science-Based Framework for Early Childhood Policy.

Discussions included an overview of the impact of early experience on brain development and lessons learned from public-private partnerships. A gold mine of research and reports presented at the conference are well worth the time of journalists and others interested in early education policy, including papers that look at early childhood program effectiveness by, among others, Jeanne-Brooks Gunn of the National Center for Children and Families at Teachers College.

A story about the conference can be found in Education Week .

The August 27 opinion piece by two Reason Foundation authors in the Wall Street Journal is still generating lots of traffic in print and in the blogosphere.

Libby Doggett, Pre-Know<

Susan Urahn, of the Pew Charitable Trusts (an underwriter of this blog) and
Libby Doggett of Pre-Know (also largely funded by Pew) collaborated on a Aug. 30 letter disputing the authors' analysis. The same day the Journal also published a letter by economist James Heckman and longtime pre-k advocate Lawrence J. Schweinhart of the High/Scope institute correcting the authors' misunderstanding of Heckman's research. A commentary by David L. Kirp "Sandbox Investment," (author of the pro-preschool book
partially funded by Pew) and Steve Barnett of the National Institute on Early Education Research that included a "fact check" on the original Journal piece appeared in the San Francisco Chronicle. Another critique came out from The Think Tank Review Project, which keeps an eye on conservative-minded think tank's under a contract with the National Education Association teachers union.

Keeping the action going, the WSJ published a response by the Reason authors, Lisa Snell and Shikha Dalmia that accepted the clarification from Heckman/Schweinhart and continued to dispute Urahn/Doggett.

Lisa Snell, Reason Foundation

More to come, no doubt.

Early Ed Watch has two entries highlighting new analyses of economic returns from investments in early childhood education. Here and here. Have I said recently what a valuable resource Early Ed Watch is?

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.”

Washington Post Reporter Michael Alison Chandler weighed in on the "pre-k as good investment" angle, after attending a forum of education advocates in Fairfax County, on the topic. Virginia is working on a new formula for matching grants that would help the county expand its pre-kindergarten offerings.

This might have been just another local story on pre-kindergarten, but Chandler added the kind of background and context that instantly improves journalism about pre-kindergarten. She noted, for example, that Gov. Timothy M. Kaine had to pare down his pre-kindergarten campaign promises due to a budget shortfall that could reach $1 billion. Chandler included statistics on how many children in the country are in a child-care setting and also noted that 32 states including Virginia have increased spending on pre-kindergarten despite the tough economic times. With a worsening economy, it's important for reporters to quantify both the need for pre-kindergarten in areas they cover as well as funding methods and costs to the taxpayer.

High quality pre-kindergarten has become something of an elusive luxury for middle class parents, caught between rising prices, the housing crisis and stagnating wages, according to report released by Pre-K Now during a Hechinger Institute Webinar on Wednesday.

The report provides a great starting point for rich and worthwhile stories journalists should be telling about the hard choices middle class American families are making as they struggle to pay mortgages and credit card debt and worry about holding onto their jobs.

Families earning too much to qualify for state-funded programs but not enough for higher quality private schools in some cases are choosing substandard care or keeping their children out of pre-kindergarten altogether, said the report’s author Albert Wat, a policy analyst for Pre-K Now.

Middle-class families and their children need and would benefit from voluntary, high-quality pre-k indergarten programs funded by their states but they often don't have access to them, notes the report, which calls for states and the federal government to expand such programs. Wat found that the average middle class family of four, living in a state with a public pre-k program, spent about 29% of their income on pre-kindergarten for their two children.

"Middle class families are feeling increasingly pessimistic about their financial situationn,'' Wat noted during the webinar, which will be available on the Hechinger Institute's website.

The webinar also offered views from William Gormley of the Georgetown Public Policy Institute, the author of a study on the benefits of Oklahoma's early childhood programs. Gormley's study found students experienced substantial gains and that the negative effects of family and environmental risk factors can be lessened by a strong preschool program.

Douglas Besharov of the American Enterprise Institute, , pointed out that emphasizing the needs of the middle class can divert attention from the most needy children in the U.S. He said the federal government help poor children by strengthening federal Head Start programs.

The report comes at a time when 80 percent of Americans believe it is more difficult to maintain their standard of living than it was five years ago, and some twenty percent think their children will have a lower standard of living than they do.

Rising expenses and declining incomes are leaving more Americans in debt, although many still earn too much to qualify for state-funded pre-k programs.

The report's recommendations include a phase-in plan to expand pre-k to all children, using factors other than family income to define eligibility, creating full-day programs to meet the needs of working families and extending eligibility for voluntary pre-k to three year-olds.

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.

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.

When a politician announces a number of new initiatives, the stories that follow often end up looking like a laundry list. However,journalists have to do more than allow politicians to spew rhetoric without demanding a full explanation. One good example comes from the speech Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley made this week to the State Board of Education, where he announced a new program for tracking student performance from pre-kindergarten through the end of college.

Early Stories is curious to know how a pre-kindergarten student might be tracked and what exactly the governor meant. For one thing, many states and school systems first enroll students in kindergarten or first grade. And not all have developed evaluation systems for pre-kindergarten that measure such things as cognitive and language abilities, reading and mathematics achievement, health or behavior problems, for example.

How will school systems measure the achievement of pre-kindergarten students and what sorts of tests will they get? Will they be assessed on their ability to recite letters and numbers?

To get a few more answers, Early Stories checked out the text of his speech which implies said that he wants the Board of Education to "develop a comprehensive performance measurement system that tracks student achievement and development from Kindergarten through higher education.''

So, now the questions can begin about what such a system might look like in Maryland, which was ranked number one for having the best schools nationally by Education Week. Who will do the "tracking,'' and what will be tracked? How much will it cost? Will all publicly funded pre-kindergartens be required to track their students?

In the days and weeks to come, details of President Barack Obama's stimulus package will begin to emerge. His budget is now a public document. Enterprising journalists from Ohio to Arkansas are beginning to report on how much money their states will get for pre-kindergarten, Head Start and other early childhood programs.

Early Stories firmly believes the reporting should not stop after that. Who will get the contracts and the jobs? How can the public be assured the new programs will be high quality? What types of programs will states and school districts offer and what does the research say about which are best? Who will make decisions and how will the decisions be made? Will opponents and others attempt to steer the money toward different types of programs? Will political connections play a role?

More excellent questions are posed by Sara Mead at Early Education Watch, who keeps a close eye on both the money and the larger policy implications.

It's not enough, in the recession economy, to simply report on how much money each state will get. The number is just a starting point for the many important stories waiting to be told.

Will long promised public preschool expansions survive the recession? That's one of the questions John Mooney of the New York Times posed and attempted to answer in an excellent piece that ran in the regional section. The story is a model for journalists who should be looking closely at planned expansions to see if they are in peril.

At a time when President Barack Obama is pushing preschool and early childhood education as part of his $787 billion stimulus plan, cash-strapped state officials are waiting to see how much money they will get and how they can use it. New Jersey is among the 38 states that provide public programs and already serves more than a quarter of all its eligible students. Under an ambitious expansion, the state had planned to provide all day-programs for low-income 3-and 4-year-olds by the fall, but it's unclear if they can proceed.

Other states planning pre-kindergarten expansions may also be scaling back, and are unlikely to ask for more taxpayer funding. The National Institute for Early Education Research has been keeping track, as has Pre-K Now . In addition to closely watching and examing state budgets when they are released, there is no substitute for visiting pre-kindergarten classes, like Mooney did. Visits will help journalists explain any progress teachers and parents see in the children, and provide a chance to observe what kinds of learning activities are taking place.

It's also worth noting, courtesy of the excellent Early Education Watch blog, that even programs that offer big gains for young children have been cut out of school budgets. Chicago's Child Parent Centers, for example, are now serving fewer than half of the original numbers of children, notes Lisa Guernsey of Early Education Watch.

As President Barack Obama was getting ready to deliver a speech this week that called for a renewed committment to early childhood education, citizens of South Dakota were gathering in their state capital to fight a bill that might have been the first step toward creating a state funded preschool program to serve low-income families.

Those opposing the bill argued that it would "give incentive to alternatives to parenting,'' and noted on their website that "documented studies show... Moms are the #1 educator for early-childhood.'' The site did not point to any specific research to back-up this claim.

South Dakota is one of 12 states that offer no state-funded pre-kindergarten. Bills to change that have faced fierce opposition from groups that compare state-funded programs to "government intrusion on the family.''

It has been interesting watching the steadfast opposition to funding pre-kindergarten in this rural state, even as other are coming around toward viewing early childhood education as a necessary and worthwhile investment.

On Tuesday, a House Committee in Pierre voted 9-6 to kill a measure that proposed a community planning process simply to gauge statewide interest in preschool for children from low-income families.

The opposition in South Dakota comes at a time when Obama is pushing for greater investment in early childhood education, as noted in the Early Ed Watch blog. Lawmakers in the past have tried to lay the groundwork for state funded programs in South Dakota, but have had no luck.

The Anchorage Daily News published an interesting editorial this week criticizing the state's lagging response to providing publicly funded pre-kindergarten. Alaska is one of only 12 states in the U.S. that does not provide programs for its youngest residents.

The editorial follow a statewide summit on pre-kindergarten in November where educators and advocates pushed for improving Alaska's offerings, and comes as President Barack Obama is touting the importance of early childhood education. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin -- who while stumping as a vice-presidential candidate called education "near and dear to my heart,'' -- did not attend that summit meeting.

Palin's budget proposal did not go as far as advocates had hoped, calling only for a state-funded pilot that would serve about 500 pre-kindergarten children. The state's superintendent has called for federal stimulus funds to be used for new preschools for low-income students, while other educators want Palin to push harder for expansion.

"The state should take advantage of opportunities to fund preschools -- proven to give kids a stronger start,'' the editorial noted. It also pointed out that "well-run preschools can improve the odds children will succeed in school.''

Palin, for her part, has criticized the stimulus package as too large and said it would not be fair to Alaskans "to create expectations about programs that wouldn't be sustainable.''

EarlyStories has for months urged journalists to visit pre-school classrooms and glimpse what is happening (or not happening), especially as states battle over funding cuts and the prospect of economic stimulus money.

So it was gratifying to see a reporter from the Beaumont Enterprise observing the routines of 4 and 5-year-olds at a private pre-k provider, watching how they absorbed "the basics of language and social skills,'' in preparation for starting kindergarten.

The story examines the choices parents in Texas consider when they look at both state-funded and private programs. It also includes good advice about the questions that parents (and, EarlyStories would like to add, journalists) should be asking about providers, which are often subject to agency guidelines. For example, what kind of education do pre-k teachers have? Do they have early childhood experience? Have they been trained and have they taught in pre-k settings? How will children be assessed?

Steve Barnett, co-director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, notes in the story that students who attend state pre-k programs are less likely to fail a grade or need special education-type services; he adds that children exposed to a curriculum that forces them to think through their actions and exercise their independence often have fewer behavior problems or aggression issues later on in life.

All of that information is helpful to parents and the public at a time when the cost and benefits of pre-k programs are being weighed closely. But the story might only have been a series of interviews and study summaries without the anecdote describing how young children curled up their faces up and squealed when describing the sour taste of a lemon. Sometimes classroom visits are the only way to bring home points about how and if young children are learning

Education journalists who are busy juggling the many K-12 stories on their beat don't always recognize the importance of what does -- or does not -- come before. That's why it is an excellent idea to listen in next week to the 2008 State of Preschool report from the National Institute for Early Education Research that ranks all 50 states on quality standards, funding and access to state funded programs. This year the report will also look at how state budgets have been effected by the recession, and will consider the likelihood of cuts. Take a look at the yearbook from 2007 for comparison.

Journalists can tune in for a phone briefing about the 2008 report at 2 p.m. on April 6 or attend a news conference on April 8 at 10 a.m. at the Oyster Adams Bilingual School, 2801 Calvert St., NW, Washington, DC. To participate in the conference, contact Jen Fitzgerald at jfitzgerald@nieer.org or Mary Meagher at mmeagher@nieer.org. Registration for the conference call constitutes agreement to honor the embargo of the report until April 8; call-in information will be available upon registering for the call and an embargoed copy of the report will be made available.

Listening to the report is no substitute for something EarlyStories has long advocated -- visiting pre-schools and early childhood centers to see what is -- or is not -- happening. The report may provide an excellent starting point for an overview of some of the key issues at a time when planned expansions may be stalled by the weak economy, and will likely provide some excellent questions to ask as well as some stories well worth pursuing.

Patrick Riccards at Eduflak, who aims to improve education "through effective communications,'' makes some helpful points that journalists covering the push and pull of pre-kindergarten expansion in a tight economy might consider -- including the very real prospect of cuts to existing programs. "We all know,'' Riccards wrote, "that once cuts come, it gets harder and harder to restore them.''

Journalists likely will be reporting on the cuts, but Riccards raises some important questions to ask in states that are pushing to expand existing programs and initiate new ones, in some cases with the help of federal stimulus money.

"How do we deliver return on investment on early childhood education? How do we make sure we have moved beyond glorified babysitting and are really focusing on instruction and academic and social preparation? How do we ensure that quality preK is measured and assessed for having true quality?" Riccards asks.

A forum held by Early Ed Watch blogger Sara Mead at the New America Foundation last week also attempted to draw conclusions from data available on early learning: it's available on their site.

At a time when early childhood advocates are hailing a new federal investment in pre-school education, the economically depressed state of Ohio may be poised to roll back public programs due to state budget cuts.

Journalists covering the story or watching this state will have their work cut out for them, because the picture is confusing and changing quickly. In February, news organizations were reporting that Ohio would receive some $83 million to Headstart and preschool programs.

But just last week, the Associated Press reported the early childhood programs in the state would be cut by $244 million in the two-year budget plan approved by the Ohio House.

Sen. John Carey, Republican chairman of the Finance Committee, told the AP that the state did not get any stimulus money for early childhood education and that the state could not afford them.

So what is happening here? Journalists have to continue to take notice and sort out the fiscal realities from the budget posturing and politics. The Akron Beacon Journal published an editorial earlier this month lamenting cuts that will stall the agenda of Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland, who has pushed for universal all-day kindergarten. and initiated other early childhood initiatives.

The Plain Dealer is following GOP efforts to slice $1 billion from the state's $56 billion budget this week, while early childhood advocates are speaking out against the cuts. Pre-school programs can prevent dropping out in years to come, and help lead to lower arrest rates and higher incomes for years to come, they maintain. As budget negotiations continue this week, the picture may change yet again for early childhood education in the state.

EarlyStories spends a lot of time observing and commenting on the way journalists cover early childhood education. It's a tough area for many who are consumed with the demands of the K-12 beat and may not realize how much the early childhood landscape is changing. That's one reason the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media is hosting a webinar on June 24th. We will explain the main federal programs in early childhood education and describe how the Obama administration hopes to expand and fund them.

We'll ask and try to answer:

· What will an infusion of money from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) mean for states and districts, and how will it influence what early education programs and policies look like?
· What sorts of new and developing partnerships between K-12 systems and early childhood care providers are on the horizon as superintendents and school officials clamor for programs they believe will assist their test scores later on? How can journalists assess the quality of such programs?
· How will investing in Early Head Start and Head Start expand access to quality child care for children from working families?
· What kind of training will be offered to early childhood workers and how can journalists assess if it is any good? What kinds of credentials must they attain?
· Is the federal investment sufficient to stave off cuts to existing pre-k programs and to reinvigorate plans for pre-k expansion?

This webinar is scheduled for one hour and is completely free. Apply online

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.

Journalists who are covering early childhood education these days find themselves watching two distinct trends that often diverge: cutbacks in long-planned pre-kindergarten expansion due to state's economic woes, and a new federal involvement in the lives of children from birth to five. Understanding and covering these dual trends will require some explanation, and that is one reason the Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media is hosting a webinar on early childhood education on Wednesday.

President Barack Obama has proposed spending $10 billion annually to support early childhood investments. How will his agenda change the early education landscape from birth to age five, and how does it connect to the larger K-12 world?

Journalists must keep an eye on the unprecedented new federal funding coming to states and districts through stimulus funds, which could drastically re-shape early education programs and policies. What will this mean for communities and at risk children across the U.S.?

Speakers include former Chicago Tribune editorial writer Cornelia Grumman of the First Five Years Fund and Scott Palmer, a partner and co-founder of EducationCounsel LLC, an affiliate of Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough.

Sign-up on the Hechinger website.

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.

Stephanie Banchero of the Chicago Tribune is staying right on top of an important political and financial battle in Illinois that could shut some 30,000 children out of preschools. Like many financially strapped states, Illinois is facing difficult budget choices, resulting in an $180 million cut in the State Board of Education budget earlier this week. The state's popular and highly regarded early childhood programs took a huge hit, Banchero noted -- losing a third of its $380 million budget.

What will that mean?

"Without high-quality early-childhood programs, low-income children will arrive at kindergarten unprepared and will struggle throughout their school years to catch up," Diane Rauner, executive director of the Ounce of Prevention Fund, told Banchero.

Reporters throughout the U.S. are doing story after story about painful budget cuts that are causing wholesale elimination of programs and forcing educators and lawmakers to make difficult choices. The situation in in Illinois is far from settled, as Banchero pointed out, with education advocates pressing lawmakers to restore the cuts.

In these tough times, it's a good idea for journalists to closely examine some of the programs that may be eliminated and try to help explain their value to the public, who will be clamoring to preserve everything from arts programs to foreign languages -- and of course, early childhood education. Each has some value, and many will be unsustainable. Advocates are likely clamoring to let the public and lawmakers know how important the programs they support are and journalists will have to document, explain or illustrate value with the help of anecdotes, examples, research, interviews and visits whenever possible.

Journalists who wonder how early childhood education fits into the larger K-12 landscape have a great opportunity to learn more about this critical topic. The Journalism Center on Children & Families in Maryland has extended the deadline for its September training conference and fellowship, entitled "Ladders of Success: Covering Early Childhood Learning."

The conference features experts including Ellen Galinsky of the Families & Work Institute and Gene Steuerle of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation. It takes place Sept 13-15, 2009 (Sunday through Tuesday) at The Inn & Conference Center and the University of Maryland in College Park, Md.

The two-and-a-half day seminar will encourage 20 journalists to examine the best way to fix the country’s underfunded and fragmented early childhood system.

Sessions will include:

Born Learning: A look at the science of early education

Economic Reality: Funding early education during a recession.

Leveling the Learning Field: One out of every five children in the United States is the child of an immigrant. How do communities address the needs of immigrant families and their young children?

Early Intervention: For many children, learning the alphabet and counting comes before they start their formal education. But many children struggle with these early concepts because of limited exposure to learning or because of undiagnosed disorders in cognition or learning.

What Works: Where to find pre-k programs that are thriving in at-risk communities?

Ready to Learn: in 2005, only 31 percent of fourth-graders read at a ‘proficient’ or better level. What do young children learn in early education that helps prepare them for lifelong success? How do programs successfully link early learning to the early grades?

For details and an application, visit at www.journalismcenter.org

At a time when many states are having to scale back on long-planned pre-kindergarten expansions, Oklahoma is taking advantage of $15 million in stimulus funds to help support three new early childhood centers, according to published accounts.

Oklahoma is is indeed facing tough fiscal times. Gov. Brad Henry has noted that state revenues are declining, but has pushed for the early childhood programs with the help of the Kaiser Family Foundation and matching funds from the Tulsa Public Schools.

Oklahoma has long been thought of as a leader in early childhood education, especially the state's emphasis on enrolling disadvantaged children. It will be interesting to see what kind of impact the early childhood education centers will have on education in the state in the years to come.

Henry is making some pretty big promises, and the press -- along with researchers -- are going to have to do a lot of follow-up work to get a sense of both the quality and the impact the new centers will have in Tulsa and beyond.

"They will be the first of their kind in the nation," Henry said during his annual state-of-the-state speech to the Tulsa Metro Chamber of Commerce this week, according to the Tulsa World. "Tulsa will continue to be a leader in early childhood education."

What kind of a leader remains to be seen.

EarlyStories is keeping a close eye on efforts to bolster early childhood education in North Dakota, one of only 12 in the U.S. that does not offer any state-funded programs. The state has long resisted the idea, so any conversation around the concept brings out advocacy groups in force.

That is what happened last week at a summit organized in Bismarck by the Head Start State Collaboration Office, according to an article in The Bismarck Tribune.. The story pointed that out only about 8,725 children out of some 40,000 children in this rural state are enrolled in either a nursery school or a special program such as Head Start.

Those are very small numbers, so it will be interesting to see what could change as a result of these early conversations. Will North Dakota continue to resist funding programs at a time of unprecedented federal interest and involvement in an early childhood agenda? Will it embrace President Barack Obama's belief that what happens in the early years pays big dividends for education later on?

It's particularly interesting to watch what is happening in North Dakota, a state where kindergarten teachers backed a proposal to require youngsters to be a bit older when they enter first grade. If they get better preparation beforehand, will the age matter as much?

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.''

Colleen Wixon explored at a very important issue this month when she examined what happens to children who don't attend pre-school -- in many cases because of the economic situation they find themselves in. Wixon's story in the Indian River Press Journal of Vero Beach, Florida, laid out the many reasons why children who skip preschool are behind socially once they enter kindergarten, and described how the hard-hit Florida communities she covers are feeling the impact of the economic downturn.

"Non-working parents are keeping their children home. Preschools and day care centers are seeing a decline in enrollment. Many day cares and preschools along the Treasure Coast are closing because of that declining enrollment,'' Wixon reported. Those facts alone are newsworthy, but she also reached out to experts who could help families understand just why and how early childhood education is important before the start of kindergarten.

The lag in pre-school attendance in the Vero Beach area comes at a time when more than 300 families are on the waiting list for subsidized child care in one of the counties Wixon covers; in another 800 families are on a list.

EarlyStories believes it is more important than ever for journalists to explain what should happen in a high quality pre-school so that parents who are strapped economically can make the best choices and understand the consequences -- and the choices.

It would also be useful for readers to hear from kindergarten teachers on their experiences.
Do they notice a big difference in students who have been to pre-school vs. those who have not? And what difference has Florida's free, voluntary prekindergarten made in terms of school readiness?

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.

Journalists following early childhood issues should take a look at a new report released from Pre-K Now, which found that twenty nine states and the District of Columbia chose to increase funding for pre-kindergarten education or hold it study, despite the tough economic times their governments are facing.

The report includes a wealth of information on state budgets that will be helpful to education journalists, along with examples of how certain states are using money from the federal stimulus package to help pay for pre-k programs. It's a key issue at a time when President Barack Obama is pushing unprecedented federal investment in early childhood.

According to the report:
* Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia increased or are projected to increase pre-k investments by a total of more than $187 million.
*Thirteen legislatures increased investment in existing programs by nearly $130 million: Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, New Jersey, New Mexico, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia.
* Two states that previously had no state pre-k programs approved pilot initiatives: Alaska and Rhode Island.
* Nine states and the District of Columbia anticipate increases through the school funding formula (Texas is included in this group as well but counted only once in the tally of 23 states with increased investments).

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.

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."

At the end of a lengthy Associated Press story on a battle for pre-kindergarten funding in Virginia, a quote stood out that begs for an answer and a response.

Republican Kirk Cox of Colonial Heights, who is a member of the legislative panel working to finalize the state's budget, said that Virgina has more than doubled funding for its pre-K program in recent years.

“It’s not a core function of education,” Cox is quoted as saying. “Every dollar you put into pre-K is a dollar you take out of the classroom.”

The quote came at the end of a story similar to one being written by statehouse reporters all over the U.S., as states are under pressure in a weakened economy to slash budgets and make painful choices.

The story detailed how teachers and advocates for a program that puts low-income children in Virginia testified before lawmakers and urged them not to cut the Virgina Preschool Initiative.

They described how the program helps get children ready for kindergarten and helps level the playing field with those from more advantaged homes. There were plenty of clear arguments quoted about the value and benefits of of pre-kindergarten, an issue the state continues to debate even as the new Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell has urged that pre-k programs not be cut.

So what about the "core function,'' quote? It's important to hear from both sides in any debate about education spending, but EarlyStories still would like an explanation of what is a core function. How exactly would funding pre-k take other dollars out of the classroom? What specifically would have to be cut?

Those making arguments on the other side have to be ready to answer and defend the role of pre-k as "a core function,'' at a time when every dollar spent on every program is coming into question. Rhetoric isn't helpful. Facts and explanations are.