So, what kind of teaching makes a difference? And, by extension, what should journalists who visit pre-kindergartens look for? They should look for instruction to be woven into activities that give children "choices to explore and play." No drill and kill called for. Pianta says what works is:
– explicit instruction in key skills (teaching matters)
– sensitive and emotionally warm interactions (relationships matter)
– feedback (how'm I doing?)
– verbal engagement/stimulation (talk, talk, talk, words, words, words)
– a classroom environment that is not overly structured or regimented. (they're kids!)

Too often journalists fall into the trap of thinking that instruction is boring and borders on child abuse. In fact, learning can be joyful and fun, even for 4- and 5-year-olds. So, let's stop with the false dichotomies between teaching and play.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

"The Pursuit of Happyness," the well-reviewed and successful movie starring Will Smith, is worth seeing. Education is a big theme. Chris Gardner is a smart guy who ends up homeless with his young son while he's trying to become a stock broker. He studies day and night to pass a broker's test. Gardner passed, got the job and went on to start his own bond trading firm and become fabulously successful.

In the movie, Gardner takes his son everyday to what he thinks is a good pre-school. He finds out his son spends most of his time watching television. When he confronts the proprietor, she says he can't expect to get anything more for the amount he's paying. Lots of working folks find themselves confronted by the same agonizing dilemma, knowing that this precious time is being wasted but being unable to afford something better.

The other plot point involving a current education issue has to do with that test. Many folks in the anti-testing crowd argue that a) tests can't measure all that a child knows, b) tests are inherently biased, c) some people aren't good test-takers and so on. In the hard, cruel, pragmatic world of work, however, sometimes a test is a hurdle you have to get over to get a job or promotion (think police officers, fire fighters, CPAs, attorneys, doctors, etc.). Learning to study and to do well on tests is not such a bad skill to learn in school.

From the Beijing News comes word that inequality starts early, even in a Communist country. Here's an excerpt of a story from Xinhua news service. At an education "expo" in Guangzhou...

Zhu Jiaxiong, vice-chairman of the China National Society of Early Childhood Education, showed two photographs when talking about fairness in preschool education. One of the photos shows a well-decorated kindergarten [kindergarten is preschool in China--rlc] that cost 200 million yuan (US$25.3 million), while the other features a rural child playing in a muddy field. Professor Zhu said there are insufficient fair-priced kindergartens in the country. The vast rural areas are especially facing shortages of preschool educational institutions. The key factors that decide educational quality are good teachers and a fine teaching mode, rather than big buildings. Thus the extravagant construction of many kindergartens are used to justify high fees. Some kindergartens now charge even more than universities.

Columbia University's National Center for Children in Poverty has a terrific overview of the early childhood policies that research has found to be most effective in narrowing the achievement gap between poor children and their more affluent peers. One crucial element, the center's report says, is what it calls an "intentional curriculum."

The report defines this as a curriculum that is:

content driven, research-based, emphasizes active engagement with children, includes attention to social and regulatory skills, and is responsive to cultural diversity and children just learning English. An intentional curriculum is directive without using drill and kill strategies; it is fun for young children and promotes positive peer and teacher interactions. An intentional curriculum is developmentally appropriate.

Whole report gives a very concise helpful overview of the research on this crucial question. Good one-stop shopping for the press.

Folks at Goldwater Institute in Phoenix have long been opponents of publicly financed pre-kindergarten. They're out with a new analysis that says the investment in early childhood education the state is making is a waste of money. It says that the small positive effects of full-day kindergarten fade by fifth grade. The study is odd, though. It seems to treat pre-kindergarten and full-day kindergarten interchangeably. It also does not use individual data and it is silent on the quality of the half-day pre-kindergarten programs in the state. In short, only a researcher who set out to find no effect from pre-kindergarten would rely on the study's methodology. Oh and, no surprise here, school choice is a big winner!

New Mexico Lieutenant Gov. Diane Denish, one of the strongest forces behind the start-up of the pre-k program in her state in 2005, now wants the number of children served to be doubled.. Illinois Gov. Rod Blagovich wants to increase the state's spending on preschool by $70 million, opening up 12,000 slots. Some legislators in Missouri will be proposing expansion of state-funded preschool to all disadvantaged children. Finally, a consortium of colleges, the city of Tuscaloosa, the Mayor's office, and the Tuscaloosa school system are working on a citywide pre-k program. Editorial in the Tuscaloosa News says that, "In the long term, Tuscaloosa will be a better community thanks to this program."

According to the National Institute of Early Education Research, Alabama in 2005 ranked 37th in the percentage of its 4 year olds served. The state also cut its per-pupil spending on pre-k every year from 2000 tto 2005 and the elimination of federal child care funds available to poor working women were cut. Whenever journalists report on a new program or purported expansion of state spending on pre-k, it's important to say what the state is already doing. A doubling of 2% of the 4 year olds served may look better than it is, especially if the funds aren't doubled as well.

The Associated Press in Georgia notes that the state failed to keep data that would allow it to evaluate the long-term effects of the state's pre-k program, which is one of the oldest in the country. The lead of the story is punchy and to the point: "Fourteen years ago, Georgia launched a publicly funded pre-kindergarten program that later became the first in the nation to offer free classes to all 4-year-olds.Educators promised better prepared students and eventually lower crime rates when students got older.But don't ask state officials for data on how many of those students graduated from high school and went on to college this past fall. They didn't keep track." The whole story is posted here.

This is a question journalists in any state that either offers pre-k now, is expanding pre-k, or is thinking about offering pre-k. Does the state have a plan for gathering long-term data? Big promises are made about the positive effects of pre-k. But will it be possible to show whether those promises are being kept?

The fourth annual report from the National Institute on Early Education Research came out this week and it generated some good stories around the country. Nancy Zuckerbrod of the Associated Press gave a good overview, touching down in Virginia to review the program there. Natalia Mielczarek at The Tennessean in Nashville used the report as a starting point to report on Gov. Phil Bredesen's addition of $70 million to the state pre-k program the past two years. She also went out and talked to parents and teachers and visited classrooms. The Montgomery (AL) Advertiser carried a short Associated Press story. The Columbus (OH) Dispatch's Catherine Candisky used the report to explain the complexities of the program in her state and a proposal by Gov. Ted Strickland to put a little bit more state money in.

Surprisingly, though, none of the stories picked up on this element of the report:

Total state spending for prekindergarten was nearly $3.3 billion, an increase of 13 percent from the previous year. However, inflation-adjusted spending per child declined in 25 of 37 states (Florida was new). In other words, real spending per child declined in twice as many states as it increased. Worse yet, nominal spending per child (that is, without any adjustment for inflation) declined in 14 states. After adjusting for inflation, funding per child fell to the lowest level since NIEER began collecting such data. In 2001-2002, states spent $4,171 per child in today's dollars; last year they spent $3,482 per child.

Given what states are spending, and given that that amount is decreasing in real terms, it seems irrelevant and even a bit misleading for NIEER to assert that "high quality" preschool has returned "$17 for every $1 invested." That figure is based on a long-term study of a boutique program in the 60s that was unlike anything that exists today.

My earlier post on coverage of the new National Institute on Early Education Research report noted that journalists hadn't picked up the "mo' money, even mo' kids'"angle. Should have checked USA Today's coverage before I said that. Greg Toppo was all over it. See how he handled it here.

Toppo also noted the existence of a new website called savvysource.com, which offers parents a way to judge the quality of preschools in their communities. Toppo quotes the site's founder as saying it is "kind of a combination of Zagat's and Craigslist" for parents of young kids.

Follow-up: Look for letters in newspapers around the country from pre-k supporters. The advocacy group Pre-K Now which, like this blog, gets support from The Pew Charitable Trusts sees the AP story on the NIEER report as a hook for supporters to write to newspapers and demand more money to be spent to raise program quality.

Rena Havner's story in the Mobile (AL) Press-Register has been getting lots of traction on blogs and websites. The story, which was a follow-up to the NIEER report on the quality of state preschool programs, noted that while Alabama was one of two states to get a perfect score according to the NIEER scale, the state's program doesn't serve very many kids: only 1,080 statewide.
"We've got this great quality program, but we were dead last," said Criss Hopson with the Montgomery-based Alabama School Readiness Alliance, which is lobbying the state to expand its preschool program. "For the children that are receiving the instruction, that's great, but it's not going to be enough to make a huge societal impact."

By the way, Sharon L. Ramey, the Georgetown University professor who was one of the authors of the child care study, and her husband, Craig T. Ramey, have produced a wealth of research on early childcare education that journalists should consult. Here's one article that is a great, readable summary of a lot of research.

Here is a list of what the Rameys call: Essential Experiences in Early Learning Years:

What are the crucial experiences needed in the early years of life? Does early caretaking or experience really affect brain development? Are these effects important or lasting? In recent scientific articles and books for parents, we have summarized a vast body of scientific evidence in terms of seven types of experiences that are essential to ensure normal brain and behavioral development and school readiness:

1. Encourage exploration.
2. Mentor in basic skills.
3. Celebrate developmental advances.
4. Rehearse and extend new skills.
5. Protect from inappropriate disapproval, teasing, and punishment.
6. Communicate richly and responsively.
7. Guide and limit behavior.

Bruce Fuller, the author of "Standardized Childhood" just out from Stanford University Press offers this measured and thoughtful response to my entry a few days ago about his book:

I’m miffed by friend Richard Colvin’s instantaneous commentary on my new book, Standardized Childhood, just out from Stanford University Press, coauthored with Margaret Bridges and Seeta Pai. Richard ends his blog-spray by admitting, “I confess I haven’t read the book.” [Disclosure: the rules of evidence or substantiation in the blog world remain a mystery to me.]

The book offers readers a concise historical tour, illuminating the age-old debate around how elites and institutions eagerly push to define the inner nature and proper upbringing of other people’s children. Sure, it takes a village. But the pivotal question moving forward is, who gets to call the shots across America’s diverse villages, and what are the ethics and evidence on the proposition that what’s best is a more homogenous way of raising and instructing young children are best?

Earlier feminist and child care movements stressed options for parents and children. But now influential born-again preschool advocates [disclosure: who are financially supported by the same national foundation that pays for Colvin’s blog site] have converged on a singular remedy: free preschool, preferably attached to public school bureaucracies, for all families, no matter how rich or poor.

Journalists, local activists, and state policy makers – as this movement unfolds – must wrestle with key issues. First, in the context of No Child Left Behind many kindergarten teachers are under enormous pressure to drill-and-kill information into children’s heads, to pump-up their test scores. The book takes readers into several preschool classrooms where teachers now feel the same pressure. So, let’s get clear on the risks and potential benefits of attaching three and four year-olds to public schools in the present environment of top-down accountability.

A committee of the Missouri legislature decided it would be unfair to rate private preschools and child care centers based on education quality and to provide those rated higher with more state funding. But the committee said it would be just fine to subject the sliver of programs operated by the public schools to those rules it rejected for the privately operated programs. The legislature also loaded up the bill with a raft of controversial provisions unrelated to preschool: a measure making it easier to fire teachers who go on strike, one making it easier to start charter schools; and one allowing professionals to become teachers without a degree. Matt Franck has the story in the Post-Dispatch.

Be interesting to see what oversight or regulation, if any, that your state performs over private child care and preschool programs. Usually, the only regulations deal with health and safety rather than educational or developmental quality.

Looks like Iowa will be investing millions over the next four years to ensure that every Iowa four year old has a chance to attend preschool. The AP reports that a Senate measure looks like it will pass, the House is on board and so is the governor. The story reports that the $15 million plan will make "quality" preschool available for 28,000 children. Do the math and that's $535 per child. I know there's something I'm missing here. But so are readers and listeners in Iowa.

One purpose of the annual "Leadership Matters" survey by the advocacy group Pre-K Now is to praise governors going along with the plan of adding more public dollars for preschool and to spank governors who are wavering, have jumped off the bandwagon, or who haven't yet climbed aboard. The report released this week praised Kathleen Blanco, the governor of Louisiana who has announced she won't run for reelection, and The Daily Advertiser of Lafayette, Louisiana took note. On the other hand, Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina was taken to task for his "evaporating" support for universal pre-kindergarten and the Post and Courier of Charleston took note. (Full disclosure: Pre-K Now, like this blog, is supported by The Pew Charitable Trusts, which advocates for public spending for universal pre-kindergarten.) In each of these stories, the reporters quoted people in the states unaffiliated with the national report and used it as a hook for a status report on pre-k in the state. What I didn't see in either story, however, was any attempt to connect the Pre-K Now report to the earlier report by the National Institute for Early Education Research on the quality of state programs. I also didn't see any mention of how much the states are spending per pupil. Quantity has to be matched by quality, otherwise these programs will have little if any effect.

The Southern Education Foundation today will release a report that will say that the region is ahead of other parts of the country in terms of its pre-kindergarten programs. The report "pulls together and synthesizes the findings of every major independent study of state-supported Pre-K across the South in the last ten years. These reports measure the current and future impact that Pre-K can have in improving Southern education and the region's quality of life." This comes from the Dawson County Times in Dawsonville, Dawson County, Georgia.

Journalists in the South who write on this report should also check other sources of information, such as the National Institute for Early Education Research on quality questions, and reports turned out by the advocacy group Pre-K Now, especially those analyzing the political leadership of governors and others in the states. Also keep in mind that 3-5 year olds can be found in many settings--Head Start, family care, child care centers, preschools in churches, preschools in public schools, for profit preschools and so on.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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.

Despite lots and lots of early ed news I've been offline, running the Hechinger Institute after the departure of several staffers....also have been very busy with seminars for journalists, which is our main activity. I blogged a bit earlier on the talk Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredeson gave at the Hechinger seminar end of June, discussing the political challenges he faced in expanding his state's investments in early childhood education. The governor also explained that he thought it was better for states to emphasize quality and expand slowly rather than go big but cheap all at once. Tennessee's program meets 9 out of the 10 quality indicators that the National Institute on Early Education Research uses to analyze state programs. Look for more from EarlyStories and, as always, let me know if you see good stories in early ed being covered well, not being covered well-enough, or not being covered at all.....

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.

USA Today the other day took note of initiatives from mayors that put books in the hands of preschoolers to encourage them to read. It seems that mayors are getting on board with the movement that to this point has featured governors in the highest profile roles. The piece reported that dozens of cities have citywide book clubs and reading selections. In Jacksonville, Florida; Longmont, Colorado, Charleston, South Carolina and other cities, the city and private funders are providing preschoolers with books. In Jacksonville, every four year old who wants one receives a backpack stuffed with a book, hand puppet, reading blanket, flashcards and other items. The story also pointed out that these programs are universal, meaning they don’t target just poor kids. My only quibble with the story is that it uses the terms “pre-K” and “child care” interchangeably. That may seem fussy but the two terms really carry quite different meanings.

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.

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

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

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

Determining whether pre-kindergarten or Head Start or other programs are serving their children well and helping them to develop socially, emotionally, and cognitively is fraught with challenges. Obviously, testing kids by asking them to read and bubble in the answers is silly. To wrestle with this issue, the Pew Charitable Trusts (full disclosure, a financial backer of the Hechinger Institute, which I run), the Joyce Foundation (another backer), and the Foundation for Child Development formed an accountability task force and named Sharon Lynn Kagan, a professor and associate dean at Teachers College, to chair it. The task force issued recommendations this week. A press release is here.

The task force took its task seriously and issued ambitious recommendations that go far beyond just assessment to providing a blue print for a "system" of early childhood education where one currently does not exist. Among the recommendations: develop standards, assessments, data reports, and training programs that are common to state pre-k's, Head Start programs, and so on; build grades K-3 on that same foundation, so that what happens before kindergarten builds toward what happens after kindergarten; make sure the assessments are good; make sure non-English speaking ahd disabled children are assessed properly and included in programs; invest the money to do all this.

I've just sketched the recommendations. Were I still writing for a newspaper or magazine I'd compare what the task force recommended with what my state is already doing in this area. In Florida, for example, kindergartners take a test and the state grades preschools based on the result. What are other states doing or not doing?

Newsweek's Nov. 12 edition has a short piece on the growth in preschool enrollments in both public and private settings, pegged to the release of a new report on participation data due out from the National Institute of Early Education Research. (on the web here. According to the article, NIEER says 69% of 4 year olds attend preschool, up from 59% in 1991. That's consistent with federal data released late last month.

Of course, Newsweek doesn't feature a free, state-funded pre-k. Rather it focuses on a $22,000 preschool in the affluent Boston suburb of Needham, Massachusetts where parents get a daily written narrative of everything their child did that day, including who he or she lunched with.

Leslie R. Williams, a Teachers College faculty member who made a long list of contributions to the field of early childhood education, died over the Thanksgiving holiday. Professor Williams had been a Head Start teacher and trainer for tribal programs in South Dakota, founded the Rita Gold Center, which is a day-care and pre-kindergarten lab school at Teachers College, and co-founded the Early Childhood Encyclopedia Project, which resulted in The Encyclopedia of Early Childhood Education. She also co-founded the All-Day Kindergarten Network.

Alabama Gov. Bob Riley last week told the Huntsville Times that he'd ask the state legislature to expand state-funded preschool. The state's department of education estimated the cost at $120 million. Although Alabama is a right to work state with no collective bargaining law, the Alabama Education Association represents the interests of teachers in the capital. The AEA rep says Riley has to talk with the AEA about how he plans to fund the proposal. As is often the case, the teachers' union is dubious of proposals that might take money off the table. In a case of curious bed fellows, the AEA raises the same concerns as "A 'Bama Blog," which asks whether the state should be paying for "free baby sitting for four-year-olds." "A 'Bama Blog" presents news from the "right side" of Alabama. I guess advocates of investments in high quality early childhood education still need to get across the message that pre-k is not babysitting.

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.

Pat Kossan in the Arizona Republic has a nice little story about how having her kids go to pre-k has changed a parent's interactions with them. This is a good angle on early childhood education I don't see mentioned much. One of the important components of the Perry Preschool Project studies from many years ago and Head Start have been their parent outreach efforts. How do the public pre-k programs in your state work with parents?

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

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

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.

I completely understand why the story of expelled preschoolers won't die. ABC News did a version of it earlier this week. But many of the stories go too far and, guess what, sensationalize it. A few years ago a Yale researcher was gathering data about various early childhood settings and discovered a small but significant number of kids kicked out of preschool. Followup interviews revealed that behavior problems were involved. The latest round of stories are hooked to a recent report the same researcher, Walter Gilliam, did proposing some solutions.

This ABC piece, in particular, suggests that these expulsions are rising dramatically. But there
(ABC Photo)
is no longitudinal data to show any change over time. Plus, the stories don't differentiate between examples of serious emotional or developmental problems and kids who, while difficult, are essentially normal kids throwing an occasional or maybe not so occasional tantrum.

The ongoing coverage has had an unfortunate side effect: blame is cast variously on society, TV, diet, lax parents, vaccines, mothers who work, or pre-kindergarten itself. (Peruse the more than 100 comments on the ABC story and see for yourself.) In our stories we ought to be more clear about the nature of some of these kids' problems and not feed these meanspirited but predictable generation-going-to-hell-in-a-handbasket reactions.

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.

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

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.’’

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.

The Foundation for Child Development has issued a new policy brief summarizing research on the best way to serve preschoolers who are not native English speakers. In some states, more than 50% of preschool age children fit this description. The brief challenges a number of myths and offers some research-based guidelines for policy makers. The brief also says that effective approaches must be used from pre-K to third grade if they are to work. This is a quote that caught my attention:

Systematic, deliberate exposure to English during early childhood combined with ongoing opportunities to learn important concepts in the home language results in the highest achievement in both the home langauge and English by the end of Third Grade and beyond.

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.

The folks at Preschool California, as well as members of the California Legislature, acknowledge that the Golden State isn’t quite so golden
when it comes to the quality of its public preschools. The advocacy group’s Deborah Kong points out that the state now meets five of 10 quality benchmarks, because the state adopted learning standards earlier this year. She also notes that pending legislation would establish a commission to explore ways to improve quality and “consolidate and streamline” state and federally funded programs to set the stage for quality improvement.

Demonstrating the effect of the NIEER reports, the legislation quotes the NIEER finding that the state only meets four of 10 quality standards and cites that as a reason to seek quality improvements. The legislation also notes, however, that the state is in a budget crisis and any improvements can’t increase costs. Indeed, with the state facing a multi-billion-dollar budget deficit, Gov. Schwarzenegger has ordered up an across the board 10% cut in spending.

The annual “State of Preschool” yearbook from the National Institute of Early Education Research is out today and, as usual, there’s good as well as disappointing news for those who favor universal access to high quality preschool for all 3- and 4-year-olds.

First the good….

Enrollment was up by 80,000 nationally in the 2006-2007 school year and, reversing a four-year-trend, inflation-adjusted per pupil spending was up too: by $32. The gain is small but it’s better than the decline in per-pupil spending that occurred in each of the past four years as enrollments grew quickly. Despite the slight uptick, per pupil spending still remains below what it was in 2002, according to NIEER’s Steve Barnett.

Biggest percentage gain in enrollment—52 percent—was tallied in Tennessee, where Gov. Phil Bredesen is fighting Republican opposition to continue to expand the program. More here. Even as enrollment grows in Tennessee, the state is maintaining high standards. Tennessee’s program meets nine out of 10 NIEER quality benchmarks. Only two states—North Carolina and Alabama—meet all 10 benchmarks. In Alabama, Republican Gov. Bob Riley is battling his own party as he tries to expand enrollment in the relatively tiny program.

Now the bad….

Kansas met only three of the 10 quality standards. Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is trying to expand and improve that program. (Again, fighting Republican resistance.) Even more worrisome to Barnett is that the state programs of California, Texas and Florida, which collectively serve nearly 40% of the American four-year-olds in state-funded preschools, met only four of the 10 quality standards.“Those states could really result in such a dismal picture for so many of America’s kids,” he said.

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

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

And…what exactly does that mean?

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

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

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

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

It's nice to see reporters picking up on findings by the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, which released a report last week describing which states are meeting benchmarks. But it would be even better to see some follow-up that helps the public -- and policy makers -- understand why some states are lagging far behind and what the findings mean.

The San Antonio Express News carried a piece the day the NIEER report was released, noting that while the preschool program in Texas serves more 4-year-olds than any in the nation, the state "has a long way to go when it comes to quality.''

The piece had good background and perspective about pre-kindergarten in Texas, which enrolled about 170,313 4-year-olds last year, more than any other state-funded program in the nation.

It also pointed out that Texas and seven other states met just four of the 10 quality standards laid out by NIEER, including failure to limit its class sizes.

Remaining questions: Just how large are these class sizes and what number is optimal? If the quality is poor, who is to blame? Does it mean the teachers don't have the training they need, or are the facilities a problem?

Is there proper equipment and room to play? Is the atmosphere chaotic? Is there a curriculum or are expectations established about what children are doing and learning? Is any learning going on? Are there any high quality programs worth looking at for examples?

At a time when public investment in pre-kindergarten is growing, it's critical for reporters to visit classrooms, ask questions -- and give the public a glimpse of what is happening inside them.

In Texas, the need for follow-up is critical because the Texas Education Agency and the State Center for Early Childhood Development are in the midst of revising pre-k guidelines for the first time since their adoption in 1999, as Lindsay Kastner pointed out last week in the Express News.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Linda Mcconnell / Special To The Rocky

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Poll shows public favors public pre-kindergarten investment)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

National survey by the advocacy organization Pre-K Now shows strong voter support for a greater federal investment in state pre-kindergarten programs.

(Kindergarten students who have had some preparation have a big advantage in Ohio)

Edith Starzyk of the The Plain Dealer in Cleveland did the kind of story on Monday that really helps illuminate why and how pre-kindergarten can make a difference -- and why the public should care.

Starzyk compared the kindergarten readiness of students in the Bay Village district -- where eight of 10 students shows up with the skills needed to start reading -- with those who are coming from Cleveland's public schools. In a series of interviews, she found the poor quality of child-cCare centers in the city poses obstacles for city students, as does the lack of pre-kindergarten.

Some 70 percent of students in the more affluent Bay Village district have attended preschool, an opportunity not as readily available in Cleveland -- although Starzyk did an excellent job of explaining how and why that is changing, and who is behind the push for improvement.

She also pointed out that success in kindergarten rises for children who have attended high-quailty pre-school -- an important point to bring home in communities where there is some skepticism about spending public money on such programs.

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

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

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

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

(Praise, Caution for Alabama's Pre-kindergarten expansion)

An editorial in the Montgomer Advertiser on Sunday hit the right note of praise and skepticism regarding Alabama Gov. Bob Riley's plan to expand a pre-kindergarten program that is considered one of the best in quality, but that simply isn't reaching enough children.

Riley's expansion will bring the number of children served up to 3,384, but as the editorial points out, that's far less than the state needs. The editorial told the public of the importance of quality, including low student-to-teacher ratios, highly qualified teachers and a program that evaluates the academic, social and basic health needs of children.

At a time when so many states are expanding their programs, it's important for the local press to stay on top of all new developments, and not simply praise or criticize politicians for their efforts to expand pre-kindergarten.

Journalists must understand both the fiscal challenges their state faces along with what makes an effective pre-kindergarten program, how many children it will reach and what the obstacles to success and expansion are. There are legislative reports and several sites that help define what a quality pre-kindergarten looks like that are worth consulting for broader perspective.

This editorial showed homework was done.

(Efforts to improve the lives of children gaining traction in Maine)

The Times Record of Maine put a number of trends together this week in an article that looked at efforts to improve the lives of children in a state where child care providers rank 596th out of 647 detailed occupations, where 40 percent of the youngest children remain unserved by formal child care programs and where the percentage of children living in low-income families has doubled over the last 10 years.

These kinds of articles play an important role in helping the public understand the importance of early childhood education and how and why the state is lagging. The article pointed to a number of ways state officials and others are concerned about Maine's children.

Their concerns and their collective ideas and input helped lead to the creation of a new bill, "An Act to Invest in Maine's Young Children.''.

The Times Record story is ripe with possibility for follow-up; for example, it notes that early childhood providers in the state often shy away from getting more education themselves because of the high cost and lack of financial incentive. Then there are questions about the state's screening process and problems it has identifying students who are at risk or have disabilities. It would be nice to get the voices of childcare workers, teachers and parents in future articles to help give the public an even better feel for these issues.

Stories about the insanity of Manhattan parents who become distraught when there aren't enough $30,000 a year kindergarten spots for their offspring always make good headlines and copy. I certainly did my share of them over the years as a reporter covering New York City, and The New York Times weighed in on the trials of the under-5 set today.

But I wish just once a reporter would take the time to truly explain WHY public education options are shunned (class size? teacher quality? facilities? student population? after school programs?) and why-- and if -- the private schools provide a better education. What curriculum do they use? How qualified are their teachers and what kind of training did they receive? How are children evaluated? Are methods for teaching reading and math much different than what is offered in public school, and if so how?

There are some obvious advantages that private schools like the Mandell School, highlighted in the Times for its efforts to expand; have -- for example, a ratio of five teachers for each student, impossible to achieve in a public school

The story says the school focuses on "teaching to each student's strength and weaknesses,''' although there was no explanation of how that might work.

One reference point the Times managed to include -- the private school competitive chaos impacts only a very small percentage of parents in a city where some 1.1 million students attend pubilc school vs. 150,000 in private. But these stories would be so much better if tthey are more than a glance at the concerns of the wealthiest Manhattanites.

Why not use the opportunity to ask some probing questions about what makes private education so much different than public school? If there is such a rush to expand private school in the city, a question is begged -- what choices exist in the public school system that are driving this trend at a time when Wall Street revenues and bonuses are falling? Are all the reforms promised by New York City Schools Chancellor Joel Klein disappointing parents, or are many scared off by stories of how hard it was to get into a public pre-kindergarten this year?

(They may like the same snacks at U.S. children, but British kindergartens may be more prepared academically, reporter finds)

Associated Press education reporter Nancy Zuckerbrod had to ask herself a very important question this month as she prepared to move her kindergarten age daughter to London, one that has implications for the way U.S. pre-schoolers learn.

Was the year Zuckerbrod's daughter spent mastering monkey bars and drawing planets in her Washington D.C. area pre-school doomed to leave her behind compared with her peers in London, who were expected to master fractions, telling time, counting in 5's up to 50 and more academic tasks? And if so, what did that say about the quality of pre-school in the U.S. compared with early education in England?

One important point Zuckerbrod raised: U.S. fourth-graders were not found lagging behind England on recent international reading studies . So what distinguishes the way the two countries teach early education and how different are the goals? Zuckerbrod, who decided against the teacher's suggestion of leaving her daughter behind for another year, now has a front row seat to answer some of these questions first hand. It will be interesting to see any follow-up that includes research, data and some questioning of the different approaches.

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.

Sam Dillon's front-page piece in today's New York Times offers education journalists a guide to the early care and education stories that will bear watching in the coming year and also a list of some of the key experts and resource people.

Over the past few weeks I've talked to a number of Washington education folks involved in the transition and they all have told me that, whatever the economic situation, President-elect Obama's plans to invest in early education will very likely go forward. If the federal government does become a significant source of funding for preschool, it would redefine the relationship between the federal government and parents and families.

A little more on the sources in the article:

Barbara Bowman happens to be the mother of Valerie Jarrett, a key Obama adviser. She also is a legendary figure in the field of early childhood education. She was one of three founders of the Erikson Institute, the nation's premier graduate school for child development, was a 2005 winner of the McGraw Prize and today is the head of the Chicago Public Schools' Office of Early Education. Chicago superintendent of schools Arne Duncan, Obama's nominee for Secretary of Education, no doubt learned a lot from Dr. Bowman and now will be charged with helping carry out the president's agenda on that issue which, by the way, Duncan had a big hand in developing.

Cornelia Grumman, a former Pulitzer Prize-winning Chicago Tribune editorial writer, heads up the First Five Years Fund. The fund is dedicated to promoting investments in expanding early learning services for children birth to age 5. She keeps close track of what's going on nationally on these issues.

Libby Doggett, the executive director of Pre-K Now, will be a good source on how the federal efforts connect with what states are doing in preschool. Pre-K Now advocates for universal pre-kindergarten.

Bruce Fuller of the University of California, Berkeley is a good source as well. Fuller will voice concerns about using public funds to make preschool available to all, regardless of income. This will be something to watch in the administration's specific proposals. Most state programs now are targeted to the poor.

Sharon Lynn Kagan of Teachers College is a leading policy expert on early education who has studied pre-kindergarten quality extensively. Look for a paper from her on how the federal government can invest in high quality programs out soon from the Center on Education Policy.

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

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

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

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

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.

I hope ABC News doesn't try to pass off its Friday night special, co-produced with the Reason Foundation, as journalism. One of the segments of the ABC special is on universal preschool, which the libertarian Reason Foundation opposes, loudly and often. That's fine. We like a plurality of views in America. Otherwise, how could Rush and the many far-right ideologues dominate talk radio? But how does a legitimate news organization, assuming that ABC News still is one, co-produce a report with a foundation like Reason that has been one of leading voices battling universal preschool?

The ABC report is based on videos produced by Reason.tv, which is an arm of the Reason Foundation. The videos are part of what Reason.tv calls "The Drew Carey Project." Yes, Drew Carey the comedian. I guess that if Al Franken can be a U.S. Senator, Drew Carey can be a cranky commentator. The main voice in the video is Reason's Lisa Snell.

Here are the reasons Snell and others give for opposing universal preschool:

1. Family day care providers will be put out of business. The person who makes this argument runs a family day care and says that she doesn't have time to get a bachelor's degree.
2. Universal standards, that would come with universal funding, would cause children to "lose out on the magic that is preschool."
3. Non-profit operators would lose out, because they couldn't compete with free, high quality preschool.
4. Choice and competition has given us successful day care operations and preschools and the government support would upset the preschool free market.
5. As she's argued many times, Snell says that if universal preschool worked so well then Oklahoma, which has one of the most successful such programs, would have higher school level test scores.
6. She also says that, if government funding were good for education, then the K-12 system would be more successful. That it is not, in her view, means that government spending will ruin preschool too.

It's a hodgepodge of ideas that celebrate unregulated markets, privatization, competition and so on. Haven't we been trying those ideas for the last 30 years? Early childhood education sector is probably the sector that has embraced these ideas the most. And one would have to be slavishly ideological to argue that it's worked out well so far. Much of the child care in this country is so bad that it's actually harmful to kids. Many family preschools are run by people with little or no formal education. Kids spend lots of time watching TV. Many state-funded preschools offer very poor quality as well. And, despite the bad quality, parents don't have a choice. They have to work. They need to have a safe place for their children. They hope that it is at least somewhat educational. Some private preschools are great, of course. So are some child care centers. But there aren't enough of them and middle-income families often can't afford them.

Edward Zigler, the Yale eminence grise of preschool and childcare, speaks in the Drew Carey video in favor of providing high quality preschool. He says studies find that the average quality of day care in the U.S. is between poor and mediocre. He says that getting kids ready for school is the nation's biggest challenge. He doesn't disagree that many public school need to improve. But he doesn't think that excuse should be used to refuse to help children get ready to succeed academically.

In the interests of full disclosure, the Pew Charitable Trusts, which supports universal preschool, has been a supporter of the Hechinger Institute. The Hechinger Institute does not endorse universal preschool. It does endorse, however, high quality journalism. And this is not journalism. And ABC News, and Stossel, shouldn't claim that it is.

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

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

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

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

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

EarlyStories keeps a close watch on the way journalists cover -- or ignore -- early childhood issues. The majority of stories we see tend to focus on funding battles, so it comes as a nice surprise when we come across stories that take us into classrooms. It's especially critical at a time when federal stimulus dollars will funnel $100 billion into early childhood education, public schools and colleges -- the largest one-time amount earmarked for education in U.S. history.

Ryan Blackburn of the Athens Banner Herald in Georgia this week wrote the kind of story that allows the public to get a sense of what is happening inside a pre-kindergarten program and why it might be important. The story included an interview with the teacher describing exactly what students should know by this time of year -- for example, they should be able to recognize small from large and be able to name the things they see in at least 30 pictures.

The small, but nonetheless important detail gives the public a sense of what students should be learning in pre-k, and it describes how the teacher is tracking the progress of each student to decide if they need extra help in a summer program before they start kindergarten.

"In kindergarten, there's less self-directed play, called center time, than pre-K students are accustomed to,'' Carolyn Wolpert, an Early Reading First coordinator, told Blackburn. "There's also more math and science concepts they must learn, so the more chances they get to prepare for the first day of class in the fall the better off they'll be.''

So now the reader can understand what children need to be ready for kindergarten. For another illustration of how critical the early years are, check out Maria Glod's Washington Post story about student performance on on the National Assessment of Educational Progress exams, showing that nine-year-olds posted the highest scores ever in reading and math in 2008.

But as Sara Mead over at Early Education Watch notes,"the real test is whether the today's 9-year-olds will sustain their pre-k and elementary school learning gains into middle and high school. It's too early to say with any confidence that they will (our middle and high schools do need to improve their performance) but it's also much to early to assume they won't. Educators and policymakers must work to continue to build on the improvements we have made in the preK-3rd years, by expanding access to quality pre-k, full-day kindergarten, and implementing aligned, high-quality curriculum and instructional programs across the preK-3rd continuum..."

That gives journalists a charge: visit these classrooms and find out what the teachers are trying to accomplish. Follow up, and see how the children who attended the programs do when they get to kindergarten, and ask teachers if they have noticed a difference. Ask for studies, and try to find out if school districts are tracking progress -- and if so how. All this will go a long way toward helping the public understand what happens during these critical early years.

Journalists covering early childhood education may want to check out a national report to be released from Pre-K Now that will be available on Tuesday, May 5th.

The annual report will address how governors from a range of states are planning to fund pre-kindergarten programs. The report will also help journalists see instantly which governors are not pushing to fund voluntary pre-kindergarten programs, and to take a look at how much those who are planning to fund such programs have earmarked.

"Leadership Matters: Governors’ Pre-K Budget Proposals FY10,” is a good tool for helping journalists track how states compare and examine national and state spending trends. It will be available starting at 10 a.m. at www.preknow.org.

EarlyStories urges journalists to see the report as a starting point. There is no substitute for visiting pre-k and other early childhood education programs to help understand and explain to the public what is happening.

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.

Universal Pre-K for all? Not so fast, says Chester E Finn Jr., a former assistant secretary of education and president of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.

At a time when politicians from President Barack Obama to governments are pushing the concept that all American children should receive at least a year of government funded pre-school and being applauded for their position, Finn is urging skepticism in a new book, entitled: "Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut."

"For all its surface appeal, universal preschool is an unwise use of tax dollars,'' Finn writes this week in the Washington Post. "In a time of ballooning deficits, expansion of preschool programs would use large sums on behalf of families that don't need this subsidy while not providing nearly enough help to the smaller number of children who need it most. It fails to overhaul expensive but woefully ineffectual efforts such as Head Start.''

Finn's views are likely to be challenged and questioned in the coming weeks -- as they almost always are. Yet it's important for journalists covering pre-kindergarten to be aware of arguments against universal pre-kindergarten when reporting on both the new federal and state push for early childhood education expansion. The story of pre-k should not be told entirely from the viewpoint of advocates and politicians.

As EarlyStories often points out, there is no substitute for visiting existing programs and looking for research on their impact. If none is available, journalists can ask kindergarten and educators in early grades what they've noticed about students who have been enrolled in pre-kindergarten programs vs. those who have not. Also, what are the costs associated with universal pre-k and who is monitoring the quality? Who benefits the most? And given the financial bind many states are in, what will other education programs have to be sacrificed to expand pre-K?

What kind of a difference can high-quality pre-school make in the lives of the poorest and most disadvantaged children? This is no small question. EarlyStories poses the concept as a reminder of what journalists must keep in mind at a time when President Barack Obama is pushing an expansion as part of his broader education agenda.

Educator and author Gordon MacInnes lays out lessons on the difference a federal role can make by examining what happened in high-poverty New Jersey school districts that have shown significant improvement by focusing on early literacy. His piece in Education Week describes how borrowing the practices of an intensive early literacy program in pre-school has led to improvements that can be seen all the way through eighth grade.

MacInnes, who devoted four decades to government service and leadership on issues related to education, poverty, and urban living is also realistic about the obstacles of establishing successful pre-school programs. Those obstacles and the political and financial fights are often the focus of media coverage.

"Expanding high-quality preschool opportunities is a much more complicated endeavor than it may at first appear," MacInnes writes. "Two major obstacles are usually overlooked: The leadership in many urban districts does not accept the connection between a quality preschool opportunity and stronger literacy; and early-childhood education is still a stepchild in most universities, state education departments, and district headquarters."

MacInnes' remarks open the door for many questions to be asked of school superintendents, even though journalists who cover K-12 school systems don't tend to focus on pre-school, unless there is a battle involved. Why nost ask superintendents exactly how they view the importance of pre-school and what connection they see to achievement later on? In districts with established programs, is anyone studying how students do later on or tracking the difference in achievement between those who have been in pre-school vs. those who have not?

Finally, if program claims that it has successfully improved early literacy, what is the evidence beyond test scores? What do successful early literacy programs look like in action? What is the curriculum, what books are used and how are the teachers being trained? What are the expectations for the children?

New Jersey journalists are likely to have taken on many of these questions while covering Abbott v. Burke, the nation’s most prescriptive and sweeping state supreme court ruling on school finance. MacInnes served from 2002 to April 2007 as assistant commissioner for Abbott Implementation for the New Jersey Department of Education, so he's clearly familiar with what went wrong and right in the quest to improve academic achievement in the state’s poorest cities.His piece this week poses larger questions that are relevant to coverage of this issue nationally, especially as it becomes a priority in the Obama administration.

As EarlyStories anticipated, it didn't take long for opposition to Chester Finn's opinions on universal pre-kindergarten to emerge. Finn's op-ed, "Slow the Preschool Bandwagon,'' appeared on May 15 in the Washington Post, introducing some of the arguments against universal pre-k that appear in his new book, "Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut.''

Finn, a former assistant secretary of education who is president of the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation,has already generated two letters of objection, and Sara Mead of Early Ed Watch questioned some of his assertions this week as "just plain wrong.''

Finn responded here.

Finn's views are not expected to be popular at a time when politicians and President Barack Obama are pushing government to fund pre-school, but they must be considered by journalists who are exploring pre-k issues and need to understand the arguments against expansion.

Susan Urahn, managing director of the Pew Center on the States, said Finn had "inaccurately assessed the effort to secure high-quality, voluntary pre-kindergarten education,'' noting that it would be wrong to focus such programs only on low-income students.

And W. Steven Barnett of the National Institute for Early Education Research weighed in, noting that Finn's approach is not one the U.S. can afford at a time when 1 in 10 children are dropping out of high school. "....good state pre-K programs improve the readiness of all students,'' Barnett wrote.

Without even a nod to his new book, an editorial in the The Examiner of San Francisco managed to pick up on many of the arguments Chester E. Finn Jr. has been making in his new book "Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut." (Hoover Press, 2009)

The editorial noted that "there is no evidence that expanding the time American children spend in state-run schools will produce any educational benefits at all,'' an assumption that many educators, researchers and pre-kindergarten advocates vehemently disagree with. Journalists who are covering this issue have to challenge such views by finding an array of research and visiting programs and classrooms to see what is -- or is not -- happening.

The editorial notes that President Barack Obama's top domestic goal is government-financed preschool for all 3-and 4-year-olds and concludes that his "Zero to Five'' initiative would most likley "drive small, privately owned preschools out of business in order to create more jobs for NEA members, who will be the real beneficiaries of this latest educational scam.''

The editorial has already produced some nasty disagreement; one comment on the Examiner site complained about misinformation and suggested that all the writer can do "is pound your highchair."

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

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

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

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

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

EarlyStories spends a lot of time urging journalists to go out and visit pre-kindergarten and early childhood programs to see first hand what is, or is not happening. We came across a article that takes this advice even further with some thoughts on why pre-k teachers turn over so rapidly.

Valerie Carver notes the reason is they aren't paid enough -- their average salaries are less than $22,000 a year -- and don't earn enough benefits to deal with the demands of the job.

Some states also require that they hold a bachelor's degree; those who don't will make even less. There are different schools of thoughts and a good deal of research and solid recommendations on this topic for journalists, who should take a good look at what teachers are, or are not doing, when they visit programs -- and ask what kind of credentials they have.

The reason high turnover rates are a concern, Carver notes, "is that preschoolers have poorer outcomes and less stability. Studies show consistently that high turnover lowers the quality of preschool altogether - not good news for these crucial and delicate years."

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

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

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

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

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

EarlyStories often pushes journalists to spend time visiting early childhood classrooms and to see the area as a rich source of story ideas. Sometimes it takes a little jump start to see the connection, and that's why it's an excellent idea to apply for the Journalism Center on Children & Families conference in September "Ladder of Success:Covering Early Childhood Learning.''

Competitive fellowships are available that include travel subsidies, and the 20 journalists who attend will have a chance to hear from some of the top experts in the field. Topics will include the debate about who should attend public preschool, how to train early childhood teachers and ways of educating immigrant children. Experts include Ellen Galinsky, Gene Steuerle, Margaret Freedson and Joan Lombardi.

It's a great chance to get out of the newsroom and come back with ideas, sources and perspective on an issue that is gaining increasing importance due to President Barack Obama's agenda of unprecedented federal involvement and investment in early childhood. Anyone with questions can call 301-405-8808.

Rhode Island, the smallest state in the U.S. is about to launch a small pre-kindergarten program for low-income children. It will be the first of its kind in a state that is one of just 12 in the U.S. that don't offer public programs. A story in the Providence Journal of Rhode Island notes that the tiny state is starting small: just four to six classrooms taught by qualified teachers.

The Journal included an interesting quote that goes to the heart of pre-kindergarten education: Quality counts. Larger states with free programs have run into questions and concerns about the quality of their offerings for years.

“Quality is everything,” Robert G. Flanders Jr., chairman of the Board of Regents for Elementary and Secondary Education, told The Journal.. “We are not just talking about daycare, but a quality preschool environment where learning takes place according to certain standards. So it’s terribly important that any program we initiate has quality factors built in and has certified instructors who have the appropriate skills to deal with early learning, and not just people who are good babysitters.”

It will be interesting to watch efforts in Rhode Island, a hard-hit state economically that managed to find $700,000 in the state budget for the program.

Jennifer Jordan of The Journal raised all the right questions in her solidly reported story. But it would be interesting to see stories and hear from journalists who have uncovered quality issues in their state programs. How is success measured? What works and doesn't, and how will the state keep track of progress and problems?

EarlyStories would love to see (and post) some examples.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tiny Rhode Island is a struggling state economically. The unemployment rate of some 13 percent in September is among the highest in the U.S. The state's economic woes are outsized. That is one reason EarlyStories found it so refreshing to see the excellent story the Providence Journal ran this week describing life inside the state's first publicly funded pre-kindergarten program. Education perhaps cannot save the economy immediately, but it's important to continue reporting on education developments in the toughest of times.

The story did everything a well reported piece on pre-kindergarten education should do. The reporter spent time in the classroom, observing children and talking with teachers. The story included the perspective of researchers and state officials. It described how students were admitted and included interviews with parents on the difference pre-kindergarten is making in the lives of their children.

Readers came away with a much better understanding of how and why such programs matter, a story even a state in the grips of an an economic crisis can embrace.

"In Providence, research suggests that as recently as three years ago, almost a third of children arrived in kindergarten ill-prepared to learn their letters,'' Gina Marcris wrote. She added later on that the program "is designed to build bridges between home and school by regularly reporting progress and educating parents about the purpose of their children’s play.''

It hasn't been easy to get such a program off the ground in the tiny state, which was previously one of only 12 in the U.S. without a public program. Previous stories have noted the difficult fight the state had to get the pilot program started.

At a time when public policy discussions are focused on state funding for pre-schools, it was interesting to see a San Francisco parent call for more programs that charge $10,000 or less. It seems that residents of the city by the sea are taking out second mortgages in some cases to afford preschool feels of between $12,000 and $20,000.

Those prices are daunting, of course, but anyone familiar with the insanity of preschool in Manhattan might consider such numbers a bargain.The highly coveted 92nd Street YMCA nursery school program, for example, charges $24,380 for a 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. program; some city nursery schools are charging close to $30,000 for full-day programs.

The upscale urban programs in New York City promise prestige along with sandbox play and alphabet training of course, and parents appear far more concerned about getting in than about the pricetag.

It's not so clear that the same is true of early learning centers in San Francisco; William Shireman wrote in his Chronicle column that "paying these prices is criminal,'' and noted that the kids who most need preschool aren't able to afford it. Shireman's argument is a good one for publicly funded, free pre-school, but he said he'd settle for more preschools "with fees of $10,000 or less that offer safety, warmth, love and a smart curriculum for children from all kinds of families. Not through subsidies but through well-designed programs and regulations that enable and encourage affordable preschool and child care, and give parents a choice."

EarlyStories welcomes new websites, collaborations and any efforts by journalists to understand the complicated landscape of early childhood education in the U.S. The area gets little media attention, so it was nice to see the brand new Texas Tribune taking on the issue in Texas, with this promising start:

"The battles over Pre-Kindergarten are no place for children. Scarce resources and passionate people make for the political equivalent of street fights.''

The opening line by Abby Rapoport sets the reader up nicely for a look at the many divisive arguments and issues that have characterized pre-k education in Texas , which has the largest enrollment of any U.S. state. Rapoport poses some good questions about what works throughout, along with describing some unsuccessful attempts to evaluate programs in the state.

A person outside of Texas might be confused about how pre-school concerns in Texas relate to overall battles and issues pre-kindergarten faces nationally; little context is provided. And while the story attempts to provide a view of what happens inside some pre-kindergarten classrooms, there isn't much evidence of an actual visit that describes what children and teachers are doing, or what teaching and learning is -- or isn't -- taking place.

Still, it's a promising start, and terrific to see new education journalism in any form, with hard questions being asked about both the public policy issues surrounding pre-kindergarten and the quality of taxpayer financed programs. EarlyStories hopes this issue will stay on the radar for the Texas Tribune.

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

"Teach me something."

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

For the first time, Chicago public schools will formally measure just how ready little learners are for kindergarten, by piloting a new readiness measurement, according to a story in Catalyst.

Unlike a standardized test, the tool will gauge how children are ready through a series of observations over time, and by measuring their understanding of concepts such as which words rhyme, the story notes. The tool will help educators gain a better understanding of the quality of the pre-school education a child received.

It would be interesting to see what other school districts do to formally evaluate kindergarten readiness, especially in states where there is no publicly funded pre-kindergarten. There are checklists and exams and quite a few resources that are aimed at helping parents and educators answer the question.

The new assessment tool in Chicago comes as important questions are being raised about the quality of U.S. preschool programs, especially Head Start, which serves more than a million students and is under scrutiny after a major study found gains students make fade by third grade. Experts hope the new readiness tool the Chicago Public schools plans to use will help gauge just how effective half-day programs like Head Start are.

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

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

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

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

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

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