The Bergen (N.J.) Record's 2006 series on waste, corruption and misuse of public funds meant to improve preschool in New Jersey continues to win plaudits. The series by Kathleen Carroll and Jean Rimbach just won the $10,000 Clark Mollenhoff Award for Excellence in Investigative Reporting from the Institute on Political Journalism. Earlier this month, Carroll and Rimbach won the Fred M. Hechinger Grand Prize for Distinguished Education Reporting from the Education Writers Assn. The series published last April relied on state audits as well as old-fashioned buttonhole reporting and identified preschool operators who were taking the taxpayers of the state for a ride. Instead of providing high quality preschool, some private operators spent money on luxury cars, vacations, and gambling while refusing to pay their teachers' benefits or provide good quality settings. The series also won the prize for the best investigative series in the 100,000 to 250,000 circulation category from the Investigative Reporters and Editors organization.

As in New Jersey, most of the states investing in pre-kindergarten are spending money on private as well as public school settings. The series highlighted the need for states to oversee how those funds are spent.

Hilary Clinton's proposed federal investment in pre-kindergarten for four-year-olds comes the week after David Brooks argued in his New York Times' column that Republicans needed a set of big ideas on how to develop "human capital" if they were to have a chance of halting the party's "death spiral." Brooks called for a program of tax breaks for low-income workers, child tax deductions, encouragement of marriage, school choice and...wait for it...investment in preschool.

Here's Brooks' take on the politics: ...

politically, a human capital agenda exploits the divisions between liberal populists and independents. Liberal populists, about 26 percent of the country, believe in redistribution policies. Conservatives and independents do not. Liberal populists believe the global economy is so broken all the benefits of it go to the top 0.01 percent. Independents and conservatives observe that hard work still leads to success. Liberals emphasize inequality. Moderates and conservatives believe inequality is acceptable so long as there is opportunity.

Clinton's proposal is for "universal" preschool--free for the poor, sliding scale for the rest. Brooks was talking about free preschool for what he called the most "disorganized" poor families.

Clearly, the politics of preschool are interesting and worth exploring by journalists. It's not as simple as liberals wanting a social program and conservatives opposing it. The details of the proposals matter--a lot.

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

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

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

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

Some interesting data:

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

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

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?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dems and Reeps in Tennessee are fighting over whether to expand the state's pre-k program beyond poor kids to all kids. Alas, the plea for bipartisanship from the political leaders from both parties who gathered in Norman, OK this week is yet to be heard in TN. Gov. Phil Bredesen, a strong advocate for pre-k, said the national campaign for president is making politics in his state more partisan. Bredesen spoke last year to editorial writers at a conference organized by the Hechinger Institute in collaboration with the National Conference of Editorial Writers. He said then he wanted to roll out universally available high-quality pre-kindergarten over the next three and a half years. He started small with the pre-k program and expanded it over time to maintain high quality. The Reeps in TN apparently haven't heard that message either. They say they don't want to spend more than the $80 million the program costs now to subsidize "glorified day care." Now, were I reporter in Tennessee, I'd test Bredesen's statement as well as those of Republicans. Is the current program glorified day care or is high quality pre-kindergarten?

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.

A new research brief on the Web site of the Foundation for Child Development highlights an important issue that suggests a number of good questions to be asked. The report is from the Association for Children of New Jersey and is called "Embracing the Big Picture: The State of New Jersey's Road Toward a PK-3 Continuum." The piece describes an emerging effort in New Jersey to ensure that what happens in kindergarten for children builds on the high quality pre-kindergarten classes the state offers in its poorest school districts.

I know, sounds boring. But research on pre-k effectiveness often shows the gains made by 5-year-olds fade after several years and many say the reason is what happens in the early grades. There's a lot of meat here. The increases in state pre-k spending around the country are not all going to public schools. Depending on the state, the money pays for classes in churches, community centers, private pre-k centers as well as in public schools. Do the state-funded classes do a good job of preparing kids for kindergarten? Do the educators in the local school district even talk to the pre-k providers? How about when the pre-k is in a public school. Does the building principal coordinate with the director of the preschool? Does state policy require any coordination? Is there any effort to help 5-year-olds make the transition to kindergarten? Any visits to a kindergarten in the spring? Do the pre-k teachers provide any information about the preschoolers to their kindergarten teacher?

Effective school districts pay a lot of attention to making sure kids' transitions--from elementary school to middle school, from middle school to high school--are smooth. The teachers at the next level should know something about the new students they're welcoming. Ineffective ones don't pay much attention and so what happens at each level does not necessarily build on previous teaching and learning. When it's a transition from a setting outside the school district to one inside the school district, paying attention to this matters even more.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thanks to Sara Mead at Early Ed Watch for alerting me to a fascinating article on math education for young children by Herb Ginsburg of Teachers College and colleagues published by the Society for Research in Child Development. Ginsburg is well known in early ed circles for his research in this area and this article pulls a lot together--the math understandings children develop and use naturally, the lack of training pre-k teachers receive in how to build on that knowledge, the fact that many in early ed resist the idea that math skills and knowledge can be taught in developmentally appropriate ways and much more. So much of the talk about education up to grade three focuses on socialization, dispositions toward learning and on preliteracy skills and knowledge. This article convincingly shows that math should be on the table as well, and not just in the form of giving kids blocks to play with (geometry!) or pieces of macaroni to glue on paper in the shape of numbers (hands on!). But the article also is blunt about the obstacles, one of which is resistance to the idea that teachers should "engage in deliberate and planned instruction, an activity some think is developmentally inappropriate."

For journalists, it would make a great feature story to find a pre-kindergarten or a K-2 class where good, developmentally appropriate, content rich math education is occurring. This article (and interviewing Ginsburg) provides a sense of what to look for. Also in this newsletter are commentaries on math education by two other great sources for journalists on teaching and learning in pre-K-grade 3 classrooms: Deborah Stipek, dean at the Stanford ed school and Robert Pianta, dean of the ed school at the University of Virginia.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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 Jackson Clarion Ledger published an editorial last week urging better funding for pre-kindergarten, noting that Mississippi is one of only 11 states without a state funded program.

The responses posted at the end of the editorial made it clear how much opposition remains in the state, ranked 48th in the nation in per pupil spending and 48th in student achievement.

“Government baby-sitting,’’ one individual wrote. “Early childhood indoctrination for the socialist USA. Get them on the big yellow buses to send them to the fascist-run propaganda factories ASAP. Sorry, send your children. Leave mine alone.’’

Such remarks should be worrisome to pre-kindergarten advocates in the state, where Republican Governor Haley Barbour has resisted funding expansions like nearby Tennessee.

Advocates who support the Quality Act of 2008 are now hopeful that lawmakers in the large rural state will include $5 million in the budget to improve existing centers. Money would be earmked for three programs approved in 2006 but never funded: an early childhood grant program, a child-care resource and referral effort, and a “quality step system,” which would pay bonuses to providers who meet higher-than-minimum standards, according to an article in this week's Education Week.

One person who responded to the editorial wanted to know what other states that fund pre-kindergarten are actually getting for their tax dollars. Another complained that the state can’t “get it right,’’ with its K-12 students.

The opinions expressed freely are a window into an issue that merits thorough coverage and exploration.

It's been interesting watching the coverage of the fight for pre-kindergarten funding emerge in two very different states, where advocates -- and taxpayers -- are keeping a close eye on the outcomes.

An editorial in The Tuscaloosa News noted Alabama Gov. Bob Riley's push for an additional $20 million for the Alabama's voluntary pre-kindergarten program, which would allow the state to triple the number of 4-year-olds in the program by 2001.

Earlier this month Riley asked 1,000 pre-kindergarten advocates in the state to walk up to the State House, find their representatives and senartors "and tell them to vote for this budget because pre-K is so crucial to the future of our state.''

Up in Massachusetts, where Gov. Deval Patrick came to office full of promises for an ambitious pre-kindergarten program, economic realities have hit home and derailed much of his education agenda. The Boston Globe pointed out last week that the House is likely to scale back some of Patrick's spending initiatives, including an additional 892 pre-kindergarten classrooms. Patrick no longer is making a big push.

Patrick told reporters the economy has hampered his ability to expand spending, and that there is "no point getting frustrated about the economic times.''

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Wiped out by kindergarten?)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Information, the editorial noted, is power.

(The bus may take off without siblings in NYC)

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

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

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

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

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

A simpler process?

(Affordable day care in Philadelphia hard to find)

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

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

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

(Montana excells in beauty, lags in pre-kindergarten programs)

Sara Mead of New America Foundation did a great job of highlighting two states in the news politically, but way behind in early childhood education. Both South Dakota and Montana, which held primaries this week, do not have any state pre-kindergarten program, nor do they have full-day kindergarten, she notes in her blog: Early Education Watch.

South Dakota's efforts bear watching as well; in February, a Zogby poll released by South Dakota Voices for Children found that 73 percent of voters in the state support a stalled plan to create standards and accountability for pre-kindergarten programs. The program Fight Crime: Invest in Kids is also pushing South Dakota to fund pre-kindergarten.

One reason these western and largely rural states are so interesting to keep an eye on is the attitudes of residents -- and politicians -- who oppose pre-kindergarten. And it is precisely why continued journalism -- and education -- about what pre-kindergarten can do matters so much.

(With pre-kindergarten in jeopardy, more Tennessee children may be learning at home)

Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen had the best of intentions when he laid out ambitious plans to expand pre-kindergarten in the state, but the $25 million program has come to a halt. His plan would have created 250 more classrooms and serve another 5,000 children, according to The Tennessean .

The article quotes disappointed educators and pre-kindergarten advocates, but it's also filled with angry commentary from readers that once again bring home a real obstacle to pre-kindergarten: a public that doesn't trust such programs or understand why pre-kindergarten should be paid for with government funds.

The remarks at the end of Natalia Mielczarek's article show what a long way there is to go toward gaining public understanding and support for quality early childhood education in some areas.

One posting actually suggested with sarcasm that children be taken from their parents after birth and turned back over at 22; another boasted about doing "everything in my power to keep my daughter out of any school or education program that is ran and funded by the government,'' while still another noted that the reason children are falling behind is because "our parents are waiting for someone else to teach their children.''

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

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

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

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