2+2=?

I totally agree with Ms. Mead regarding the articulation between community colleges and 4 year institutions. We should also be aware that many of our early childhood teachers already have a leval of ECEd certification i.e. CDA, or National-CDA. They have been trained specifically in child development, classroom management, cultural diversity and more. I'm not so sure a 4 year degree will bring much more to the 2 and 3 year old classrooms, except a wider range of liberal arts education, which is also a benefit. Many of our early childhood teachers have families, and some second jobs because of the low salary levels. How are they supposed to also manage the cost or the time for higher ed. degrees?

Many of our regulators such as NAEYC, NECPA, Head Start, State accreditors and VPK funders should understand that once an early childhood teacher attains a 4 year degree, who is going to pay the salary deserved? Certainly not the provider, whether private, government, or non-profit; certainly not the parent(s) who are already financially stressed to the max; and certainly not the government with increased subsidies (which have been cut this year).

This is a difficult topic, which has been tossed around for the last several years, and only pushed forward in 2004/05 when NAEYC revamped its accreditation standards. Unfortunately, it comes down to the $$$ needed to support teachers with their higher education; give them the paid flex time to attend classes, take exams and complete homework, while all the time hoping their new juggling act won't affect their everyday job responsibilities in the classroom.

Highly qualified teachers at every age level is a noble goal (and an economic imperative) and I'm happy to see attention paid to achieving it (although the research on whether there is a causal relationship between education level and teacher quality is mixed). I commend you on shining some light on some of the nuanced challenges that we face in building a pipeline of highly qualified early childhood educators. So often (and at the peril of their own objectives) it seems that these types of policies are established at a great distance from where they will be implemented effects will be felt.

I attended community college in California for two years, then transferred to a four-year state university. Had I not been an older student and extremely motivated, I might have dropped out.

As hard as I worked at the community college level, when I did transfer, I immediately realized that nothing had prepared me for the rigor, the workload, the class discussions which I felt were way over my head, heck...even the number of books required for each class...it was quite an adjustment to go from what was essentially a glorified high school environment, straight into upper division classes at the university.

Could my experience be common, and perhaps contribute to the 2+2 problem?

We have been struggling with this issue for many years. The bottom line is that children deserve to have well prepared teachers at every level and as soon as they enter programs outside their family environment. We don't question whether or not a K-18 teacher needs a degree. Research tells us that the development of the brain and opportunities for quality learning is most critical during the 0-8th year. Why do we keep having excuses why we cannot provide all young children with high quality learning experiences? Because young children will need a lower student/teacher ratio there will continue to be a need for other adults in the classroom. Not every teacher must have the BA but it should remain our goal that one teacher in every group (classroom) should have a degree. If we believe the research about brain development and we continue to do nothing to improve the quality of the programs where young children spend their days, then we are in essence saying that children really do not matter.

Raising children in groups is very different from raising our own children. Families do not have 20 4 year-olds (Head Start group size). That in itself tells us that we need highly educated teachers that have very specific skills. We believe that about other applied sciences, so why not child development. The community college has been accessible to the community and the field. It is time for our 4-year partners to join in this endeavor. Students need seamless pathways that build upon the foundation begun at the 2 year college. It is time for institutions of higher learning to step up to the plate and do what is right and what is needed so that all children in this country will be the beneficiaries.

Thank you Ms. Mead for your article. Discussions regarding early childhood teacher education and preparation are so vital. I think that articulation agreements within states and even between states for two and four year colleges is essential so that the pathways are clear and easy.

It would be great to see additional scholarship monies available for early childhood teachers who are in training. Clearly this may not be as realistic a push in this economy.

Another pathway that might be helpful in higher education are programs that allow and promote teachers to work in ece while studying/training. There are many of these such programs in New Zealand where the government has required by 2012 all teachers gain a three year certificate which is similar to a Bachelor's degree in Teaching (without a research component). In these programs, the hours worked in an ece setting are part of the hours of 'study' while the student teachers also take courses, keep a portfolio of their work and are closely mentored.

One argument for increasing training standards for ece teachers is that it may lead to greater pay parity with school teachers. There is evidence that this argument has worked internationally where early childhood teachers and unions have been able to argue and bargain for pay parity due to training, knowledge and skills.