Kindergarten

Don't Forget Children with Disabilities

Sara Mead — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:35:00 -0400

Christine Gralow, a teacher who blogs on the New York Times website, writes about the difficulties parents face in finding appropriate kindergarten placements for their young children with disabilities--particularly autism. Although she's focused on New York, the problems she describes--complex bureacratic hoops, difficulties obtaining appropriate services for children, lack of space in appropriate programs, and inequities in the services offered to children whose parents are less affluent or savvy--are hardly unique to that city. The issues that Gralow describes can be particularly problematic for children in the early years, because young children with disabilities can't afford to waste learning time while their parents struggle with school districts to get them services. As states and school districts invest in early education reforms, they need to ensure that those reforms address the needs of children with disabilities and their families. Particular attention needs to be paid to alignment of services for children with disabilities, so that they continue receiving appropriate services when they transition from pre-k to kindergarten or from grade to grade.

Beyond Redshirting: The Case for PK-3 Alignment

Sara Mead — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:51:00 -0400

Over the past few weeks we’ve looked at kindergarten redshirting, when parents delay children’s entry to kindergarten for a year after the child is eligible to start kindergarten because they don’t think the child is ready for school yet. Overall, the evidence suggests that holding a child back a year is unlikely to confer lasting educational benefits, and does carry potential costs parents may not be aware of. Yet ultimately this is a personal choice for parents, often a difficult one, and we respect the choices that individual parents make based on their children’s needs and the options available to them.

Yet it’s precisely because kindergarten redshirting is such a fraught topic that we feel compelled to point out it doesn’t have to be. While necessary for some children, in many cases kindergarten redshirting is a blunt response to challenges that can be better address in other ways, namely through better pre-k access, pre-k through early elementary alignment, and more customized educational approaches.

Ultimately, kindergarten redshirting is based on two flawed assumptions: First, that there are and must be stark distinctions between preschool and kindergarten; Second, that “readiness” for school is a characteristic of the child. These two assumptions can produce the ridiculous conclusion that, when a child is lagging his peers, we should deny him access to opportunities to develop skills in the areas where he lags, rather than offering him more intensive support in those areas.

To be sure, kindergarten and pre-k aren’t identical. The skills and knowledge children are mastering at ages 3 and 4, and they way teachers convey those skills and knowledge to them, are different from, and build the foundations for, those they learn as 5-year-olds in kindergarten. But there shouldn’t be a stark divide between “pre-k” that is not school on the one hand and “kindergarten” that is school on the other. Rather, the skills and knowledge children learn in kindergarten should build seamlessly on top of those they learned in pre-k. Both pre-k and kindergarten should combine both “school-like” features—such as qualified teachers; a set curriculum focused on building children’s language, literacy, math, and social-emotional skills; and regular, developmentally-appropriate formative assessments—with “non-school” features, such as learning through play, teaching techniques that are responsive to children’s desire and interests, and a strong focus on social-emotional development rather than just academics. When pre-k and kindergarten programs are truly aligned, then the jump between pre-k and kindergarten is not as great, and “whether or not Johnny is ready” becomes less of an issue.

Of course, entering kindergarten is a bigger jolt for children who haven’t previously attended quality pre-k programs—that’s one reason we support policies that expand access to quality pre-k, which can help take the redshirting issue off the table by developing children’s skills and knowledge so that they are ready for kindergarten by age five. Schools can also help parents who want to keep their young children, by providing outreach and information that helps parents understand early childhood development and what children will be expected to learn in the kindergarten classroom.

Even with high-quality pre-k, not all children will have reached the same level of development and achievement by the time they’re scheduled to enter kindergarten. And that’s why it’s important to realize that “school readiness” isn’t just a matter of 5-year-olds being “ready” for kindergarten, but of schools being ready to support learning for the variety of levels at which children come to them. This means providing more supports for students, families, and teachers—such as ongoing professional development and mental health consultation. It also means greater customization, which goes hand-in-hand with alignment. Effective early educators and early education programs know how to tailor attention to individual children’s developmental levels and needs, even within the context of a classroom where children are achieving at very different levels. This customization can also support greater alignment, by breaking children’s academic progress down into a continuum of levels that are much more fine-grained than grades, and stretching that continuum across multiple grades, so that children progress through the levels at their own pace, but ultimately reach the end of it. Technologies that allow teachers to assess children’s learning in real time and tailor instructional approaches to where children are at also play a role here.

This raises an important point: The issues involved in kindergarten redshirting are very similar to those involved in equally contentious debates over grade retention in the early grades, and improving PK-3 alignment also provides new ways to deal with some of those challenges. In his book Building Blocks, Gene Maeroff profiles a few schools that have taken this approach to the next level, offering multi-grade classrooms and flexible groupings that allow children to take the time they need and progress and different paces in different subjects.

PK-3 alignment is far from easy. It requires changes in curriculum, instructional strategies, and how we operate schools. But ultimately it provides a better way to support children in the early grades, to address many of the challenges we face during those years, and to help keep children from falling through the cracks early on.

Featured Abstract: Kindergarten Redshirting

Sara Mead — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:55:00 -0400

A new study by economists David Deming and Susan Dynarski suggests that the trend towards delaying children's entrance into kindergarten (commonly known as kindergarten redshirting) may be partially to blame for the stagnation in higher education attainment for American youth:

Forty years ago, 96% of six-year-old children were enrolled in first grade or above. As of 2005, the figure was just 84%. The school attendance rate of six-year-olds has not decreased; rather, they are increasingly likely to be enrolled in kindergarten rather than first grade. This paper documents this historical shift. We show that only about a quarter of the change can be proximately explained by changes in school entry laws; the rest reflects "academic redshirting," the practice of enrolling a child in a grade lower than the one for which he is eligible. We show that the decreased grade attainment of six-year-olds reverberates well beyond the kindergarten classroom. Recent stagnation in the high school and college completion rates of young people is partly explained by their later start in primary school. The relatively late start of boys in primary school explains a small but significant portion of the rising gender gaps in high school graduation and college completion. Increases in the age of legal school entry intensify socioeconomic differences in educational attainment, since lower-income children are at greater risk of dropping out of school when they reach the legal age of school exit.

Deming and Dynarski's logic is straightforward: Children (particularly boys) who are held back a year before entering kindergarten are a year older than their peers, which allows them to legally drop out of school a year earlier than they could have if they had started kindergarten when they were eligible, depressing educational attainment. The researchers also provide a helpful look at state policie changes moving up the cut-off date by which children must turn five in order to enter kindergarten, and the role they play in delayi8ng children's kindergarten entry. Many educators recommend redshirting children--partiuclarly boys--who have late birthdays or seem to lag their peers in language or social-emotional development. Parents need to make their own decisions based on their individual child's circumstances and needs, as well as what supports the school can offer, but this evidence should lead some parents and policymakers to think twice about delaying kindergarten entry.

Political Nonsense From The Other Side: The Gay Marriage-Kindergarten Gambit

Joe Mathews — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 19:35:00 -0400

Backers of Prop 8, the California initiative to ban gay marriage, write in an argument submitted for the official November ballot pamphlet that if their measure does not win, kindergarten teachers would be required to teach about gay marriage. (And specifically, to teach there is no difference between gay marriage and opposite-sex marriage). The Yes on 8 campaign argues that such instruction would be mandatory because of state law that requires comprehensive health instruction for all grades, K-12. Part of that instruction, under law, requires teaching in "the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage."

Yes, but it takes a half-dozen leaps of logic to an imagined requirement about teaching gay marriage parity in kindergarten. The argument is nonsense. The law says nothing about requiring that marriage be taught in kindergarten, and nothing about how you teach it. The gambit is described more fully in this San Francisco Chronicle story.

Confused About Kindergarten Redshirting?

Sara Mead — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 14:57:00 -0400

I don't often agree with Richard Whitmire*, but I do enjoy reading his new-ish blog, "Why Boys Fail?" Richard is smarter, more honest, and more data-driven than most other proponents of the current "boy crisis" storyline, and to the extent that the boy crisis has a kernel of truth to it--and it does, particularly for poor and minority boys--he's one of the more thoughtful people investigating that.

But this post he recently ran, by University of Alaska-Fairbanks Professor (and noted boy crisis hysteric) Judith Kleinfeld, makes no sense whatsoever. Like many "boy crisis" promoters, Kleinfeld believes many boys are not developmentally ready to enter school or begin learning to read at age five, and that this is one reason boys tend to lag girls in reading achievement. Kleinfeld has proposed delaying boys' entry into kindergarten as one potential strategy to address the literacy gap. She notes that the practice, known as "kindergarten redshirting," is common among affluent, white parents, and suggests that poor and minority boys, whose parents are much less likely to redshirt, would do better if they were held back from kindergarten too.

Then she does something really wierd.

To support her argument, Kleinfeld links to a recent study that reaches the exact opposite conclusion. In an NBER working paper released this June, David Deming and Susan Dynarski write:

Red-shirting is referred to as “the gift of time” in education circles, reflecting a perception that children who have been allowed to mature for another year will benefit more from their schooling. As we will discuss, little evidence supports this perception...There is little evidence that being older than your classmates has any long-term, positive effect on adult outcomes such as IQ, earnings, or educational attainment. By contrast, there is substantial evidence that entering school later reduces educational attainment (by increasing high school dropout rates) and depresses lifetime earnings (by delaying entry into the labor market).

In fact, Deming and Dynarski conclude that "The recent stagnation in the high school and college completion rates of those in their late teens and early twenties (especially males) is partly explained by their later start in primary school," due both to kindergarten redshirting and to the passage of state laws moving up the cut-date by which students must turn five in order to enter kindergarten in a given year. In other words, redshirting is part of the problem for boys today, not the solution, and following Kleinfeld's advice to hold more boys back a year before starting them in kindergarten would likely exacerbate the boy crisis she purports to want to address. Moreover, Kleinfeld seems utterly unaware that the very research she's citing to buttress her argument, works against it.

This may seem like a small point, but it's important for two broader reasons.

First, some boy crisis proponents have actively opposed expansion of quality pre-k programs because they argue that these programs inappropriately push boys into language and literacy activities before they're ready for them. To be sure, some poor quality preschools--particularly those with less-educated teachers--push inappropriate academic activities on children before they're ready. But the fact that boys lag girls in language and literacy is a terrible reason to deny them access to quality programs that improve their language and literacy skills. If anything, young boys need the boost in language and literacy skills that quality pre-k programs provide even more than girls do. Boys also benefit greatly from the social and emotional development quality pre-k programs support, which can improve their ability to function in a kindergarten classroom once they get there.

Second, Kleinfeld's arguments here reflect a broader poverty of thought and disconnect from evidence that pervades much of the current conversation about the boy crisis. Boy crisis proponents persist in pushing kindergarten redshirting despite the utter lack of evidence that it improves boys' acheivement (see a summary of the research by Deborah Stipek, attached below, for more info). Look at many of their other recommendations to address the boy crisis, and you'll find similar problems, shortages of evidence supporting their prescriptions, or disconnects between proposed solutions and the problems they purport to address. For example, boy crisis proponents also habitually misrepresent or fail to understand evidence from neuroscience and cognitive science about gender and the brain in order to make the case for gender-based educational approaches. Not always, but often, the "boy crisis" simply seems to be a hook for individuals' preconceived ideas and agendas about gender or pedagogy.

Whitmire, in contrast, seems sincerely interested in looking past the rhetoric and ideologies to find real data, real answers and real solutions to the achievement problems plauging poor and minority boys. But he'd do better to stick to writing his own blog posts from here on out.

*I'm particularly less than crazy about his recent Chronicle of Higher Education op-ed on gender balances in higher education and the hook-up culture on college campuses. See Kevin Carey here and yours truly here for more on why.

New Child Well-Being Index Offers Both Positive and Negative News for Youngest Americans

Sara Mead — Thu, 24 Apr 2008 16:01:00 -0400

How are young children in America doing? A new report looks at the data and comes up with some pretty good news—as well as a few red flags. Young children’s overall well-being has improved since 1994, with particular improvements in children’s safety and educational attainment. But other trends—such as rising obesity for even young children and a growing number of low-birth-weight babies—still give cause for concern.

The Child Well-Being Index seeks to provide a holistic assessment of how children and adolescents from birth through age 17 are doing today, how children’s welfare today compares to the past, and trends over time. To produce the CWI, researchers from Duke University compile and analyze longitudinal data on nearly 30 indicators that reflect children’s and adolescents’ quality of life in seven different domains— economic well-being, social relationships, health, safety and behavior, education, community connectedness, and emotional well-being. In recent years they’ve also published annual “special focus” reports that hone in on how specific subgroups of children are doing, or how children are doing in particular areas.

This year’s special focus report looks at the well-being of young children and elementary school-aged children from birth through age 11. Between 1994 and 2002, overall child well-being improved substantially, in part because of large decreases in adolescent criminal behavior, victimization, and pregnancy—leading some observers to fear that improvements in child well-being were primarily and adolescent phenomenon, and that young children’s well-being was stagnating. By focusing just on younger children, this report seeks to determine whether improvements in child and youth well-being were in fact limited to adolescents, and finds good news—younger children’s well-being also improved substantially between 1994 and 2002.

Specifically, young children became safer between 1994 and 2002, their families’ economic situations improved, and their educational achievement blossomed. Infant and child mortality also decreased, as did a number of negative health indicators. On the downside, more babies are being born with low birth weights, and increasing numbers of young children are obese—even among toddlers and preschoolers under age five, nearly 14 percent are obese. And, overall, young children’s well-being has been mostly stagnant for the past six years.

A variety of indicators in the report are specifically relevant to early childhood education. A particularly striking positive trend involves full-day kindergarten—the share of children enrolled in full-day kindergarten (as opposed to half-day programs or no kindergarten at all) rose quite steadily from less than half in 1994 to more than two-thirds today. That’s dramatic progress, but it still leaves more than one-in-three children in partial day programs.

The percentage of 3- and 4-year-olds attending preschool also rose more than 10 percent from 1994 to 2002, from less than half to over 55 percent of children enrolled. Ironically, preschool enrollment appears to have declined slightly since 2002—even as states have increased the number of children served in public pre-k by more than 300,000. That finding deserves further inquiry—it could reflect inconsistencies in the data (trying to find reliable information on private preschool enrollment is incredibly tricky—particularly since public and parent understandings of what “preschool” means may have changed over time due to the pre-k movement’s emphasis on pre-k quality). Or, it could reflect real decreases in preschool enrollment, which would raise important questions for policymakers and pre-k advocates.

Positive trends in full-day kindergarten and preschool enrollment over the 1990s are hardly surprising. During the 1990s we saw a popularization of research on young children’s development that has both influenced parents’ behavior and spurred policymakers to focus greater attention on public policies intended to support young children’s development. These behavior changes and new policies seem to be paying off in the form of increased elementary school achievement—since the late 1990s 9-year-olds’ performance on the National Assessment of Educational Progress has improved significantly in both reading and math.

Finally, a variety of environmental and behavior changes that affect children’s health—such as reductions in environmental lead, leading to lower rates of lead poisoning, or reduced rates of maternal smoking—have potentially positive impacts on children’s physical and mental development that may reduce the incidence of some learning problems and contribute to improved educational performance. At the same time, however, increasing percentages of babies born today with low birth weights, which can increase risk for cognitive and behavioral problems, could lead to more children having trouble in school down the road. Educators and policymakers should also consider how schools and early education programs can play a role in reducing obesity rates—such as by providing healthier snacks and lunches or increasing time devoted to physical activity.

Want to learn more about the Child Well-Being Index and what it tells us about how young children are doing today? Then join us tomorrow, April 25, at 10:00 AM at the New America Foundation for a presentation by the report's authors and a panel discussion with experts on early education and children's health. Register to attend here.

Trends in the Well-Being of Younger Children
Co-sponsored by the New America Foundation and the Foundation for Child Development

April 25, 2008
10:00 AM to 11:45 AM
New America Foundation
1630 Connecticut Ave, NW, 7th Floor
Washington, 20009

Featured Speakers

Dr. Kenneth Land
Coordinator, Child and Youth Well-Being Index Project

John Franklin Crowell
Professor, Duke University

Fasaha Traylor
Senior Program Officer Foundation for Child Development

Sara Mead
Senior Research Fellow, Education Policy Program and Workforce and Family Program New America Foundation

Bruce Lesley
President, First Focus

Valerie Kaufmann
Coordinator, Early Learning Branch, Maryland State Department of Education

Lauren Ratner
Director, Family and Community Health Association of State and Territorial Health Officials

Moderator

Rev. David Gray
Director, Workforce and Family Program New America Foundation

Not An Onion Headline

Sara Mead — Tue, 15 Apr 2008 21:45:00 -0400

The headline of this Wall Street Journal article suggests it will tell a much more interesting story than it does. (h/t: reader GT)

Early Ed Roundup: Week of March 10 - March 14

Christina Satkowski — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:10:00 -0400

Boston Launches Birth to Five Initiative

Boston Mayor Thomas Menino announced plans on Thursday for a 10 year program to expand and streamline early education services for Beantown’s youngest learners. The public-private partnership, "Thrive in Five", will align educators, health and human service providers, city departments and the private sector to connect families with local services and ensure that day-care providers offer high-quality pre-k programs. The City of Boston, The United Way, local hospitals and others have already committed $3.25 million for the program. Boston's schools have made significant progress under Menino's leadership, and working to extend those education improvements down into the early years is a logical next step.

New Hampshire Lawmakers Debate Kindergarten Funding

Last year the New Hampshire State Senate passed legislation requiring school districts to implement kindergarten programs by September 2008, but lawmakers still can't agree on how to fund it. Eleven New Hampshire school districts, serving nearly 15 percent of the state’s students, do not offer public kindergarten, making New Hampshire the only state that does not offer kindergarten in all districts.

The primary obstacle has been paying for space to house kindergarten classrooms. The state of New Hampshire traditionally funds 75 percent of the cost of building or leasing new classrooms, but Senate Republican leader Ted Gatseas is pushing to make the state foot the entire bill, estimated at $20 million. In a preliminary vote last week, legislators voted against Gatseas’s plan and gave initial approval to allow districts to delay kindergarten programs by one year.

Pre-K on the Delaware Campaign Trail

Delaware State Treasurer and Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate Jack Markell outlined a comprehensive plan to consolidate and expand early education programs in the state. The plan includes $12.5 million to subsidize 75 percent of the salaries of high-quality teachers working in childcare classrooms. The state would also work to connect private childcare providers with local schools in an effort to align pre-school and elementary-grade curricula. Candidates John Carney and Mike Protak have yet to outline their views on early ed.

Pre-School Intervention Curbs Obesity, Study Finds

Cookie Monster may not be a good role model after all. A new study from the University of Miami finds that targeted nutrition and physical activity programs in pre-k classrooms can instill good eating habits and reduce the risk of obesity for children aged 2 – 5. Children, parents, and teachers in the study participated in a six-month program, where they learned about healthy eating, how to incorporate physical activity into lesson plans, and about the cultural and environmental barriers to implementing a healthy lifestyle. By the end of the program, the percentage of children at risk for overweight dropped from 16 to 12 percent. The study’s authors hope that the findings will encourage the public to think more about the importance of nutrition and exercise in the early years.

Early Ed Roundup: Week of February 25 - February 29

Christina Satkowski — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 16:52:00 -0500

Idaho Legislature Considering Pre-K

Idaho lawmakers will vote next week on two bills that could be the first steps to developing a state pre-k program. The legislation under consideration would fund a survey of existing pre-k programs in the state, allow local governments to levy funds for pre-k, and establish 10 state-funded pilot programs. This is a big step: Idaho is one of only 8 states that don't fund pre-k, and current Idaho law actually prohibits spending public school funds to serve children younger than 5. A recent survey by Boise State University shows that a majority of Idaho residents support state funding for pre-k while the Idaho legislature has repeatedly blocked attempts to make it happen..

Alabama Pre-K Program Recognized for Community Involvement

The Tuscaloosa pre-k program received National Civic Star Award last week in recognition of the program’s community-wide commitment to pre-k. Local charities, city government, the United Way, and the Alexis de Tocqueville Society have contributed funds to support the program since it was founded in 1992. Today the program serves 299 at-risk four year olds; 150 more children are waiting for the program to secure more funding. Elsewhere in the state libraries in Birmingham recognize the importance of early literacy skills and operate a program to introduce infants to the joys of reading books.

Oregon Approves Full-Day Kindergarten … For a Fee

The Oregon Legislature last week approved a bill that will allow schools to charge parents for full day kindergarten services. Currently the state school funding formula only pays for half-day programs. Some districts use federal Title 1 funds pay for full-day programs, but others offer only half-day kindergarten. Education advocates in Oregon have been pressuring the state legislature for several years to increase funding for both full-day kindergarten and expanded pre-k. Many lawmakers said this week’s move is "elitist" and called on the state to support full-day kindergarten, which would come with an estimated $50 million price tag.