Insuring Pre-Kindergarten for
All Preschool-Age Children in Pennsylvania:
A Policy Analysis
James Coyle
RETURN
edited 4/26/12
Background
The state of Pennsylvania has adopted a policy to insure that all preschool-age children in the state will have access to high quality pre-kindergarten education, provided through a combination of public and private sources. Early childhood education is receiving increasing attention at the state and national level as a powerful tool for assuring success in school and providing a wide variety of social benefits. Pennsylvania has joined other states and national initiatives in an effort to create opportunities for all children to participate in pre-kindergarten programs.
The Office of Child Development (OCD), created during the Rendell administration, is housed in the Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare (DPW). The office is partnered with the Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE) to coordinate services within the two departments which affect young children and their families. OCD promotes access to quality early childhood education by supporting the development of program and curriculum standards, training opportunities, grants promoting the expansion and development of early childhood education and care programs, and partnerships between local school districts, private agencies, Head Start, and members of the community concerned about the needs of young children.
OCD and others in the current administration see early childhood learning, education, and care as having a dramatic impact on school readiness and academic success. The office cites research that supports this belief and other work identifying the significant social benefits high quality pre-kindergarten programming (Office of Child Development, 2005).
Elements of the Policy
Pennsylvaniaís pre-kindergarten policy directly impacts preschool age children ages three to approaching kindergarten age in their local school district. The state is promoting access to early childhood classroom programs designed for three, four, and five year olds not yet of kindergarten age.
A prominent element of Pennsylvaniaís strategy has been defining quality. OCD has defined high-quality pre-kindergarten as programs which meet curriculum, staffing, parent support and professional development standards set forth by the state of Pennsylvania and described in the Early Learning and Keystone Stars standards or by accreditation requirements from the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC).
The Early Learning Standards identify goals and instructional techniques for children in their pre-kindergarten years. They were developed as companion document for the third grade standards published by the Pennsylvania Department of Education. The Early Learning Standards are one link in a series of documents which begin with infant-toddler education (now in draft form), and continue through the primary grades. These documents attempt to address learning targets and strategies which are age and individually appropriate while being linked to third grade, eighth grade and graduation requirements in Pennsylvania. They were heavily influenced by NAEYC work in this area, as well as by guidelines from Head Start and other sources of early childhood educational and professional practices (2006).
The Keystone Stars program establishes minimum requirements for DPW licensed programs, covering curriculum, staffing patterns, materials, and staff training as well as minimum safety requirements. The stars program is linked to NAEYC accreditation, a nationally accepted standard for quality early childhood education (2006).
Kindergarten age varies from district to district in the 501 districts of Pennsylvania. Kindergarten programs have been provided by all school districts in Pennsylvania since the mid 1980ís, but districts are not required to provide them. About 40% of Pennsylvania school districts provide all day kindergarten to some or all of their age eligible students. Those that provide it on a limited basis target children who may be immature or at risk for learning problems. Districts have adopted full day kindergarten because of public interest and in attempt to increase the academic success of young learners.
Public sources of funds include local school districts, the state of Pennsylvania, Head Start and the federal government. Recent public state funding in early childhood education has come in the form of funding for Head Start programs supplementing the primary federal source as well as annual grants to promote state goals for early childhood programs. Accountability block grants, for example, were issued to promote the development of full day kindergarten, smaller class sizes for young children, or pre-k programs funded or provided by local school districts.
Private sources of funding include parents individual purchase of services and program initiatives supported by the Build Initiative, a corporate sponsored program to support quality early childhood education. The initiative is intended to help states construct a coordinated system of programs, policies and services for young children. Sixteen foundations belonging to the Early Childhood Funders' Collaborative (ECFC) provide the primary funding and structure of the initiative. (Early Childhood Funders Collaborative, 2002). Pennsylvania is one of five grantee states.
Pennsylvania Actions Promoting Early Childhood Education
Pennsylvania has taken several steps to promote early childhood programs, although they are not mandated:
Pennsylvania has begun funding Head Start with state dollars, a change from previous practice. The funding expands the number of Head Start programs available and provides training and other quality incentives to improve programs.
Through Child Care Resource Developers (CCRD), now known as the Pennsylvania Keys, Pennsylvania has funded and guided community groups in the development of local plans to serve young children and their families. In Bucks County, for example, the Quality Child Care Coalition (QCCC) is funded through annual grants to increase the number of early childhood programs in the county, promote professional development in the field, interest the business community in early childhood education, and identify obstacles to the development of quality programs in some communities.
Private programs are encouraged to participate in the ìKeystone Starsî program. Voluntary participants are rated from one to four stars, with one representing minimally required compliance, four indicating a high quality program. NAEYC accredited programs are granted four stars automatically. Stars participants receive free training, funding for materials and other program materials and recognition as Keystone Stars holders. The Keystone Stars program has enjoyed a strong response from programs eligible to participate.
Local school districts which qualify because of the socioeconomic status of the population are encouraged to apply for grants to promote an increase in the number of quality preschool placements in their community. The grants are fairly large; come from BUILD, a coalition of private sources, and will eventually need to be replaced by local funds.
Accountability block grants are state funds which can be used to develop K-4 (preschool) programs..
Through block grants and BUILD grants, districts may purchase or directly provide the preschool program.
Research Supporting Early Childhood Education
Research indicates that high quality early childhood education leads to reduced remedial and special education costs. (Barnett, 1996). Children who participated in Head Start programs were found to earn higher scores on cognitive and language tests, display less aggressive behavior and demonstrate improved social skills (Barnett and Hustedt, April 2003). Despite research supporting early childhood education a significant number of families in Pennsylvania do not have access to pre-K programs. (Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children, 2002).
Research documenting the positive long-term impact of early childhood education for children and society accumulates and is frequently cited by proponents. Studies limited to cognitive impact of early childhood education showed limited impact which tended to dissipate through the late elementary and middle school years. As researchers broadened their studies to examine social and societal gains, the findings that early childhood education led to major educational and social benefits was widely supported by a large body of research (Cottin and Conklin 2001).
Policy Impact
The policy enhances early childhood programs by taking advantage of existing public and private resources. For example, by supporting Head Start with additional state funding, the state of Pennsylvania is able to take advantage of an existing early childhood program targeting families in the lowest socio-economic category, and those least likely to have access to quality early childhood programs. Rather than create an entirely new system of public pre-kindergarten programs, the state policy supports and enhances existing preschool resources.
Pursuing a policy promoting access to early childhood education now takes advantage of national interest and support in programs for young children. The research cited above has led to a broad consensus regarding the nature and value of quality early childhood education. Pressures on school district caused by high stakes testing naturally increase interest in having children arrive at school ready to achieve.
Quality improvement projects necessarily address the training and credentials of staff. As Keystone Stars and other credentialing programs focus on professionalizing the field of early childhood education, salaries are expected to increase. The higher training and education requirements will improve the quality of instruction. Higher salaries will attract and help retain staff.
The promotion of early Childhood education and care programs provided and enhanced through public dollars poses challenges. Currently, most parents who seek pre-K programs can and must purchase them privately. Exceptions include Head Start programs, subsidized child care programs, and district K-4 programs which exist in various locations throughout the state in limited form. Increasing publicly funded early childhood education and care beyond the current network places a burden on the taxpayer. Increasing quality of programming is an expensive task which includes increasing salaries, providing ongoing high-quality training, promoting bachelors and graduate level education, and other activities.
Policy Costs, Issues, and Benefits
California considered universal preschool through proposition 82 in 2006. The fiscal impact study showed that tax revenues of 2.6 billion dollars would be used to insure voluntary pre-K programs for all Californians. Proposition 82 was defeated with 60 % of voters opposed to the measure. (Institute of Governmental Studies, 2006). Pennsylvaniaís strategy represents an increase in funding for public education, which will meet resistance even at this level. The cost of a complete public preschool system would be politically and financially prohibitive.
Quality of early childhood education and care programs is extremely uneven. The positive impacts are only found in those programs which meet rigorous standards called for in the various studies, including those described above. Those benefits would not be found by studying existing programs. To insure quality programming for all children, the state of Pennsylvania will need to expand and support a bureaucratic network of technical assistance and oversight. This system will add to the costs associated with state support of programs for young children.
Some researchers are critical of the claims supporting early childhood education. They argue that the failure of studies to identify long-lasting cognitive impact is proof that the promise of early childhood education is a false one. (Olsen, 1999). From an academic standpoint, even supporters of early childhood education agree that this reform alone will not resolve concerns about school performance. Other reforms at the elementary and secondary levels are necessary.
Despite these issues, Pennsylvania and other states make a strong argument regarding the power and value of early childhood education. Universally available early childhood programs will increase childrenís readiness for school. Children who participate in high quality programs will be more likely to achieve the skills needed to succeed in school and will test higher on PSSAs or other state mandated tests.
Research indicates that high quality early childhood programs benefit society by improving overall educational performance, reducing the need for remediation and special education. Additional research shows benefits to society, as well, including higher earnings for adults who were in good early childhood program, reduced likelihood of arrest and imprisonment.
Districts who have embraced early childhood programs see them as a significant school improvement tool and consider the programs to be directly related to their success addressing the requirements of state testing and No Child Left Behind.
Cost poses challenges for every community that will be significant and must be addressed. It will not be possible to assure early childhood education without using existing as well as new resources. Models of early childhood education, which build on existing private and public resources, can be part of a state wide early childhood system. (Barnett and Hustedt, April 2003). In recent years, Pennsylvaniaís provision of significant levels of funding to support Head Start is an example of a partnership approach which uses existing resources.
Private preschools are a valuable resource. It may be more cost effective for a school district to charter an early childhood program in the community than to create a new, isolated program. A model already in use in Pennsylvania allows Head Start funds to flow to existing early childhood centers, which agree to meet minimum Head Start educational and care standards. (Barnett and Hustedt, 2003).
Using a diverse network of publicly supported early childhood programs will allow parents to choose to participate in programs that match their interests and values. Well-designed programs can be a source of information and support, even for parents who do not enroll their children in a state supported program.
Conclusion
Without a statewide policy addressing the need for early childhood education, there will be a continued lack of availability of high quality early childhood programs, especially in communities with large at-risk populations for socio-economic reasons. Lack of access will contribute to decreased readiness for school as children approach kindergarten and first grade age. Without a comprehensive pre-K policy, Pennsylvania risks the loss of long-term gains to society described in research including improved earnings potential and less demand for social services, including the prison system.
Research supports high quality early childhood education as preparation for success in school. State initiatives in early childhood education indicate a strong interest in the needs of young children and the benefits of early learning. The development of a uniform system can assure quality education practices while building on existing private and public early childhood infrastructure.
State initiatives in early childhood education indicate a strong interest in the needs of young children and the benefits of early learning. The development of a uniform system can assure quality education practices while building on existing private and public early childhood infrastructure. The policy of promoting access to early childhood education through a combination of grants, curriculum projects, direct funding and support for existing programs is an effective way to develop a statewide network of early childhood programming without the costly creation of a public system.
References
(2002). About Build. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from Build: The funder's advisory council Web site: http://www.buildinitiative.org/fundersadvisory.html
(November 10, 2005). Office of Child Development. Retrieved November 28, 2006, from Department of Public Welfare Web site: http://www.dpw.state.pa.us/General/AboutDPW/DPWOrganization/OCD/
(September 26, 2006). Keystone Stars. Retrieved November 28, 2006, from Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare Web site: http://www.dpw.state.pa.us/Child/ChildCare/KeyStoneStarChildCare/
Areglado, Nancy (1999) I Became Convinced. Journal of Staff Development 20(1), 35-7.
Barnett, Steven W. and Hustedt (2003) Preschool: The Most Important Grade. Educational Leadership 60(7), 54-7.
Bodrova, Elena, Paynter, Diane E. and Leong, Deborah J. (2001) Standards in the Early Childhood Classroom. Principal 80(5), 10-15.
Claybaugh, Gary K. and Rozycki, Edward G. (2002). Analyzing Controversy New Foundations Press, Oreland, PA. Fall 2003 printing
Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. 1995. Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes in Child Care Centers. Denver: University of Colorado at Denver.
Cotton, K and Conklin, N. (1989, January). School improvement research series: research on early childhood education. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from Northwest Regional Education Laboratory Web site: http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/3/topsyn3.html
Olsen, D (1999, August 10). Education and Child policy: benefits of preschool don't last. Retrieved November 12, 2006, from Cato Institute Web site: http://www.cato.org/research/education/articles/prebenefits.html
Elliot, Debbie (Author and reporter). (2004) Analysis: Alabama Amendment to Remove Racist Language from the State Constitution (Radio Broadcast). Philadelphia: WHYY.
Freeman, Gregory D and King, Janet L. (2003) A Partnership for School Readiness. Educational Leadership 60(7), 76-9.
Goldberg, Mark F. (2000) Committed to High Quality Education for All Children. Phi Delta Kappan 81 (8), 604-6.
Hatch, Amos J. (2002) Accountability Shovedown: Resisting the Standards Movement in Early Childhood Education. Phi Delta Kappan 83 (6), 457-62.
Hobbie, Frances R. (2001) Goals 2000 Revisited: Goal #1. The Educational Forum 66 (1), 50-7.
Neuman, Susan B. (2003) From Rhetoric to Reality: The Case of High Quality Compensatory Prekindergarten Programs. Phi Delta Kappan, 85 no (4), 286-91.
Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children. From Building Blocks to Books: Learning from Birth through 8 in Pennsylvania (2002). Harrisburg, PA.
Quality Child Care Coalition, A Three year Strategic Plan for Early Care and Education, June 2002.
Wohl, Faith A. (2001) Pre-Kindergarten: Expanding the Boundaries of Education. Principal (Reston, VA) 80 (5), 22-5.