A Publication of the National Institute for Early Education ResearchDecember/January 2007 Volume 5, No. 1

NIEER

Quality Rating System

PAGE 4

Latest on Literacy

PAGE 10

FUNDED BY

m a t t e r s

SPECIAL REPORT:The Pew CharitableTrusts AdvancingQuality Pre-K

For All Initiative

When economist MiltonFriedman died in Novemberat age 94, he left a body ofwork that directly impacts thelives of Americans—not leastof them preschool-age chil-dren. People concerned aboutthe U.S. and world economieshave Friedman and his col-league Anna Schwartz tothank for monetarism, theidea that governments shouldcontrol the money supply tokeep inflation in check. Theirresearch implicated govern-ment monetary policy indeepening and sustaining the Great Depression. Credita share of the prosperity ofrecent decades to policiesbased on his thinking.

Friedman didn’t confine

his efforts to monetary policy,however. He applied his considerable intellect to awide range of policy matters.He is credited with convinc-ing Richard Nixon to end themilitary draft and persuadingthe Clinton administration toinstitute a “negative incometax” for low-income workersin the form of the earnedincome tax credit. He was aguiding force in the rise ofthe “Chicago School” ofeconomics, espousing a free-market approach to policysolutions. When Friedmanwas awarded the Nobel Prizein Economic Science in 1976 the presenter noted:“Friedman’s most character-istic feature is his unique

propensity and ability to effec-tively influence and disturbcurrent notions and previ-ously established knowledge.”

Milton Friedman’s effortsto disturb established ideas in education dates back to atleast 1955 when he wrote anessay, “The Role of Govern-ment in Education” thatmarked the beginning of the school choice movement.He believed a case could bemade for a government role inensuring universal access toeducation but saw little justi-fication for the governmentrunning the schools. Friedmanenvisioned a system of gov-ernment-funded vouchersthat could give parents thefreedom to choose the schoolstheir children attend.

Many at the time consid-ered Friedman’s voucherproposal a radical idea. Mosteconomists now believe thatchoice and competition canimprove public education, butvouchers still play little role inthe K-12 educational system.Not so in early childhood.

Friedman’s voucher ideahas been embraced in earlycare and education to a fargreater extent than elsewhere.Vouchers are a primarymechanism for child carepolicy, and number of statepre-K programs essentiallywork as voucher programs.Florida essentially gives parents $2,500 per child withthe barest minimum of con-straints on where they spend

it. At the other end of thespectrum, New Jersey’sAbbott pre-K program pro-vides over $10,000 per childto a system of free educationwith stringent standards inwhich parent choice is moreextensive than in K-12, but is far from absolute.

In 2005, Friedman wrotethat “Sooner or later therewill be a breakthrough; weshall get a universal voucherplan in one or more states.When we do, a competitiveprivate educational marketserving parents who are freeto choose the school theybelieve best for each childwill demonstrate how it canrevolutionize schooling.” In preschool education, thatbreakthrough has alreadyarrived. It is up to us in theresearch community to assessthe successes and failures.

Economics is oftenreferred to as the dismal sci-ence. In Milton Friedman’scapable hands, economicswas anything but dismal. He was as optimistic as hewas persistent. If we adopthis optimism and persistence,we have a good chance atdeveloping his legacy in earlychildhood policy, thoughexactly what that looks likeremains to be seen. n

2

PR

ES

CH

OO

L M

AT

TE

RS

F R O M T H E D I R E C T O R ’ S C H A I R

Milton Friedman: An Economist with BigIdeas and a Big Impact

W. Steven BarnettDirector, NIEER

National Institute for

Early Education Research

120 Albany Street, Suite 500

New Brunswick, NJ 08901

732-932-4350

Fax: 732-932-4360

www.nieer.org

The National Institute for Early Education Research supports early childhood education initiatives

by providing objective, nonpartisan information based on research. NIEER is one component of

a larger early education initiative designed, funded and managed by The Pew Charitable Trusts.

W. Steven Barnett, Director

Carol Shipp, Director, Public Affairs

Pat Ainsworth, Communications Director

Mary Meagher, Communications Assistant

Margaret Sotham, Contributing Editor

Sandy Ogilvie, Art Director

© 2006 National Institute for Early Education Research

Send comments, opinions, and news to editor@nieer.org.

Address Changes: Please include mailing panel on page 12when requesting address changes.

NIEER is a unit of Rutgers University.

NIEER

3

When advocates in NewYork State held a press con-ference in mid-December tourge Governor-Elect EliotSpitzer to invest more in pre-K and other early learn-ing programs, a fresh voicerang out from the podium.

“I stand here as a pedia-trician, prescribing an EarlyLearning Commission at thehighest levels of state govern-ment,” said Dina Joy Lieser,director of Docs For Tots,New York. With that utter-ance, the dynamic in theroom shifted from that ofjust another advocate argu-ing for a cause to somethingmore familiar—a caregiverprescribing a cure. It’s whyLieser and her colleagues atthe fast-growing nationalorganization Docs for Totsare making an impact onearly childhood issues.

Over the past two years,Lieser has become an ener-getic advocate for public pre-K, rallying dozens ofprominent pediatricians tothe cause. Together, they—and their trademark whitecoats—have been makingtheir presence felt amongpolicymakers in the state.Little wonder. As advocatequalifications go, it doesn’tget much better than being a doctor. Polls show peopletrust doctors and accordthem a unique brand ofrespect when they speak out.What’s more, reporters grav-itate toward doctors whenthey have something to say.

That’s why Lieser’s questfor a new commission mod-

eled after those in otherstates where early learninghas been elevated up the listof priorities is receiving cau-tiously positive reviews.When Lieser cites the evi-dence demonstrating theadvantaged of an EarlyLearning Commission, shegets an extra measure ofattention.

The New York Statechapter of Docs for Tots isone of several dozen tospring up across the countrysince the organization beganin 2003. The national organi-zation is the brain child ofGeorge Askew, a Clevelandnative and pediatrician whosecareer path includes teachingpediatrics, and a stint headinga branch of the Head StartBureau. “The organizationwas founded on the idea thatyou begin to save a child’slife well before they reach adoctor’s office, hospital orclinic,” he says. “I could treata sore throat or a bruisedankle, but that wouldn’tbegin to address what chil-dren suffered because ofinadequate access to earlycare and education, poorhousing and poverty.”

Askew, who now serves asthe organization’s executivedirector, began circulatinghis ideas among colleaguesand hit the lecture circuit toraise awareness of how issueslike early education impactchildren’s growth and devel-opment. “It became obviousto me that tons of my col-leagues were champing at the bit to get active on social

policy and address theseissues. They’d say, ‘I’d like toget involved but I don’t havetime to learn the issues or getconnected to effective advo-cates.’ So I decided to startan organization that did justthat,” he says.

Among the organization’stenets is to seek coalitions.Docs for Tots New Yorkchannels its efforts throughthe statewide WinningBeginning, New York, acoalition of some 60 organi-zations dedicated to expand-ing early learning options,birth to age 5. Last year, thecoalition spearheaded the fight to win $50 millionin new pre-K funding in thecurrent budget, the largestnew investment in publicpre-K outside of California.With a new governor, thegroup is now working tomake pre-K part of the state’spublic education system,funded through state aid.

Lieser discovered Askew’swebsite almost the momentit went live in 2003. It didn’ttake long for her to sign on.“We weren’t planning tohave affiliates yet, but Dinawas so energetic, we decidedto go ahead,” Askew says.That year, The PewCharitable Trusts also pro-vided a grant to the doctorsto support their work onpublic pre-K. “That helpedget us connected to themovement nationwide,” saysAskew.

At this writing, the organ-ization has nearly 900 activedoctors in more than 20states, with several activeadvocacy campaigns in NewYork, Washington, Florida,Texas and Colorado. Tolearn more about how to findlocal doctors in your areainterested in advocating forearly childhood education,visit www.docsfortots.org. n

DE

CE

MB

ER

/JAN

UA

RY

20

07

Docs For Tots: A Fresh Voice ForQuality Early Childhood EducationNearly 1,000 Pediatricians Join State Groups to Promote High-Quality Early Learning Programs; White Coats Draw Attention to Cause

As a pediatrician and policy director for Docs for Tots New York, Dina Liesercombines her professional experience and talent for advocacy to press for aneffective early childhood system. She also coaches other doctors.

4

PR

ES

CH

OO

L M

AT

TE

RS

The growth in child careand preschool education,along with the need for fami-lies to be more informedabout quality has spurred theadoption in several states ofsystems for rating programquality through the assign-ment of stars or other qualityindicators consumers areused to seeing for other serv-ices like hotels and restau-rants. According to theNational Association for theEducation of Young Children(NAEYC), 13 states are nowusing some sort of qualityrating system (QRS) and 30others are considering them.With numbers like that, it’ssafe to say the move to QRSis a trend.

Proponents of QRS saythey serve as a consumerguide by providing consumersof child care and preschooleducation with stars or othersymbols denoting compli-ance with various qualityparameters. If effectivelyimplemented, proponentsbelieve QRS can enlistinformed consumers in theeffort to nudge programquality upward while at the same time serving as abenchmark against whichproviders can measure andplan improvement. In manycases, QRS is used to informfunding decisions and achievehigher levels of quality. Theadditive effect of all this, say proponents, is an ever-improving early childhoodeducation system that can’thelp but improve early child-hood learning outcomes.

While there is anecdotalevidence that QRS is having

positive effects on programquality and child outcomes,little research exists to backup that assertion. A study isnow being conducted onColorado’s Qualistar EarlyLearning QRS system todetermine its effect on class-room quality and learningoutcomes and those findingsare eagerly awaited. Mean-while, education experts likeNIEER co-director EllenFrede, sounds a note of cau-tion. “Quality rating systemscertainly have the potentialto act as a positive force, but,depending on how they arestructured and administered,they also have the potentialfor setting the quality bar toolow or providing additionalfunding to better programsfor what they are alreadydoing without increasingquality on a broad scale.Research on implementationand effects is clearly needed,”she says.

That hasn’t stopped statesfrom moving forward withstar-based systems. InVirginia, where GovernorTim Kaine is pushing anaggressive early educationagenda, a system for measur-ing and reporting quality hasbeen incorporated into thepilot program that will serveas a springboard for eventu-ally making state-funded preschool education availableto all 4-year-olds in the state.Virginia is incorporatingQRS into its plans for state-funded preschool educationin the policy conception phaseas opposed to developing asystem later.

Framers of the pilot

program say including aquality rating system right upfront recognizes that achiev-ing quality through regula-tion is important and thatwith increased public invest-ment also comes increasedaccountability. According toKathy Glazer, who heads thegovernor’s working group onearly childhood initiatives,policymakers also hope QRSwill exert a positive effect ingovernor Kaine’s efforts toraise third-grade readingscores, a benchmark he considers critical.

In most states with QRS systems, revenue flowsaccording some type of tieredreimbursements or grantsthat are awarded based onsome measure of quality.Pennsylvania’s KeystoneSTARS system, for instance,offers grants that are calibratedby enrollment size and starlevel attained. Richard Fieneat Pennsylvania State Univer-sity recently completed anevaluation of Keystone STARSand found that centers andhome-based settings withhigher STAR ratings hadhigher scores on the Environ-mental Rating Scales (ERS)and that the system isimproving quality in childcare centers. Classrooms with defined curricula andteachers with college degreesprovided higher quality earlyeducation and care.

QRS systems varies bystate. In Ohio, child care centers and preschools canattain a maximum of threestars. A one-star rating, forinstance, can indicate a cen-ter has achieved better than

the required licensing stan-dard in staff-child ratio andat least one teacher has anearly childhood certificate or degree and the staff com-pletes at least 5 hours ofadditional child developmenttraining yearly. The highestrating (3 stars) indicates cen-ters meet national standardsfor high-quality care, thatteachers have degrees in earlychildhood education andboth teachers and adminis-trators have at least 15 hoursof additional training yearly.

North Carolina, one ofthe early states to establish astar-based system, continuesto lead the way. The staterecently upgraded its 5-Star

system to concentrate onprogram standards and staffeducation. The old systemawarded points in threeareas. One star was awardedsimply for complying with CONTINUED ON PAGE 11 >>

It’s in the Stars: More States are UsingQuality Rating Systems for Pre-KThey Were Originally Developed For Child Care. Will They Work For Preschool?

More parents are basing child careand pre-K decisions on star ratings.

In the wake of the terrorist attacks ofSeptember 11, 2001, there was enormousuncertainty about what the future wouldhold. But shortly after that tragedy, withdeep conviction that children are the besthope for the future, The Pew CharitableTrusts launched a national initiative withthe ambitious goal of ensuring that every3- and 4-year-old has access to a qualitypre-kindergarten education.

Now, five years later, we want to take stock of where we’ve been, how ourstrategy has evolved, and what the futuremight hold. Many people have workedlong and hard to create the pre-K move-ment in this country, a movement builton a long history of commitment to theissue. We have been privileged to workwith many of these dedicated individualsand look forward to continued collabora-tion that will achieve more victories forchildren.

Why did The Pew CharitableTrusts focus on pre-kindergarten?The Trusts believes that one effective wayto invest its resources is by informingand advancing state and federal policiesthat benefit the public. There are manypolicy issues deserving of attention, butphilanthropic dollars are limited, anddeciding where to focus is a challenge.We begin to narrow the field by identify-ing important issues that also meet thefollowing criteria:

• There is a clear goal toward which towork,

• That goal is supported by objective,high-quality research,

• The issue can generate broad supportfrom the public, policymakers and arange of influential constituencies, and

• Measurable progress can be madetoward the long-term goal in three to five years.

After many years of experience in the environment, education, health andhuman services arenas, we have learnedthat advancing policy goals takes time;significant resources; rigorous, nonparti-san research; and sophisticated, focusedpublic education campaigns. In 2001, theTrusts’ board determined that a multi-year initiative with the goal of advancingvoluntary, high-quality pre-K for 3- and4-year-olds fit these criteria.

How is the Trusts’ initiativedesigned?We framed the issue of preschool as anintegral part of children’s educationalexperience, with the power to help reducethe achievement gap and enable morechildren to reach critical early learninggoals and meet their potential. This fram-ing fit into the emerging national con-cern over children’s educational achieve-ment and made it possible for us to bringin an array of diverse constituencies whohad not previously been part of the policydebate on early education. With newresearch, funded by the Trusts and others, we are now reaching beyond education to frame pre-K as an economicstrategy, capable of contributing to thenation’s fiscal health. This increases theinterest in pre-K and further diversifiesthe chorus of voices emphasizing its valueto the nation.

Based on this framing, our strategyhas been to develop objective, rigorousinformation on the costs, benefits andcharacteristics of high-quality pre-kinder-garten and to build the networks neededto ensure that unbiased research informspublic policy debates nationally and inthe states. Our primary focus is on iden-tifying states that have the opportunity to advance this issue, strengthening thecapacity of advocates to disseminate non-partisan research and analysis about

pre-K, and engaging a wide range oforganizations and individuals, includingthose from law enforcement, business,education, early childhood, and physiciansand seniors, to inform these debates withgood data. Our principal partners arePre-K Now of the Institute for EducationalLeadership (www.preknow.org) and theNational Institute for Early EducationResearch at Rutgers University (www.nieer.org), which have provided keyresearch, strategic support and leader-ship. Other major grantees have includedFight Crime: Invest in Kids, the NationalConference of State Legislatures, theCouncil of Chief State School Officers,the National School Boards Association,the Committee for Economic Develop-ment, Education Law Center, EveryChild Matters, Voices for America’sChildren, the Hechinger Institute OnEducation and The Media and theEducation Writers Association—all ofwhich have put their reputations, skilland experience behind this issue.

The Pew Charitable TrustsAdvancing Quality Pre-K for All; Five Years LaterBy Susan K. Urahn and Sara Watson

National Early ChildhoodAccountability Task Force

High-quality preschool is a largeinvestment for states to make. Toensure that children reap the benefitsof these programs, state leaders mustknow that they are effective. To helpthem, the Foundation for ChildDevelopment, the Joyce Foundationand The Pew Charitable Trustslaunched the National EarlyChildhood Accountability Task Force,which is based at the Trusts as part ofits overall pre-K initiative. The TaskForce, led by Profs. Sharon LynnKagan and Eugene Garcia and staffedby Thomas Schultz, expects to releaseits final report in the spring of 2007.www.earlyedaccountability.org

Is pre-K making progress?Thanks to decades of work by many dedicated individuals and organizations,the movement for quality pre-K is takingroot. It is instructive to take a look back.In 2002 and 2003, state revenues plum-meted and virtually every state in thecountry had to cut spending significantlyto balance their budgets. As the NationalConference of State Legislatures noted, itwas the most challenging budget situa-tion states had faced since World War II.It was not the best of times for expandedinvestments in pre-kindergarten, butresearchers and advocates used this timeto build their case and educate the publicand policymakers. As state revenues beganto improve, states moved to support pre-kindergarten, as shown in the map.

Several success stories stand out. Thisyear, Illinois became the first state in thenation to pass legislation providing qualitypre-kindergarten to all its 3- and 4-year-olds. This victory is the result of a fouryear effort that began with local activistseducating all gubernatorial candidates

in 2002 and then working with the newgovernor to fulfill his promise. The stateprovided $90 million in new money overthe next three years and then in 2006 setthe program on a trajectory to serve allchildren by 2011. In signing the bill,Governor Rod Blagojevich said, “Studyafter study and basic common sense tellus that giving kids the chance to startreading early and learning early is thesingle most important step we can taketowards helping them become successfulstudents. That’s why it’s so critical thatevery child in Illinois have the opportu-nity to attend pre-kindergarten and it’swhy we’re making Illinois the first statein the nation to make pre-kindergartenavailable for every 3-year-old and every4-year-old.” Renowned pediatrician T.Berry Brazelton praised the governor,saying “I’m going to be talking about itall over the country…I’m going to beusing Illinois as the example of whatneeds to be done.”

Other states have also taken up thepre-kindergarten banner.

• Tennessee’s governor has stated hiscommitment to cover all 4-year-olds.The state expanded its top-quality pro-gram by 57 percent this year and willconsider additional funds next year.

• Arkansas—a poor state, with a familyincome that is 49th in the nation—nonetheless has continued to expand its new program that is on track tocover 60 percent of the state’s children.

• In 2006, Texas broke a long-standinglogjam over expanding its programwhen it expanded eligibility to includechildren of military families.

• Even Louisiana, despite overwhelmingdemands on its resources, decided tomake children a priority by increasingfunding by $1.5 million.

• Massachusetts has enacted a high-quality pilot program, and in 2006 both houses of the state legislatureunanimously passed a bill establishingpre-kindergarten for all. Advocates hopefor full approval in the next session.

• In 2002, Florida voters changed thestate constitution to require a qualityeducation for every 4-year-old. Whilethe program’s quality standards are notyet at the level that children need,advocates continue to press for theseimprovements.

There have also been setbacks—butin each case, advocates and policymakerscontinue to press forward. In 2006,California voters turned down a ballotinitiative that would have covered all 4-year-olds in the state, citing concernsabout the funding mechanism and gov-ernance structure. However, exit pollsshowed 62 percent of voters still supportedpre-K for all children. Based on this support, the state invested $100 millionin early education shortly after the refer-endum was defeated.

MT

WA

OR

CA

AK

NV

IDWY

CO

NM

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

ND MN

WI

IL

MI

OH

KY

TN

MS AL GA

SC

NC

VA

NJ

VTNH

MA

CT

DE

RI

MDWV

FL

PA

NY

ME

IN

IA

MO

AR

LA

UT

AZ

HIIncreased Investment in Pre-KAnticipated Increase in Pre-KFlat Investment in Pre-KNo State Pre-K Program

Source: Pre-K Now

Legislative Action on Pre-K Budgets FY 2006-2007

“Until all Illinois children

have access to pre-K, we’re not

going to stop beating the drum…

pre-K is an investment, not

an expense, and one that

makes our other educational

achievements more effective.”

State Representative Roger Eddy (R-IL)

In 2004, 14 states increased funding for pre-kindergarten by $204 million over theprevious year. In 2005, 26 states added another $600 million, giving 120,000 morechildren the opportunity for a good early start. And in 2006, 31 states increasedpre-kindergarten by over $450 million—growth supported by policymakers span-ning the political spectrum. In sum, over the past 3 years, states have increased funding for pre-kindergarten by over $1.2 billion.

Individual leaders are also raising thevisibility of this topic as never before,including governors such as Jodi Rell (R-CT) and Phil Bredesen (D-TN); andbusiness executives such as Jim Rohr,CEO of PNC and Rusty Hammer, formerCEO of the Los Angeles Area Chamber ofCommerce. Governor Tim Kaine (D-VA)made pre-K the centerpiece of the educa-tion platform in his 2005 campaign andincluded it in the Democratic response to the 2006 State of the Union address.Yet another marker of how this issue hasgrown in prominence is media coverage—last year there were over 5,000 majorstories on this topic, with the nature ofthe coverage changing over the past fewyears from “human interest” stories toones addressing core issues of qualityeducation, financing and access.

This progress is the result of continuedperseverance by a wide range of individu-als and organizations. State and localadvocates such as Arkansas Advocates for Children and Youth, Strategies for Children in Massachusetts, PreschoolCalifornia, United Ways of Texas, FloridaChildren’s Campaign and the WinningBeginning and the PreK Coalition in NewYork have planned smart campaigns,forged coalitions with many colleaguesand built a reputation for working withdiverse policymakers and the public towin these victories. In Illinois there wastremendous leadership—and unprece-dented collaboration—among three earlychildhood groups, who jointly decided tolead with pre-K while there was opportu-nity to make progress, with the expecta-tion of continuing that partnership onother issues. In California, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation has beenanother philanthropic champion for pre-K, and they have helped develop nationalstrategy. Other key foundations includethe Foundation for Child Development,Schumann Fund for New Jersey, GeorgeGund Foundation, and the JoyceFoundation. Head Start leaders have long made the case for the importance of pre-K for poor children. And manyearly childhood groups, such as theNational Association for the Education of Young Children, have pushed formore and better pre-K.

How long will the Trusts’ pre-K initiative last? Since 2001, the Trusts has invested over$50 million in more than 20 organiza-

tions, with grantees supporting rigorousnonpartisan research and analysis, as wellas public education campaigns to informpolicy debates in over half the states. Ourgrantees have had great success to date,but as is true with all our work, futureinvestments will depend on the opportu-nity for continued progress—which forpre-K looks very promising over the nextfew years. However, at some point, stateswill move from pre-K to a new challenge.That’s the natural cycle of policy change.Our philosophy is to target issues wherethere is a unique window of opportunityto advance change, and when that windowbegins to close, move to the next issue.

In fact state advocates have told usthat, the structure of our pre-K initiative—a tight focus, support for research andpublic education efforts, and engagementof diverse messengers—may well lenditself to other issues. So we would hopeto use the lessons learned from this expe-rience to develop an effective campaignin another area of vital interest to chil-dren, such as some aspect of health careor supports for infants and toddlers—as long as it meets our criteria.

We also hope that the long-termresearch commissioned under this ini-tiative, as well as the advocacy training and capacity-building supported by theTrusts’ funds, will leave a lasting benefitto the field.

What do you mean by “qualitypre-kindergarten for all”?Every state has its own definition of pre-K and will implement that visionsomewhat differently. But here’s what we look for (figure 1):

Our philosophy is to target

issues where there is a unique

window of opportunity to

advance change, and when

that window begins to close,

move to the next issue.

(In the future) the structure

of our pre-K initiative…may

well lend itself to other issues.

Figure 1

Pre-K programs should:• Meet quality benchmarks associated

with improving children’s outcomes,such as highly-trained teachers

• Have a fun and engagingatmosphere that children lookforward to and enjoy

• Encompass all aspects of children’sdevelopment—cognitive, social,emotional, physical

• Include referrals to health andother services

• Help parents educate their childrenand encourage parents to beinvolved in the pre-K program

State pre-K policies should:• Improve both the quality of pre-K

programs as well as children’saccess to them

• Provide voluntary access to a coreprogram for all families who wantpre-K for their 3- and 4-year-olds

• Establish an ultimate goal that pre-K will be available to allchildren, but they may reach that target through a phased-inenrollment that serves disadvan-taged children first

• Offer a core pre-K program for all children and additional servicesfor at-risk children

• Include diverse settings—schools,community-based, and faith-basedsettings—to give parents goodchoices, as long as quality standards are met

• Collaborate with child care to provide the coverage that workingparents need

• Support pre-K not as a stand-alonepolicy but as part of a system ofservices (including Head Start) thatare needed for young children’sfuture success

• Use improvements in pre-K tostrengthen the rest of the earlychildhood system

• Not take funding from one children’s program to pay for another

For more information on the Trusts’ strategy, visit www.pewtrusts.org.

The Pew Charitable Trusts serves the public interest in three major areas of work: informing the public on key issues and trends as a highly credible source of independent, nonpartisan research and polling information; advancing policy solutions on importantissues facing the American people; and supporting the arts, heritage, health and well-being of our diverse citizenry and civic life,with particular emphasis on Philadelphia.

Would the Trusts’ pre-K initiativesupport a broader agenda? Children need far more than pre-K tothrive, and states are tackling a variety of those issues. As has always been thecase, advocates in each state will deter-mine which of the very important sup-ports that children need are most likely tomove in their state’s policy climate. Andbecause states face different challengesand have different needs, they will havedifferent priorities—some will focus on health care, some on child care andothers on pre-K. Many advocates have a broad vision for children—and theyshould because children need a widerange of supports. But as policy expertsrepeatedly advise, what is most impor-tant is that advocates choose some focus within that vision to win real victories for children—one step at a time.

In some states, such as Texas, advo-cates focused on pre-K because they were convinced that it was the only child-focused topic that would move in theirstate at that time. Other states are pack-aging pre-K with selected other servicesin skillful ways—with the Trusts’ sup-port. Illinois is a powerful example ofusing pre-K’s lead message and strongdata to strengthen the entire early child-hood system, since the new commit-ments support an early childhood fundthat devotes 11 cents of each dollar forinfant/toddler programs. In Massachusetts,advocates look just beyond pre-K and areworking toward a combined package ofpre-K and full-day kindergarten. Otherstates and school districts are concentrat-ing on pre-K to third grade given thecritical window of opportunity to solidifyearly learning in those years.

We are also pleased to participate in a new collaboration—joining the PackardFoundation, Gates Foundation and theBuffett Early Childhood Fund in supportof a joint effort by Zero to Three andPre-K Now to develop a vision for acoordinated and comprehensive systemof early care and education services forchildren prenatal to age 5 that foster theirsuccess in school and life. The paper willdocument best practices from select

states in their journey to build bridgesbetween pre-K, child care, infant/toddlerprograms and other family support serv-ices and offer policy recommendationsfor those who are striving toward thisvision.

Two other points are important here.First, no matter which issue advocateschoose to focus on, it is critical that statesnot rob Peter to pay Paul—taking fundsfrom one effective children’s program topay for another. And second, while theTrusts’ pre-K initiative has a specific goal,we are moving towards that target in waysthat we hope ultimately will strengthenthe whole network of early childhood

services. For example, improvements inpre-K, such as better teacher trainingopportunities, can be structured so theyalso apply to those who teach programsfor younger children. And after states winvictories in pre-K, advocates are well-positioned, with deeper skills and experi-ences, to build on that success to advanceother policies needed to create a nurtur-ing environment for children.

The Trusts has now helpedorganize a new project address-ing children prenatal to age 5called the Partnership forAmerica’s Economic Success—does that mean the Trusts has changed its focus? Not at all. As mentioned earlier, the Trusts’pre-K initiative is moving full steamahead. But we’re excited about pursuinga separate but related project to help chil-dren. While the research is clear that pre-Kmakes a tremendous difference, it’s notthe only support children need to thrive.With 11 other funders, we helped start(and now administer) the Partnership for America’s Economic Success (www.partnershipforsuccess.org). RobertDugger, a managing director of TudorInvestment Corporation, is our lead partner and chair of the advisory board.Sara Watson is the project director. Itspurpose is to assess the contribution thatdifferent supports for young childrenmake to the nation’s economy. Thatproject is in the early stages, while thepre-K initiative is a full-fledged campaign.

If the evidence compiled by thePartnership is compelling—and we hopethat it is—we will seek to work with ourpartners to expand the Partnership into amajor campaign designed to advance themost effective investments in children.Just as the Trusts supports projects toprotect the world’s oceans as well as theworld’s old growth forests, so too can we advance a variety of effective, targetedinitiatives that help children grow intohealthy, productive adults.

This is an exciting time for earlychildhood advocates. Our nation has theopportunity to fundamentally change whatit means to provide a quality educationfor all children. Success to date showsthat a focused agenda, backed by goodresearch and fueled by smart strategies toget that information into policy debates,can win substantial victories for children.

Susan Urahn is the Managing Director,State Policy Initiatives and Sara Watson is Senior Officer, State Policy Initiatives atThe Pew Charitable Trusts

While the Trusts’ pre-K

initiative has a specific goal, we

are moving towards that target

in ways that we hope ultimately

will strengthen the whole network

of early childhood services.

The time parents spendwith their children builds the social capital kids drawupon as they develop in life.Observers worry that work-place demands and othersocietal changes are erodingchild-parent time. That con-cern was voiced by noneother than President BillClinton in 1999 when hedelivered, in a speech, a star-tling revelation—parentswere spending 22 fewerhours per week in the homecompared with 30 years ear-lier. The president’s Council

of Economic Advisers hadarrived at this figure byadding the hours mothersand fathers spent in the paidworkplace and comparingthem to 1968. The implica-tion—that child-parent timewas indeed diminishing dueto workplace demands—seemed inescapable to many.It lingers to this day.

Against this backdroparrives Changing Rhythms of American Family Life, anauthoritative new volumefrom the Russell SageFoundation that takes muchof the mystery out of howparents are spending theirtime these days. As is oftenthe case, there is good newsand bad news. Despite moreharried lives, parents are, onaverage, spending more timewith their children than inthe 1960s when more chil-dren grew up in homeswhere dad was the bread-winner and mom stayed athome. This is less so amongthe poor and in single-parentfamilies, however. ChangingRhythms is a report, in bookform, on time diary studiesof American parents overfour decades. University of Maryland sociologistSuzanne M. Bianchi and col-leagues analyzed data fromtime diaries and interviews of1,200 parents in the NationalSurvey of Parents (NSP).That survey has completedsix waves to date—from

1965 to 2000. For many who have wit-

nessed the march of womeninto the work force and risein single parenthood, thenotion that there has notbeen an overall decline in the amount of time parentsare spending with childrenseems counter-intuitive. The story that unfolds fromBianchi’s analysis, however,is one of adults striving tomake time for children in anenvironment where manythings compete for theirtime. Among the compensa-tions parents are making isless emphasis on cookingand housework than in thepast. When children are firstborn, working mothers workless and dads work more tocompensate. Men are helpingout around the house moreand they are spending moretime with children than mendid in the 1960s.

Because birth controlmakes not having childreneasier and society now acceptsthat people may choose notto have children, there hasbeen a change in who is having children. Parenthoodcan now be timed later in lifewhen adults feel more readyto devote time to children.This delay is accompanied bya decline in the number ofchildren mothers have, per-mitting a larger investmentin each child.

In disadvantaged popu-

lations, this is often not thecase. There, child-bearingoccurs earlier in life, forcingwhat the authors call “adulti-fication” of adolescents intoearly parenthood. In manyrespects, family formation isbifurcating along social andeconomic class, with childrenarriving later and withinmarriage among the better-educated and earlier andoutside of marriage amongthe least well educated.

The authors point to two facts that point to themounting pressures parentsfeel: Parents’ total workloadcontinues to increase withparents averaging a 9- to 9.5-hour work day 7 days a weekwhen unpaid work is addedto paid work. Employedmothers average a 10-hourwork day 7 days a week. And, American parents haveless vacation and work thelongest annual hours thanany other country, includingJapan.

This is a timely, compre-hensive, and well-writtenoverview of how today’sAmerican parents allocatetheir time. Besides clearingup misconceptions about thestate of parenting today, itoffers surprising insights intogender equality and parentsbalancing of work and chil-dren. For more information,visit http://www.russellsage.org/publications/books/060110.113159 n

Related Reading

A Testament to How Parents Adapt andSpend Time with Their ChildrenChanging Rhythms ofAmerican Family Life

By Suzanne M. Bianchi, John P. Robinson andMelissa A. MilkieAmerican SociologicalAssociationRose Series in SociologyRussell Sage FoundationNew York, New York$37.50

9

DE

CE

MB

ER

/JAN

UA

RY

20

07

10

PR

ES

CH

OO

L M

AT

TE

RS

newsmaker P E O P L E M A K I N G N E W S

Hooked on Literacy: Why DorothyStrickland Sees Language as Job One

Few educators have thedepth of knowledge andbreadth of experience inearly childhood literacy asDr. Dorothy Strickland. Sheoccupies the Samuel DeWittProctor Chair in Educationat Rutgers University and is

a Senior Research Fellow atNIEER. Her numerous con-tributions to the field of lan-guage acquisition have beenrecognized by organizationssuch as the InternationalReading Association whereshe has been installed in the Reading Hall of Fame.

A prolific author,Strickland’s most recent publications are TeachingPhonics Today, BeginningReading and Writing andLearning About Print inPreschool. Preschool Mattersasked her what she thinksabout the state of early child-hood literacy education thesedays and what can be done to improve it.

Q: Of all the subjects inearly childhood educationthese days, literacy seems to be red hot. Why do youthink it is at the forefront of so many initiatives?

A: Literacy achievement is atthe forefront of accountabilityin our country. For better orworse, schools, teachers, andchildren are measured in largepart by student performancein reading and writing. Atten-tion to early literacy as afunction of school readinessis reflected in early childhoodeducation classrooms and inthe public policy arena. Thefocus is on both preventionand early intervention with aspecial emphasis on childrenwho may be at risk for failure.

Q: Many in and out of education talk about literacyas if it were a fixed concept. Is it? How would you defineliteracy?A: Research on literacy learning and teaching is ever-evolving, resulting in a changing definition of literacy that takes into accountthe increasing demands of allaspects of our lives—personal,social, and economic.

While it is still true thatbecoming literate involvesthe development of somevery basic skills and strate-gies, low-level basic skillsthat involve surface leveldecoding and the recall ofinformation are hardlyenough. It is not only whatwe are required to do withtexts that has changed; thetexts themselves have changed.

We view and generatetexts in endless variety: books,magazines, and pamphlets ofevery conceivable design; let-ters and memoranda arrivingvia fax, e-mail, and surfacemail; images on television

screens, computer screens,and other electronic displaysin our kitchens and offices;not to mention the array ofinformation for productassembly, care, or operation.Today’s learners need literacyskills that help them adapt to constant change. Thus,becoming and being literateis a complex endeavor, and itbegins during the early child-hood years.

Q: What are the compo-nents of a high-quality liter-acy classroom?A: High-quality classroomsare those in which literacylearning is grounded in allthe ways that children learnand grow—physically, socially,emotionally, and cognitively.Play is integral to explorationand instruction. Teachers are keenly aware of individ-ual differences among theirstudents.

Differentiated instructionis reflected through flexiblegrouping in which childrenhave opportunities to workwith the whole group, insmall groups, and one-to-one with adults. A variety of media and materials areprovided for exploration and teaching. These includean abundance of children’sliterature—both fiction and non-fiction—and lots ofmaterials and opportunitiesfor drawing and writing.

The environment in theseclassrooms is rich with print, representing language familiarto children and resultingfrom daily activities and thematic inquiry. Teaching

and learning include, but gowell beyond, basic skills tofocus on problem solving andstrategies for independentlearning.

Q: Can the kind of classroomyou describe serve EnglishLanguage Learners as well as those for whom English is their first language?A: Early childhood profes-sionals in high-quality learningenvironments seek to learn as much as they can aboutthe cultural and linguisticbackgrounds of the childrenwith whom they work. Suchteachers understand thenature of linguistic diversityand provide developmentallyappropriate experiences withEnglish language literacy for children.

Family literacy programsare offered to reinforce theseexperiences and provide con-tinuity between home andschool. Whenever practical,such programs employ staffwho speak the children’shome language as well asEnglish.

Q: The debate over assess-ment of preschoolers seemsnever-ending. How can preschool children’s literacydevelopment be faithfullyassessed and educators heldaccountable?A: Monitoring and assessingchildren’s early literacydevelopment is an important part of a comprehensive earlychildhood program. A soundassessment program can be used to monitor children’s CONTINUED ON PAGE 11 >>

11

DE

CE

MB

ER

/JAN

UA

RY

20

07

>> CONTINUED FROM PAGE 4

licensing requirements. Anna Carter, who overseeslicensing at the NorthCarolina Division of ChildDevelopment, says awardingstars for compliance in theold system amounted to “free points”. Providers whohad achieved a 5-Star ratingunder the old system are nowwrestling with how to keeptheir rating under the morestringent new system. Cartersays inaugurating the newsystem has required a bigcommunication effort with

providers and parents. “Howdo you explain to parentsthat nothing has changedwith the way you deliver carebut today you’re a two-starfacility and yesterday youhad three stars?” Carter asks.

Most states make partici-pation in their QRS programsvoluntary but in NorthCarolina and Tennessee, it ispart of the licensing processand therefore mandatory.Nearly all states with qualityratings include accreditationas a requisite for achieving thethe top levels. Anne Mitchell,

president of NAEYC’s boardand author of the United WayGuide on Quality RatingSystems, says the quest foraccreditation actually gaverise to QRS systems in thefirst place. States recognizedthe huge gap between thenational standards and theirown regulatory requirements.As programs struggled toachieve national accredita-tion, many fell short andstates saw the need to estab-lish levels of achievement.

With so many states nowexploring quality rankings, it makes sense to align thevarious accreditations moreclosely. Through a joint proj-ect, NAEYC, the NationalAssociation for Family ChildCare and the National AfterSchool Association will col-laborate to help states buildaccreditation benchmarksinto their quality rating stan-dards so providers don’t haveto satisfy two separate sets ofrequirements.

North Carolina’s Carterand Virginia’s Glazer are

among those who believenational accreditation isn’tnecessary to demonstratequality in state program. Infact, Carter says that eventhough legislative restrictionson using national accredita-tion as a licensing require-ment have been lifted, herstate is better off for havingone agency oversee licensingand quality assessment. Herteam in North Carolina hasadvised other states likeWashington, Wyoming andIndiana on ways to raise pro-gram quality. She cautionsagainst applying a cookie-cutter approach to qualityrating systems. “We were fortunate that we had othersystems in place (Smart Start,a strong community collegesystem, TEACH, and salarysupplements) before weimplemented our star sys-tem,” she explains. “Not allstates have those supports inplace, so they may be shoot-ing themselves in the foot ifthey try to simply copy whatother states have done.” n

More States are Tracking Preschool with Quality Rating Systems

>> CONTINUED FROM PAGE 10

development and learning, to guide a teacher’s planning anddecision making, to identify children who might benefit fromspecial services, and to report to and communicate with others.

In addition to the ongoing, day-by-day assessments that linkclosely to the early childhood curriculum, there is a growingtrend toward the use of child assessments for program account-ability. These assessments, in which early literacy is often amajor component, reflect an increasingly high-stakes climate in which preschool programs are required to demonstrateeffectiveness (often on standardized measures) in improvingschool readiness and creating positive child outcomes.Unfortunately, assessment results related to early literacy aresometimes interpreted to be representative of all aspects of theinstructional program. Early childhood educators should makeuse of multiple measures if the assessment information will be

the basis for important educational decisions and recommen-dations. Knowledge about the different types of assessment andtheir uses is essential for all concerned.

Q: How can policymakers and others get more informationabout enhancing literacy development in preschoolers?A: My colleague, Shanon Riley-Ayers and I co-authored thepolicy brief Early Literacy: Policy and Practice in the PreschoolYears, available at the NIEER website at http://nieer.org/docs/index.php?DocID=143. Information from that brief will also bepublished in a forthcoming book, Literacy Leaders in PreschoolSettings: A Quick Guide for Directors, Principals, Supervisors,and Teacher Leaders, co-published by Teachers College Pressand the National Association for the Education of YoungChildren, Spring 2007. n

Dorothy Strickland: Hooked on Literacy

Number of Stars Received Total Points EarnedH 3-4HH 5-7HHH 8-10HHHH 11-13HHHHH 14-15

In North Carolina’s system, up to 5 points can be awarded ineach of three areas—program standards, education standardsand compliance history. The highest score achievable is 15.Stars are awarded based on total number of points earned.The highest star rating is five.

North Carolina’s Star Rated License System

NON–PROFIT ORG.U.S. POSTAGE

PAIDNEW BRUNSWICK, NJ

PERMIT NO. 157

ADDRESS SERVICEREQUESTED

National Institute for

Early Education Research

120 Albany Street, Suite 500

New Brunswick, NJ 08901

NIEER

discoveries S C I E N C E N E W S Y O U C A N U S E

Peruse the parentingbookshelves or surf parentingweb sites these days and oneis likely to encounter the viewthat many preschool-agedand older children are beingover scheduled with extra-curricular activities. The ideathat children are being overscheduled to the detriment of their healthy developmentand parent-child relationshipsis widely held. A 2006 Roperpoll conducted by the PublicBroadcast Service and theNational Parent TeacherAssociation found that fourout of five parents believethere is a national trend towardover-scheduling children.

Yale University psycho-logist Joseph L. Mahoney,University of Texas socio-logist Angel L. Harris, andUniversity of Michigan psychologist Jacquelynne S. Eccles examined a broadswath of research to test theover scheduling hypothesis.They found the bulk ofresearch on organized activ-

ities shows positive conse-quences for children whoparticipate. Not only do chil-dren benefit academicallyand educationally, they alsobenefit in social, civic andphysical development.

School-aged children inthe U.S. and other Westerncountries average 40 to 50percent of their waking hoursin discretionary activitiesoutside of school. Theyspend part of that time inorganized activities such assports, clubs, and fine arts.The rest is divided betweeneducational activities likehomework, television watch-ing, playing games, workingand what the researchersrefer to as “hanging out.”

Mahoney, Harris andEccles say proponents of theover scheduling hypothesisbase their view on threeinterrelated propositions:

• Children participate inorganized activities becauseof perceived pressure fromparents or other adults;

• The time commitmentrequired for such activitiesis so extensive that tradi-tional family activities like dinnertime and parent-child discussionsare sacrificed;

• Children devoting lots of time to these activitiesare at risk for developingadjustment problems andpoor relationships withparents.

They found that whilethere are many reasons chil-dren participate in organizedactivities, they seldom describepressure from parents or therole such activities.

On average, childrenbetween ages 5 and 18 spentabout 5 hours per week inorganized activities—aboutthe same amount of time theyspent on out-of-school edu-cational activities. They spentless time performing house-hold chores and hanging outand more time playing gamesand watching television.

Time spent participat-ing in organized activitiesincreased from childhood to adolescence but did notdominate American chil-dren’s free time.

They found predomi-nantly positive associationsbetween total number oforganized activities partici-pated in and social and aca-demic outcomes such as aca-demic achievement, self-con-cept, college attendance,parental involvement andcareer aspirations. Yale’sMahoney says we should beless concerned about over-scheduling and more con-cerned about the 40 percentof children who don’t partic-ipate in organized activities.The report is featured inVolume XX Number IV ofthe Social Policy Report, apublication of the Society forResearch in Child Develop-ment. To read it, visithttp://www.srcd.org/press/mahoney.pdf. n

Is Over Scheduling of ExtracurricularActivities Really Harming Children?