Sharing Web Resources

The organization and newsletter I have been researching in this course has been NIEER, National Institute for Early Education Research.  It is plentiful in the information on early childhood education.  I will briefly discuss some of the sources I read and what I gained from those readings.  Anyone in the field of early childhood education or development could find great use of this site.  As our focus this week is the topics and issues related to different views of economists, neuroscientists, or politicians supporting positive social change through the early childhood field.  

Under the News & Events on the NIEER site, you can find the most recent and later news headlines focusing on early education.  March 27, 2019 an article by Elliot Regenstien addressing the topic of achievement gap and the Districts choice of playing catch up verse earlier intervention.  “The stakes could not be higher. School improvement data show that for cohorts of children who are a year behind in third grade, only the best districts in the country can get them caught up by the end of high school” (Regenstein, 2019, para 2).  Supporting the need to start a change, considering the new generation of politics, government officials, and educational advocates.  Use of testing is a measure of assessing the child’s performance academically.  These assessments do not begin until the third grade and following.  Being mandated by the Federal government to meet certain standards for school districts.  Boston, Omaha, and Fresno school districts took leadership in early childhood education, incorporating early intervention beginning in kindergarten.  There is great benefit with these districts as they demonstrate strong leadership and support.  As Elliot states the need for early intervention prior to third grade he explains the obstacles districts face in relation to the required assessments. (Regenstein, 2019).  The obstacles districts face alone without the impact of the assessments, also effect the results.  The fact is that there are many school facilitators who have no early learning or early elementary knowledge or experience.  Another obstacle being that we begin testing at third grade, missing several early years.  The list continues and indeed enlightens one on the struggles schools face, more than I assumed.

The next publication I read was based on a previous article NIEER published, as well as I paraphrased on this same blog.  Steven Barnett addresses the critics to the pre-K proposal made by the President Obama’s administration.  Research and studies are abundant in the facts that indeed support the President’s proposal.  When one study is isolated or misinterpreted the negativity and doubt can be projected from those that a hesitance with the proposal was established.  The universal pre-K is based on all the facts and findings of impartial analysis.  The issues critics are bringing to the table relate to the following: “Does high-quality pre-K have lasting benefits? What is the evidence for the $7 to $1 return on investment in pre-K?  Do non-disadvantaged children benefit from pre-K, and is a targeted or a universal approach to pre-K more effective?  Are large-scale public programs, including Head Start effective?” (Barnette, 2017, p. 2).  Using and basing findings on the meta-analysis over the years to current.  Studies based on effects of large-scale public programs, programs conducted outside the U.S., and more support the fact of pre-K program benefits.  With regards to the financial evidence, there are studies that show a higher yield than the quoted $7 to $1 benefit-cost.  The facts and findings from the Chicago Longitudinal Study support the reference Obama used for justification of the cost.  As Barnette includes the other findings that promote a higher yield from the Chicago Child Parent Center (CPCs) and the Perry Preschool program.  Giving critics more evidence for them to dismiss their objectives to the Pre-K proposal.  Research from the United States, United Kingdom, and New Zealand show great gain for universal pre-K programs for disadvantaged children.  Interaction of peers whether disadvantaged or not can help support and encourage others to strive greater.  When you continue to further yourself in the support for universal pre-K and see the points that are addressed to the critics, you gain further research facts and findings.  Opening up a new source of information for one in the field of early childhood.

Throughout these weeks I have truly enjoyed reading the latest and past information that is found on this site.  My knowledge has expanded, and I am also able to stay abreast of all the current issues and news.  You can also find information on tips on conducting a cost study on the NIEER site.  It is a guideline to how one can transition and receive funding for shifting to a universal pre-K program.  It even offers a calculator to help you figure the expenses.  When you access the calculator, you are directed to another site supported by NIEER, Center on Enhancing Early Learning Outcome (CEELO).  This site also provides many helpful sources or one in the early childhood field.            

References:

Regenstein, E., (2019). Early learning is the best way to close the achievement gap:5 reasons        districts prefer to play catch up instead. Retrieved from: http://nieer.org/news/regenstein     early-learning-is-the-best-way-to-close-the-achievement-gap-5-reasons-districts-prefer            to-play-catch-up-instead

Barnette, S. (2017, June 23). Getting the facts right on pre-K and the President’s pre-K proposal.  Retrieved from: http://nieer.org/policy-issue/getting-facts-right-pre-k-presidents-prek-k          proposal