ERIC EJ1101330: Sustaining the Benefits of Early Childhood Education Experiences: A Research Overview

2016·0.25 MB·English

by  ERIC

Sustaining the Benefits of Early Childhood
Education Experiences: A Research Overview
Rebecca E. Gomez
Over the past decade, there has been increased recognition of the short- and long-term benefits
of high-quality early childhood education programs, but the systems needed to sustain these
benefits throughout early learning transitions (and beyond) have not yet been fully implemented.
My oldest nephew is six lived the first five years of his life in a
years old and in first grade. single-parent household because his
Despite overcoming signifi- mother has been incarcerated and in
cant challenges during the first five and out of rehabilitation programs for
years of his life, he is doing pretty well. drug addiction – a factor we know from
He’s reading above grade level and the literature on early childhood
performing at grade level in math. development could put him at risk for
He demonstrates good cognition and developmental and learning delays
general knowledge, along with social (Shonkoff 2010; Karoly, Kilburn &
competence and executive functioning Cannon 2005; Shonkoff & Phillips
skills consistent with what one 2000).
might expect from a six-year-old. He
What, then, bolstered my nephew’s
approaches learning experiences with
progress in learning and enabled him to
curiosity and persists in completing
be resilient despite these realities? Some
tasks that are difficult. He has also has
of this, surely, is a result of the caring
Rebecca E. Gomez is an assistant research professor at the National Institute for Early Education
Research in the Graduate School of Education at Rutgers University.
VUE 2016, no. 43 5
adults in his life, with whom he was THE IMPORTANCE OF EARLY
able to form stable attachments and CHILDHOOD EDUCATION:
who engaged him in learning experi-
INCREASING RECOGNITION
ences grounded in his community and
AND A SHIFT IN FOCUS
home culture. These supports acted as
protective factors (Center for the Study Decades of research on child develop-
of Social Policy 2009) helping to ment and the benefits of ECE as an
counteract those risks. He also, intervention now indicates that
however, attended an early childhood high-quality programs result in both
education (ECE) program that was short- and long-term benefits to young
accredited by the National Association children (Shonkoff & Phillips 2000).
for the Education of Young Children We know that a child’s family and
(NAEYC), widely thought to be the community environments are inextrica-
“gold standard” of quality in ECE bly linked to his or her development,
(Neugebauer 2009). His first five years and stable attachment relationships
of life took place during a period of can mitigate risk factors and promote
considerable attention to the role of positive social, emotional, and
early experiences on brain development cognitive developmental outcomes
and the impact of high-quality early (Bronfenbrenner 1986; Ainsworth &
childhood education on ameliorating Bowlby 1991). We also know from
risk factors and reducing achievement studies focusing on educational
gaps in the early elementary grades. interventions for young children that
“ability gaps” – or differences in
The newest research in this field tackles
children’s baseline knowledge and
the question of how to ensure that the
skills – are a primary cause for the
gains made in ECE will be sustained.
achievement gap, begin at an early
Research has begun to look at ECE
age, and cannot be mitigated by
systems that create the infrastructure
educational experiences after second
for an aligned, effective set of policies
grade (Heckman 2011).
and programs to support young
children’s development and learning Evidence from longitudinal studies of
from birth through third grade. Much interventions like the Perry Preschool
of my work as a researcher in the field Project and the Abecedarian Project1
of ECE has focused on exploring the suggest that early childhood education
potential of ECE systems, and the has the potential to reduce these ability
governance of those systems, to create gaps (and subsequently, the achieve-
a coherent learning continuum for ment gap) by permanently bolstering
children from birth through grade social and emotional skills (Schwein-
three. I continue this work at the hart et al. 2005) as well as IQ
National Institute for Early Education (Heckman 2011, citing work by Camp-
Research (NIEER), where we focus on bell and colleagues). My nephew
conducting high-quality research on
pre-K that can inform policy and
1 The HighScope Perry Preschool Study
practice. Indeed, NIEER was created
and the Carolina Abecedarian Project
in 2001 for the purpose of conducting
are two well-known early childhood
independent research on pre-K and for education research studies that have
seeking to increase the transparency tracked participants for over forty years
and shown positive, long-term outcomes
and accountability of pre-K policies.
of high-quality early education, along a
NIEER is uniquely positioned at the
range of educational, social, and emotional
intersection of research, policy, and indicators. For more information about
practice, enabling its faculty to take the Abecedarian Project, see http://abc.fpg.
unc.edu/; for the Perry Preschool project,
a holistic view of pre-K and be
see http://www.highscope.org/Content.
responsive to the needs of the field.
asp?ContentId=219.
6 Annenberg Institute for School Reform
“
benefited from this body of research
because it pointed the way to interven-
“
tions that could improve his life and
reduce the negative impact of his early In 2012, it was estimated that 69 percent
deleterious experiences.
of all children in the United States were
The body of literature on the impor-
tance of the first five years of life in enrolled in some type of formal early
shaping a child’s overall developmental
trajectory, and on the effectiveness of education experience.
ECE as an intervention for young
children, has continued to grow. Until
relatively recently, however, policymak-
ers at the federal, state, and local level
have been guided by the ethos that the Gomez 2014), and more broad-based
family has primacy over a child’s care investment in ECE began to take place.
and learning experiences, particularly Advocacy and media campaigns by
during his or her first five years of life. various stakeholders were created in an
As a result, these policymakers have effort to garner more widespread
largely limited investment in services for investment in ECE. Pre-K Now, for
young children to those children deemed instance, was a ten-year campaign (from
“at-risk” in some way (e.g., Head Start), 2001 to 2011), funded by the Pew
or to support families during times of Charitable Trusts, designed to educate
crisis (e.g., the Lanham Act of 1941, federal and state policymakers about the
with provisions for childcare services importance of investing in early educa-
for mothers who entered the workforce tion – specifically, in state and federally
during World War II) (Lombardi 2003). funded pre-K services.
In recent years, this history of targeted Interest also grew on the part of state
investments and limited government governments in investing in publicly
involvement in the lives and education funded preschool programs to meet the
of children under the age of six has greater demand for childcare and early
begun to change. Over the past two learning experiences. The percentage of
decades, the need for more widespread children served by state-funded pre-K
ECE services increased as more women programs rose from 14 percent in 2002
entered the workforce and needed care to 29 percent in 2014 (Barnett et al.
for their children during the workday. 2015). While still a modest increase, it
The increase in demand for services, represents many thousands of children
coupled with the rapid pace of research gaining access to preschool programs.
on the benefits of ECE for young Enrollment in other types of ECE
children’s learning and development, programs also grew. In 2012, for
created a “perfect storm” of sorts among instance, it was estimated that a total of
scholars and advocates in the field that 69 percent of all children in the United
led them to the conclusion that it was States were enrolled in some type of
time to leverage these advances in formal early education experience
knowledge and public will. (Organisation for Economic Coopera-
tion and Development 2012). During
Beginning in the late 1990s, the field
this decade, major investments in ECE
made a concerted effort to translate and
were also made internationally. Of
promote the growing body of research
forty-five countries surveyed by the
on ECE to policymakers and business
Economist Intelligence Unit (2012),
leaders. It was then that ECE began to
thirty-three provided access to ECE for
emerge as a policy issue (Kagan &
over 50 percent of all their children.
Rebecca E. Gomez VUE 2016, no. 43 7
ECE is still not universally embraced. tance of teacher-child and peer
Only a few states truly provide for interactions for young children’s
universal pre-K, and no state invests in learning, in addition to structural
universal ECE services for infants and factors (LaParo et al. 2012). While
toddlers. But the zeitgeist has shifted additional research is needed, there is
among families, researchers, and consensus in the field that quality is
policymakers about the importance an essential ingredient to producing
of young children’s participation in benefits for children’s learning and
education and care outside of the development (Camilli et al. 2010).
home. My family’s decision to enroll What is less clear, however, is how
my nephew in ECE reflects this shift. to sustain those gains over time –
something that I think about when
considering my nephew’s learning
“HIGH-QUALITY ECE”:
trajectory over the next few years.
EVOLVING DEFINITIONS
My nephew had the opportunity to
SUSTAINING GAINS: MOVING
attend an ECE program accredited
FROM PROGRAMS TO SYSTEMS
by NAEYC. Research has shown that
children enrolled in high-quality My nephew has continued to do well
programs tend to demonstrate better in school, but the research is not yet
cognitive and social emotional out- conclusive regarding to what extent the
comes in school than do their peers gains accorded to young children by
who did not have the benefit of a high-quality ECE experiences can be
high-quality ECE program (Mashburn sustained over time. Several studies of
et al. 2008), and that they sustain those pre-K programs (Hillm, Gormley &
outcomes into the primary grades Adelstein 2015; Lipsey et al. 2013;
(Love et al. 2013). ECE experiences Puma et al. 2010) suggest that by grade
that are of high quality are what make 3, the benefits children gain by partici-
the difference for young children over pating in quality ECE experiences fade
time, particularly for children with out or converge with those of their
identified risk factors. But what peers that did not participate in those
constitutes “high quality” in an experiences. Other studies found that
ECE program? educational outcomes from pre-K
programs were sustained through third
The definition of high-quality ECE
grade (Muschkin, Ladd & Dodge
long hinged on three baseline, struc-
2015) and that the long-term effects of
tural factors: group size, adult-child
Head Start programs are manifest in
ratios, and teacher qualifications (train-
children’s increased social and emo-
ing and experience) (Vandell & Wolfe
tional competency (Love et al. 2013).
2000). NIEER has embraced these
Still other research findings suggest
three factors, along with seven other
that quality acts as a “counterfactual
“benchmarks of quality” for the
condition,”2 (p. 3) resulting in effects
purpose of establishing a floor for
that differ between groups of children
quality in state-funded pre-K programs
who attended a high-quality ECE
and ranking states according to the
program and those who did not (Feller
number of quality benchmarks
et al. 2014, p. 3; also see Jenkins et al.
reflected in policy (Barnett et al. 2015).
2015). Furthermore, dosage (i.e., the
Our understanding of “quality” over amount of time spent in an ECE
the past decade has become more program) appears to matter, as children
multifaceted, emphasizing the impor- enrolled in high-quality ECE programs
8 Annenberg Institute for School Reform
for between one to three years per- experiences they have developed during
formed better over time than those their time in ECE programs. Work also
enrolled in a program for less than needs to occur at the system level.
one year (Nores & Barnett 2010).
Ensuring Access, Quality, Alignment,
Why Do ECE Benefits Tend to Fade and Continuity: The Need for a
by Third Grade? Systemic Approach
There are multiple theories about why The broad-based recognition that ECE
fade-out occurs, among them: high- can impact children’s learning and
quality elementary school experiences development has resulted in increased
allow peers who did not attend ECE to enrollments and a proliferation of
catch up with their peers; the instruc- publicly and privately funded ECE
tional quality in elementary school may programs. It has also created a patch-
be poor, and thus children have fewer work of policies and fragmented
chances to maintain what they have administrative structures at the federal,
learned; and the instructional approach state, and local levels. This fragmented
in elementary school is misaligned with infrastructure means that access to
that provided in ECE settings, trigger- high-quality ECE programs for
ing fade-out as a result of mismatch children and families varies tremen-
in content and instruction (Jenkins et dously depending on the state – and
al. 2015). sometimes even the community – in
which they live (Barnett et al. 2015).
Research is being conducted to assess
Inequities leading to potential fade-out
the validity of each of these theories,
of ECE benefits remain pervasive for
and hopefully, interventions can be
children in all fifty states.
designed to address potential chal-
lenges. Interventions in individual ECE The response from some scholars has
programs and schools, however, are been to shift the unit of analysis from
not the only areas in which work needs programs to systems. An ECE system
to take place to ensure that children – can be defined as programs and
like my nephew – have the chance to services for young children and families
capitalize on the knowledge, skills, and plus the policies and administrative
infrastructure that support those
programs (Kagan & Kauerz 2012).3
2 A counterfactual condition refers to a set of ECE systems typically have seven
conditions in which a particular outcome elements:
results that is different from the outcome
achieved when the conditions were similar • regulations articulating minimum
but not exactly the same. Here, this refers
requirements for safety and health;
to ECE settings, all of which can be said
to be similar, but with varying differences • professional development supports
in quality. for ECE professionals;
3 The “smart education systems” (SES) • financing;
framework from the Annenberg Institute
• accountability measures ensuring
for School Reform at Brown University
proposes a similar approach (see http:// programs meet fiscal and quality
annenberginstitute.org/who-we-are/smart- benchmarks;
education-systems). An SES is defined as • outreach to and engagement with
a partnership between a high-functioning
families and communities;
school district and local civic and
community organizations that coordinates • standards for early learning and
educational supports and services wherever development, programming, and
they occur – at school, at home, and in the professional preparation; and
community – to provide all children with
equitable opportunities and high-quality
learning experiences.
Rebecca E. Gomez VUE 2016, no. 43 9
• a coordinated approach to gover- implement systemic interventions that
nance to manage each of the other increase program quality,6 focus on
six elements (Kagan & Kauerz 2012; enhanced supports to the ECE work-
Kagan & Cohen 1996). force, and explore durable options for
financing ECE programs (Kagan &
The primary goal of a functional ECE
Gomez 2015; Gomez 2015; Regenstein
system is to create the mechanisms for
2015; Goffin, Martella & Coffman
children and families to have greater
2011). Several states, including
access to high-quality ECE programs.
Maryland, Pennsylvania, Massachu-
Still in its infancy, research on ECE setts, and Washington have already
systems is an important area of inquiry implemented new approaches to
in the field, with implications for governance aimed at aligning policies
policymaking. Notable innovations in and infrastructure from birth through
research and practice focus on the grade 3.
development of a P–3 early learning
It is important to emphasize that a
system, in which there is alignment not
causal connection cannot be made
only among the policies and programs
between system development and
that address children from birth to age
improved child outcomes or sustained
five, but also from birth through third
gains over time. However, research on
grade (Kagan & Kauerz 2012).4 Many
systems indicates that system-level
challenges arise from a lack of align-
interventions increase the capacity of
ment among these policies and
states to improve the supports to
programs. For example, in many states
programs (Gomez 2015), which, in
and localities, there are few transition
turn, could bolster the structural
supports for children as they move
quality of those programs and, in some
from pre-K to kindergarten. Transition
cases, the process quality as well
supports should not only include
(Tarrant & Huerta 2015). Further-
systematic methods of communication
more, if a P–3 system focus is applied,
between pre-K and kindergarten
state efforts can be directed to explor-
teachers, but also an alignment of the
ing alignment of early learning and
standards, curriculum, and assessments
development standards with K–12
in pre-K to kindergarten to ensure a
standards, and the alignment of those
continuum of developmentally appro-
standards with curriculum and
priate teaching and learning (Kagan &
assessments for children from birth
Tarrant 2010).5 When my nephew, for
through grade 3.
example, transitioned from a privately
owned ECE program into a kindergar- Research on systems underscore
ten program in the public school the need to address transitions in
system, there were no formalized outreach and engagement systems,
opportunities for teacher communica- including systemic supports for
tion, and the curricula in kindergarten
looked very different from that of his
4 I distinguish here between an ECE system,
pre-K program.
which typically focuses on birth through
age 5, and a P–3 system, which focuses on
In addition to research on the impor-
birth through third grade.
tance of systemic supports during
5 For a description of a systemic approach
transitions, research on governance led by a community advocacy organization
suggests that creating a coordinated in Tulsa, Oklahoma, that supports aligned
transitions, see the article by Amy Fain
state-level approach to governance of
and Diane Eason Contreras in this issue
ECE/P–3 systems gives states the
of VUE.
authority to foster greater alignment 6 See the Quality Rating and Improvement
across the birth-to-grade-3 continuum, System National Learning Network at
http://qrisnetwork.org/.
10 Annenberg Institute for School Reform
vertical transitions (from ECE to support high-quality teaching. Recent-
public school settings, including pre-K ly, the National Academies of Science
to kindergarten); horizontal transitions released a report on the ECE work-
(from home to school and from school force, which can serve as a basis for
to community settings); and temporal thinking about what types of invest-
transitions (moving from activity to ments in workforce supports are
activity within the course of the day) needed to contribute to program
(Kagan & Tarrant 2010). Another quality and boost children’s learning
study that examined transitions from (Allen & Kelly 2015). The influence
pre-K to kindergarten in Finland found of family and community on children’s
that while many types of transition learning and the ability of these
activities were beneficial to children, supportive factors to influence
“co-operation over curricula and children’s learning over time is
passing on written information about another area of investigation that
children between the preschool and shows promise.
the elementary school were the best
The notion of ECE/P–3 systems as
predictors of the children’s skill”
drivers of program quality is still fairly
(Ahtola et al. 2011, p. 295).
new; to date, no state has a fully
These studies offer a prologue for implemented system (Kagan & Kauerz
thinking about the structure of a P–3 2012). This makes research on ECE
system that would increase access to systems difficult to design and carry
high-quality ECE programs for all out. However, the past decade has
children and align those programs with done a great deal to advance the field’s
the primary-level curriculum, instruc- thinking about a range of aspects of
tional approaches, and assessments. ECE; this work can and should be used
This kind of high-quality, aligned P–3 as a springboard for continued research
system has the potential to support and policymaking.
children in becoming healthy, socially
competent lifelong learners. “
WHAT RESEARCH HAS YET
“
TO ANSWER
A high-quality, aligned P–3 system – serving
I have highlighted here the areas of
consensus in the research regarding the children from birth to third grade – has the
importance of high-quality ECE for
potential to support children in becoming
supporting young children’s develop-
ment and learning. Despite this
healthy, socially competent lifelong learners.
consensus, there is still much to be
explored. I have discussed the areas of
intellectual and practical debate regard-
ing the causes of fade-out and what
can be done to mitigate fade-out
effects, an important line of inquiry
that must continue.
We have also yet to fully understand
the influence of the ECE workforce on
program quality and children’s learn-
ing, including the type and amount of
professional development needed to
Rebecca E. Gomez VUE 2016, no. 43 11
MUCH PROGRESS, REFERENCES
MUCH STILL TO DO
Ahtola, A., G. Silinskas, J. L. Poikonen,
More and more people are aware of
M. Kontoniemi, P. Niemi, and J. E. Nuruni.
the importance of the first five years
2011. “Transition to Formal Schooling:
of a child’s life for his or her overall
Do Transition Practices Matter for
development in the early years and
Academic Performance?” Early Childhood
long-term benefits in school and life.
Research Quarterly 26, no. 3:295–302.
Research continues on the critical
factors in high-quality ECE programs Ainsworth, M. D. S., and J. Bowlby. 1991.
that result in significant benefits for “An Ethological Approach to Personality
young children’s success in school and Development,” American Psychologist 46,
beyond. Federal, state, and local no. 1:331–341.
investments in programs and systems
Allen, L., and B. B. Kelly. 2015. Transform-
are affording many more children
ing the Workforce for Children Birth
access to high-quality ECE.
through Age 8: A Unifying Foundation.
However, many children still do not Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine of
have access to good programs that are the National Academy of Science.
accessible and affordable for their
Barnett, W. S., M. E. Carolan, J. Squires,
families. My nephew had the benefit of
K. Clarke-Brown, and M. Horowitz. 2015.
a strong family support system and a
The State of Preschool 2015: State
high-quality ECE program to help him
Preschool Yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ:
succeed in school. However, he lives in
National Institute for Early Education
a state where there is no publicly
Research.
funded pre-K, nor is there even full-day
kindergarten. This means that there are Bronfenbrenner, U. 1986. “Ecology of the
countless children in similar situations Family as a Context for Human Develop-
who do not have the opportunity to ment: Research Perspectives,”
participate in high-quality ECE Developmental Psychology 22, no.
experiences, and this may affect their 6:723–742.
learning and development negatively
Camilli, G., S. Vargas, S. Ryan, and
over the long term. And despite
W. S. Barnett. 2010. “Meta-analysis of
increased recognition of the importance
the Effects of Early Education Interventions
of early childhood education, the
on Cognitive and Social Development,”
emerging research on the systems
Teachers College Record 112, no. 3:579–
needed to scale up ECE programs and
620.
align them with K–3 systems has yet to
be implemented in any major way. This Center for the Study of Social Policy. 2009.
decade of recognition has brought Protective Factors Literature Review: Early
about much progress and knowledge Care and Education Programs and the
about the influence of ECE on chil- Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect.
dren’s lives. But we can and we must Washington, DC: CSSP.
do better.
Economist Intelligence Unit. 2012. Starting
For more on the National Institute for Well: Benchmarking Early Education across
Early Education Research, see http:// the World. London, U.K.: The Economist.
nieer.org/.
Feller, A., T. Grindal, L. Miratrix, and L.
Page. 2014. “Compared to What? Variation
in the Impacts of Early Childhood Educa-
tion by Alternative Care-Type Settings.”
Working paper, available at http://ssrn.com/
abstract=2534811.
12 Annenberg Institute for School Reform
Goffin, S. G., J. Martella, and J. Coffman. Kagan, S. L., and K. Kauerz. 2012. Early
2011. Vision to Practice: Setting a New Childhood Systems: Transforming Early
Course for Early Childhood Governance. Learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Washington, DC: Goffin Strategy Group.
Kagan, S. L., and K. Tarrant, editors. 2010.
Gomez, R. E. 2015. “Governance as a Lever Transitions for Young Children: Creating
for Bringing Coherence to ECE Systems: Connections across Early Childhood
The Adaptive Capacities of Consolidated Systems. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes
Approaches.” In Early Childhood Gover- Publishing.
nance: Choices and Consequences, edited by
Karoly, L. A., M. R. Kilburn, and J. S.
S. L. Kagan & R. E. Gomez. New York:
Cannon. 2005. Early Childhood Interven-
Teachers College Press.
tions: Proven Results, Future Promise.
Heckman, J. J. 2011. “Effective Early Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
Childhood Development Strategies.” In The
LaParo, K. M., A. C. Thomason, J. K.
Pre-K Debates: Current Controversies and
Lower, V. L. Kinter-Duffy, and D. L. Cassidy.
Issues, edited by E. Zigler, W. S. Gilliam &
2012. “Examining the Definition and
W. S. Barnett. Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
Measurement of Quality in Early Childhood
Brookes Publishing.
Education: A Review of Studies Using the
Hillm, C. J., W. T. Gormley, and S. Adelstein, ECERS-R from 2003 to 2010,” Early
2015. “Do the Short-term Effects of a Childhood Research and Practice 14, no. 1,
High-quality Preschool Program Persist?” http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v14n1/laparo.html.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly 32,
Lipsey, M. W., K. G. Hofer, N. Dong, D. C.
no. 3:60–79.
Farran, and C. Bilbrey. 2013. Evaluation of
Jenkins, J. M., T. W. Watts, K. Magnuson, the Tennessee Voluntary Prekindergarten
D. Clemens, J. Sarama, C. B. Wolfe, and M. Program: Kindergarten and First Grade
E. Spitler. 2015. “Preventing Preschool Fade Follow-up Results from the Randomized
Out through Instructional Intervention in Control Design. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt
Kindergarten and First Grade: A Working University, Peabody Research Institute.
Paper.” Irvine: University of California
Lombardi, J. 2003. Time To Care: Redesign-
School of Education.
ing Child Care to Promote Education,
Kagan, S. L., and N. E. Cohen, editors. Support Families, and Build Communities.
1996. Reinventing Early Care and Educa- Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
tion: A Vision for a Quality System. San
Love, J. M., R. Chazan-Cohen, H., Raikes,
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
H., and J. Brooks-Gunn. 2013. “What
Kagan, S. L., and R. E. Gomez, editors. Makes a Difference: Early Head Start
2015. Early Childhood Governance: Choices Evaluation Findings in a Developmental
and Consequences. New York: Teachers Context,” Monographs of the Society for
College Press. Research in Child Development 78, no.
1:vii–viii, 1–173.
Kagan, S. L., and R. E. Gomez. 2014.
“One, Two, Buckle my Shoe: Early Child- Mashburn A. J., R. C. Pianta, B. K. Hamre,
hood Mathematics and Teacher Professional J. T. Downer, O. A. Barbarin, D. Bryant, M.
Development.” In Preparing Early Child- Burchinal, D. M. Early, and C. Howes. 2008.
hood Educators to Teach Math: Professional “Measures of Classroom Quality in
Development that Works, edited by H. P. Prekindergarten and Children’s Development
Ginsburg, M. Hyson, and T. A. Woods. of Academic, Language, and Social Skills,”
Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing. Child Development 79, no. 3:732–49.
Rebecca E. Gomez VUE 2016, no. 43 13
Muschkin, C. G., H. F. Ladd, and K. A. Schweinhart, L., J. Montie, Z. Xiang,
Dodge, 2015. “Impact of North Carolina’s W. S. Barnett, C. R. Belfield, and M. Nores.
Early Childhood Initiatives on Special 2005. Lifetime Effects: The HighScope
Education Placements in Third Grade,” Perry Preschool Study through Age 40.
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis Ypsilanti, MI: HighScope Press.
37, no. 4:478–500.
Shonkoff, J. 2010. “Building a New
Neugebauer, R. 2009. “Where Are We Biodevelopmental Framework to Guide the
Headed with Accreditation?: Trends in Future of Early Childhood Policy,” Child
Quality Assurance,” Child Care Exchange Development 81, no. 1:357–367.
186:14-17.
Shonkoff, J., and D. Phillips. 2000. From
Nores, M., and W. S. Barnett. 2010. Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of
“Benefits of Early Childhood Interventions Early Childhood Development. Washing-
Across the World: (Under) Investing in the ton, DC: National Academies Press.
Very Young,” Economics of Education
Tarrant, K., and L. A. Huerta. 2015.
Review 29, no. 2:271–282.
“Substantive or Symbolic Stars: Quality
Organisation for Economic Cooperation Rating and Improvement Systems through a
and Development. 2012. United States – New Institutional Lens,” Early Childhood
Country Note – Education at a Glance Research Quarterly 30:327–338.
2012: OECD Indicators. Paris, France:
Vandell, D. L., and B. Wolfe. 2000. Child
OECD Publishing.
Care Quality: Does It Matter and Does It
Puma, M., S. Bell, R. Cook, and C. Heid. Need to Be Improved? Madison: Institute
2010. Head Start Impact Study: Final for Research on Poverty, University of
Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department Wisconsin.
of Health and Human Services, Administra-
tion for Children and Families.
Regenstein, E. 2015. “Glancing at Gover-
nance: The Contemporary Landscape.” In
Early Childhood Governance: Choices and
Consequences, edited by S. L. Kagan and
R. E. Gomez. New York: Teachers College
Press.
14 Annenberg Institute for School Reform