More for Children Before School Starts
Richard M. Clifford, The News & Observer
March 24, 2003         

CHAPEL HILL -- Last year's legislative session saw much discussion of the merits of the governor's prekindergarten initiative called More at Four. Unfortunately the debate generated more heat than light. It's time to look at what we know about preschool programs and their impact on children as they prepare for school. Are these programs good for children? Do they represent good investments of scarce public resources?

I have spent most of my life asking just these questions. My first experience with early childhood programs was when my own two children were in high-quality early childhood programs while my wife and I were working and in school. An elementary school principal at the time, I quickly realized the impact these programs were having on my children and their readiness for school.  

They were learning at an astonishing rate and they loved it. They developed close personal ties with the children in their programs and with the teachers and program directors. They came to kindergarten eager and ready to learn. This experience led me to change the focus of my work to trying to understand how we can help bring all children to school prepared to take advantage of the rich resources our society provides in elementary and secondary education.  

Studies find benefits

Two landmark studies have shown decisively that the experience of my own children can hold true for a very wide variety of children, especially children who are poor or otherwise disadvantaged. The Abecedarian study conducted over the past 30 years by my colleagues at the FPG Child Development Institute in Chapel Hill has followed children in our child care center and compared their experiences with a comparable group of children who did not have access to the same high-quality preschool experiences.  

This carefully designed study found that a high-quality, intensive early childhood program could be a major boost for children as they come to school. The study also showed that the advantages they gain from this boost last for decades as they move through the schools and into the world of work.  

The Perry Preschool Study found similar results for children in a high-quality preschool program in Michigan . This research also has followed children from disadvantaged situations as they experienced the high-quality program and then moved through the schools. Both studies found major academic and social benefits for the children.  

But these studies may not answer the second question fully. Were these programs worth the substantial cost of providing such high quality services?  

An early study of the Perry Preschool Program found that for every $ 1 invested in the program, society reaped $ 7 in benefits through reduced costs for special education, higher employment rates when the children started work as adults, and reduced costs for social supports for their families. A recently released review of the Abecedarian program by independent researchers found similar cost benefits.  

Finally, can these kinds of experimental studies be translated into large-scale programs in the real world -- or are they only possible in tightly controlled research settings?  

A series of large studies of early childhood programs from child care to Head Start reveal that it is difficult to maintain the desired level of quality as programs are expanded to serve large numbers of children. Major investments in raising and maintaining the quality of programs are required. We have too few people adequately trained to teach in these programs and our funding is woefully short of what is needed to serve all children who need these services.  

But the studies show that we are making real progress and that when we are successful at achieving high quality, the benefits are there for the children in the programs.  

A decade ago, North Carolina began the highly acclaimed Smart Start program aimed at raising the quality of services available to all children below kindergarten entry age. During the last legislative session a few legislators argued that we should cut back on Smart Start as Gov. Mike Easley's More at Four prekindergarten initiative was expanded.  

Two-pronged approach

A careful examination of the research shows that this debate was misplaced. We need targeted programs to reach the children and families in greatest need like the More at Four prekindergarten program to ensure that these children get the extra boost to help them get off to a good start in school. We also need the broad-scale approach of Smart Start to be sure that child care and preschool for all children from birth to school entry are of high quality.  

It is only through a combination of approaches that we can provide all families with the support they need and ensure that every child has an equal chance for success in school and in life.  

My instincts told me that the large investment my wife and I made for our own children's education prior to kindergarten was worth it. Research since then has borne out that instinct and has shown that the investment is worth it for all young children. Investing in North Carolina 's youngest citizens is wise public policy.  

(Richard M. Clifford, Ph.D., is a senior scientist at FPG Child Development Institute and research associate professor at the School of Education at UNC-Chapel Hill.)