Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:08:24.690Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - A Model Universal Prekindergarten Program

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Edward Zigler
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Walter S. Gilliam
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Stephanie M. Jones
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Get access

Summary

The movement to establish public prekindergarten for all young children in the United States has steadily accelerated. Forty states now provide some form of classroom-based preschool services to at least some groups of children, whereas in the 1960s half the states did not even have universal kindergarten and just seven had limited programs for preschoolers (Gilliam & Marchesseault, 2005; Mitchell, 2001). Today there are throngs of advocates for universal preschool, including many outside the ranks of expected supporters like parents and early childhood educators. Surveys and public opinion polls repeatedly show that the majority of the public approves of state funding for prekindergarten programs and believes these should be available to everyone. As described in Chapter 1, private philanthropic foundations have mounted a national mission to promote universal preschool. Economists and members of the business community, whose opinions generally carry great weight among policy makers, have identified preschool as necessary to building a skilled and productive work force in coming generations. The time is right to capitalize on this momentum, to put our accumulated research on the benefits and cost-effectiveness of early education to use, and to urge all states to adopt or expand prekindergarten services. But this is also the critical time to guide the construction of these programs so they are of high enough quality to achieve the expectations being placed in them.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abt Associates. (1997). National impact evaluation of the Comprehensive Child Development Program. Final report. Cambridge, MA: Author.
Administration for Children and Families. (2002, December). Pathways to quality and full implementation in Early Head Start. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/ehs/ehs_resrch/reports/pathways/pathways_title.html. Accessed May 2005.
Administration for Children and Families. (2004). The role of Early Head Start programs in addressing the child care needs of low-income families with infants and toddlers: Influences and child care use and quality. Washington, DC: U.S. DHHS.
Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF). (2000). Head Start children's entry into public school: A report on the National Head Start/Public School Early Childhood Transition Demonstration Study. Washington, DC: U.S. DHHS.
Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF). (2002). Making a difference in the lives of infants and toddlers and their families: The impacts of Early Head Start. Volume 1, Final Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. DHHS.
Aubrun, A., & Grady, J. (2004). Framing the birth to three agenda: Lessons learn–ed from pre-K campaigns. Providence, RI: Cultural Logic LLC. http://www.zerotothree.org/policy/policybriefs.framing9-04.pdf. Accessed March 2005.
Barnett, W. S., Brown, K., & Shore, R. (2004, April). The universal vs. targeted debate: Should the United States have preschool for all? Preschool Policy Matters, Brief Issue 6. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.Google Scholar
Bergmann, B. R. (1996). Saving our children from poverty: What the United States can learn from France. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Bogard, K. (2003). Mapping a P–3 continuum (MAP): P–3 as the foundation of education reform. New York: Foundation for Child Development. http://www.fcd-us.org/uploadDocs/4.30.04.bogard.MAPrelease.final.pdf. Accessed June 2005.Google Scholar
California Department of Education. (2000). Prekindergarten learning development guidelines. Sacramento: Author.
Cohen, A. J. (1996). A brief history of federal financing for childcare in the United States. The Future of Children, 6(2), 26–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dave Lawrence: Champion for Florida's kids.” (2004). Preschool Matters, 2(1), 11.
Doherty, K. M. (2002, January 10). Early learning. Education Week, 17(21), 54–56.Google Scholar
Elkind, D. (2001, Summer). Much too early. Education Matters, pp. 9–15.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S. (2000). The School Readiness Initiative in South-Central Connecticut: Classroom quality, teacher training, and service provision. Yale University Child Study Center, New Haven, CT. Unpublished manuscript. nieer.org/resources/research/CSRI1999.pdf.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., & Marchesseault, C. M. (2005, March 28). From capitols to classrooms, policies to practice: State-funded prekindergarten at the classroom level. National Prekindergarten Study, Technical Report #1. Yale University Child Study Center, New Haven, CT. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., & Ripple, C. H. (2004). What can be learned from state-funded prekindergarten initiatives? A data-based approach to the Head Start devolution debate. In Zigler, E. & Styfco, S. J. (Eds.), The Head Start debates (pp. 477–497). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., Ripple, C. H., Zigler, E., & Leiter, V. (2000). Evaluating child and family demonstration initiatives: Lessons from the Comprehensive Child Development program. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15(1), 41–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomby, D. S., Culross, P. L., & Behrman, R. E. (1999). Home visiting: Recent program evaluations – analysis and recommendations. The Future of Children, 9(1), 4–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gormley, W., & Phillips, D. (2003). The effects of universal pre-K in Oklahoma: Research highlights and policy implications. Crocus Working Paper #2, Center for Research on Children in the United States, Georgetown Public Policy Institute & the Georgetown University Department of Psychology, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Heckman, J. J. (2004, April 21). Lecture, City of Denver, CO.
Hodgkinson, H. L. (2003). Leaving too many children behind: A demographer's view on the neglect of America's youngest children. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership.Google Scholar
Jennings, T. (2003). Retrieved from Children's Campaign Inc. http://www.iamforkids.org/newsdata/view_ind/519.
Kagan, S. L., & Neuman, M. J. (1998). Lessons from three decades of transition research. Elementary School Journal, 98, 365–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamerman, S. (2000). Early childhood intervention policies: An international perspective. In Shonkoff, J. P. & Meisels, S. J. (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (2nd ed., pp. 613–629). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, A. W. (2001). Education for all young children: The role of states and the federal government in promoting prekindergarten and kindergarten. Working Paper Series. New York: Foundation for Child Development.Google Scholar
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2005, Spring). Accreditation Update, 6(2). http://www.naeyc.org/accreditation/pdf/6.2AccUpdate. Accessed May 2005.
National Research Council. (2000). Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy. Bowman, B., Donovan, M. S., & Burns, M. S. (Eds.), Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Olds, D. L., Eckenrode, J., Henderson, C. R. Jr, Kitzman, H., Powers, J., Cole, R., Sidora, K., Morris, P., Pettitt, L. M., & Luckey, D. (1997). Long-term effects of home visitation on maternal life course and child abuse and neglect. Fifteen-year follow-up of a randomized trial. JAMA, 278, 637–643.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olmsted, P. P., & Montie, J. (Eds.). (2001). Early childhood settings in 15 countries. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
Parents as Teachers National Center. (2004). 2004 Annual report. St. Louis: Author. http://www.parentsasteachers.org/site/pp.asp?c=ekIRLcMZJxE&b=308088. Accessed June 2005.
Pfannenstiel, J. C., Seitz, V., & Zigler, E. (2002). Promoting school readiness: The role of the Parents as Teachers program. NHSA Dialog, 6, 71–86.CrossRef
Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (Eds.). (1999). The transition to kindergarten. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Pianta, R. C., & Kraft-Sayre, M. (2003). Successful kindergarten transition: Your guide to connecting children, families, and schools. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Powell, G. (2004). Quality in Head Start: A dream within reach. In Zigler, E. & Styfco, S. J. (Eds.), The Head Start debates (pp. 297–308). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Raden, A. (2003). Universal access to pre-kindergarten: A Georgia case study. In Reynolds, A. J., Wang, M., & Walberg, H. (Eds.), Early childhood programs for a new century (pp. 71–113). Washington, DC: CWLA Press.Google Scholar
Ramey, C. T., Campbell, F. A., & Ramey, S. L. (1999). Early intervention: Successful pathways to improving intellectual development. Developmental Neuropsychology, 16, 385–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramey, C. T., & Ramey, S. L. (1998). Commentary. The transition to school: Opportunities and challenges for children, families, educators, and communities. Elementary School Journal, 98, 293–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramey, S. L., Ramey, C. T., & Lanzi, R. G. (2004). The transition to school: Building on preschool foundations and preparing for lifelong learning. In Zigler, E. & Styfco, S. J. (Eds.), The Head Start debates (pp. 397–413). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Raver, C. C., & Zigler, E. (1991). Three steps forward, two steps back: Head Start and the measurement of social competence. Young Children, 46(4), 3–8.Google Scholar
Reynolds, A. J. (2000). Success in early intervention: The Chicago Child-Parent Centers. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Reynolds, A. J. (2003). The added value of continuing early intervention into the primary grades. In Reynolds, A. J., Wang, M. C., & Walker, H. J. (Eds.), Early childhood programs for a new century (pp. 163–196). Washington, DC: CWLA Press.Google Scholar
Rolnick, A., & Grunewald, R. (2003). Early childhood development: Economic development with a high public return. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, The Region (Supplement), 17(4), 6–12.Google Scholar
Schweinhart, L. J. (2002). Making valid educational models central in preschool standards. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
Scrivner, S., & Wolfe, B. (2002, October). Universal preschool: Much to gain but who will pay? Working Paper Series, Foundation for Child Development. www.ffcd.org.Google Scholar
Vandell, D. L., & Wolfe, B. (2000). Childcare quality: Does it matter and does it need to be improved? Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
Whitehurst, G. J. (2001, Summer). Much too late. Education Matters, pp. 9, 16–19.Google Scholar
World Bank. (2005). Financing options in early child development. http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTEDUCATION/EXTECD/0,contentMDK:20259114∼menuPK:527328∼pagePK:148956∼piPK:216618∼theSitePK:344939,00.html. Accessed May 2005.
Zigler, E., & Seitz, V. (1982). Social policy and intelligence. In Sternberg, R. (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 586–641). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×