Title I and Early Childhood Programs: a Look at Investments in the NCLB Era
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Child Care and Early Education Series, Paper No. 2 1 POL ICY PAPER CENTER FOR LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY O c t o b e r 2 0 0 7 Child Care and Early Education Series P a p e r N o . 2 Title I and Early Childhood Programs: A Look at Investments in the NCLB Era by Danielle Ewen and Hannah Matthews Introduction young children beginning at A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S birth. Title I of NCLB presents The demographics of the coun- The research and analysis reflected in this an opportunity for schools and try’s young child population are paper were made possible by the generous school districts to increase support of the Foundation for Child changing in several ways, creat- investments in high-quality Development, The George Gund Foundation, ing challenges for school dis- The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur early education initiatives, tricts across the country as the Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard which may have long-term ben- Foundation, and an anonymous donor. number of at-risk young chil- efits for at-risk children. Yet dren increases. At the same Many individuals contributed to this report. implementation of NCLB also We are indebted to the state and local school time, educators are working administrators who took time out of their presents a number of challenges toward meeting new accounta- busy schedules to speak with us. Information that may impact the availability bility requirements established on individual school districts was verified by of resources for early education district personnel and was accurate at the in the No Child Left Behind programs. time of publication. We are grateful to our Act (NCLB). The first compo- colleagues at CLASP, Rachel Schumacher and nent of NCLB, Title I, is the Elizabeth Hoffmann, for their advice and largest federal funding source From 2000 to 2005, the num- input, and to Kristen Darling, who assisted ber of poor children under the with interviews and research for this report. for low-income students. While Thanks also to Steve Thorngate, CLASP’s Title I is widely known as a age of six increased by 16 per- communications coordinator, for his editing 1 funding source for elementary cent. According to the latest support. and secondary education, Title estimates, one in five children We also appreciate the insights of our under the age of six lives in a reviewers, Katie Hamm; Karen Manship and I funds may be used to serve Susan Muenchow, American Institutes for 2 poor family. The growing Research; Jana Martella, National Association number of poor and low- of Early Childhood Specialists in State About the Authors income children is particularly Departments of Education; Adele Robinson, National Association for the Education of troublesome because these chil- Danielle Ewen is Director Young Children; and Fasaha Traylor, of Child Care and Early dren may face a number of risk Foundation for Child Development. Education and Hannah factors during early childhood While CLASP is grateful for all assistance and Matthews is a Policy Analyst that threaten healthy develop- funding related to this paper, the authors at CLASP. ment and learning, including alone are responsible for its content. 2 P O L I C Y P A P E R low birth weight, stunted The growth in poverty and its as one research-proven method growth, obesity, and lead poi- associated risk factors among of increasing student achieve- soning—each of which is asso- very young children suggests ment. Title I-funded early edu- ciated with physical disabilities, that efforts to reduce the cation programs can also help reduced IQ, and grade repeti- achievement gap should begin improve connections between tion.3 According to the in children’s earliest years. This schools, pre-kindergarten pro- increase in children at risk has grams, child care providers, and Quality pre-kindergarten is necessary, the potential to impact the Head Start and Early Head but not sufficient, to raise the educational implementation of NCLB, Start programs serving young achievement of all children. which requires schools to children at risk of school fail- For children to get the most out of improve achievement among all ure; and they can increase and growing public investments in early children—including poor, low- expand the availability of high- learning, we must align standards, income, minority, and ELL stu- quality settings in a community. curriculum, and assessment from pre- dents. In 2007, states received Research demonstrates that kindergarten through kindergarten and into the early elementary grades. $12.8 billion in Title I funds, well-designed and well-imple- which are the main vehicle for mented high-quality early edu- - Foundation for Child Development NCLB’s accountability require- cation programs can improve ments. Federal education fund- outcomes for all children, par- National Center for Education ing was estimated to comprise ticularly those from low- Statistics, nearly half of all approximately 9 percent of total income families and immigrant entering kindergarteners have elementary and secondary edu- families.8 High-quality pro- one or more risk factors— cation expenditures in 2006- grams should support the full defined as having a mother with 2007.7 range of children’s development less than a high school degree, and help parents access neces- living in a family that has While Title I funds can be used sary services for themselves and received food stamps or welfare by local educational agencies their children, such as medical assistance, living in a single- (LEAs) to support the learning and dental care, mental health parent household, or having needs of students in all grades, services, nutritional services, parents whose primary lan- the flexibility of the funds gives family support, and services for guage is a language other than LEAs the opportunity to direct children with disabilities (see English.4 As of 2000, one in 10 funding toward the country’s box on p. 3). Longitudinal kindergarteners in the nation youngest and most vulnerable research on three comprehen- was an English Language children, through high-quality sive early childhood programs Learner (ELL).5 By 2015, it is programs spanning the early with positive impacts on low- projected that children of childhood and early elementary income children into adulthood immigrants will comprise 30 years. Addressing the achieve- found that these programs gen- percent of the country’s school- ment gap through the provision erally began early in the child’s age children.6 Many of these of high-quality early education life and at least by age three.9 children also face economic can have large impacts, and it hardships and significant barri- should be an important compo- To sustain the benefits of early ers to healthy development and nent of education reform. In an education, children must con- school success. era of accountability, local tinue to receive high-quality school districts may look to educational opportunities and Title I-funded early education support services throughout Child Care and Early Education Series, Paper No. 2 3 childhood. Research points to course of the kindergarten year, should build upon children’s the importance of duration in compared to children in half- earlier educational experiences early education interventions. day kindergarten. Full-day by aligning curriculum, stan- Children who participated in classes also allowed teachers dards, and instruction.13 two model early education pro- more time to focus on activities grams showed increased gains outside of reading and language Despite their promise, high- when services continued into arts, including math, social quality publicly funded early early elementary school. The studies, science, and art.12 To education programs are in short Abecedarian Project provided be most beneficial to young supply. A chronic lack of fund- high-intensity early education children, full-day kindergarten ing has led policymakers to services for children from infancy to age five; a small number of these children con- C L A S P B E L I E V E S T H AT T H E C O M P O N E N T S O F tinued to receive family support H I G H - Q U A L I T Y E A R LY E D U C AT I O N I N C L U D E T H E services into second grade. The F O L L O W I N G : Chicago Child-Parent Centers Sufficient funding to attract and retain well-trained and qualified started with a three-year-old teachers in formal settings preschool program, family sup- Training and information for all providers, whether informal or port services, and follow-up formal, to address the developmental needs of all children, through school age. While chil- particularly those who may be more likely to experience the risk dren in both programs outper- factors associated with poverty formed their peers who did not Availability of and access to comprehensive services for families participate in either preschool needing them, including developmental screenings and follow-up treatment; child health, mental health, and nutrition services; and program, those who continued access to continuous and ongoing medical care, family support, to receive services during the and home visiting early elementary years saw Parental involvement opportunities for all parents, including increased gains in academic those working full-time and those who may not speak English as achievement over those chil- their first language dren who received fewer years Infrastructure supports to ensure ongoing monitoring and quality of services.10 improvement, technical assistance in all aspects of the program, and program assessment in formal settings Evidence suggests as well that Strategies to help children manage transitions to other full-day kindergarten is another classrooms or programs, including kindergarten important component for local Inclusion of children with special needs in settings with normally communities to build on the developing children, along with supports to teachers and parents to help all children reach their full potential successes and supports that young children have gained in Appropriately serving culturally and linguistically diverse children with bilingual and bicultural teachers and caregivers, 11 early childhood programs.