Starting Out Equal:  Examining Preschool as a Means for Closing the Achievement Gap

Abstract

            The achievement gap between minority and non-minority students has been a topic of educational research for many years, however recent federal legislation has caused a resurgence of interest in the problem.  One way states are attempting to alleviate the gap is by increasing preschool programs for students with low socio-economic status.  This paper addresses current research on the achievement gap and on the impact preschool has on lessening the divide between middle-class and low-income students.  An examination of programs in Virginia, including the VPI, is included along with implications for policy and practice.

Introduction

    It is September, the first week of school and I am visiting the kindergarten classrooms to take a first look at the newest additions to our school family.  In one classroom, the teacher has organized the tables into groups with supplies lying neatly in the center.  The children’s names are written on nametags at each seat.  They are eagerly seated in a group on the carpet, listening to the teacher read a book.  When she is finished, she asks the children to find their name on one of the tables and sit down in their spot to begin an art activity based on the book.  Some children run directly to their names.  Others are slower, but with a little help from their friends, find the spot that is to be their space in the classroom.  The crowd dwindles as the children go to their seats to meet their tablemates.  A few children, though, continue to wander around the room.  I walk up to a small African-American boy and ask, “What’s your name?”  He tells me and I prompt him to look for the first letter in his name.  A blank stare tells me that he doesn’t recognize his letters.  I gently help him to his spot, and return to help several other children, soon learning that they were not native English speakers. In a later conversation, the teacher confesses that every year the group of students who can’t do the name activity grows larger. This year the number of children who cannot recognize the first letter of their name especially disheartens her.

Further investigation into school records shows that most of the children I had helped in the classroom had not been in a preschool program.  This fact makes me wonder because our school alone has two funded programs for preschool students.  Digging deeper, I find that the first student I had helped had been eligible to attend Head Start, however all of the available slots at our building had been filled by the overflow from another school.  Other children in the classroom had been extended the same fate or had parents who reported they just missed the financial cut-off for the preschool programs and couldn’t afford a private school.  I sit back at my desk, wondering what the future had in store for these children and the disservice that had been done with their early education.  Would they ever be able to catch up, or had we unconsciously given them membership in the group of low-performing students that educators struggle to help but that consistently continue to fall between the cracks in the educational system until they graduate or give up?  Would the fact that these children had unequal skills from the start seal their fate as an adolescent and young adult?  The questions swirling in my thoughts were overwhelming and there were no immediate answers.  I would just have to wait and see what time and intervention would bring.

            The skills that children may not possess when they first enter school have often been described in the literature as the beginning of what is known as the achievement gap.  While the achievement gap can be defined in several ways, it almost always refers to a gap in the performance between middle-class students and students who come from minority or low-income backgrounds.  Recent federal legislation such as the No Child Left Behind Act has increased funding for early childhood education programs, signaling a resurgence of investigation into best practices for educating young children as a means for boosting later school performance.  This paper will attempt to look at these early childhood programs in the context of their potential impact on decreasing the achievement gap in education.  After providing brief background information on achievement gap theory and preschool practices, the paper will investigate the early education practices of states, including Virginia, and will lend itself to a discussion of the implications for policy and practice. 

The Achievement Gap

            Although it has been present in educational conversations since the 1954 ruling of Brown v. Board of Education, the achievement gap in educational performance between minority and non-minority students has become an increasingly popular topic in the educational research community.  Slavin and Madden (2002) stated the gap in performance between African-American and Latino students and their white classmates starts early in elementary school and has a direct impact on the future educational and social lives of these children.  In the same year, Lee and Burkham (2002) also proposed that there are significant differences from race and ethnicity in children’s performance on standardized tests when they first enter kindergarten.  Both sets of researchers attributed the gaps in performance to differences in the socio-economic status of the student’s families, which indirectly caused them to attend lower quality schools than students with middle-class family backgrounds.  Fryer & Levitt (2004) in their investigation of data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study kindergarten cohort remarked that although they did not find definite proof, they felt that attendance in a low-quality school was a strong factor in the achievement gap between African-American and white students. 

            In each of these studies, the achievement gap was defined by progress in reading and mathematics as measured by performance on standardized tests. Some researchers like Lee and Burkham additionally define the achievement gap in terms of social advantages based on involvement in activities like type of childcare, family activities, and home demographics (2002).  Ladson-Billings (2006) describes the socioeconomic impact of the achievement gap as an achievement “debt,” noting that there is a mismatch in the funding given to schools in locations that are primarily inhabited by white Americans and the funding given to urban schools that primarily serve children of African-American and Latino backgrounds.  She asserts that until funding in schools is equal, the students who attend poorly funded schools will continue to fall behind, adding to the educational debt that is already present for these children.  In addition, she discusses that cumulative factors, such as poor nutrition and poor health care, will continue to add to the achievement gap in schools until these issues are addressed in the greater community. 

Rothstein (2004) wrestled with the same issues: nutrition, health care, housing, in his book looking at the impact of social and economic reforms in closing the achievement gap.  In fact, he reported from his review of the literature that family income at age 5 was more important to the outcome of high school graduation of a student than the family income at a later age.  Again, this points to the great importance of socioeconomics on the early life and educational experiences of young children.  This may be the reason that states have started to expend more time and funding on developing quality preschool programs for disadvantaged children in an effort to attempt to lessen the performance gap on standardized measures of reading and math skills.

The Achievement Gap and Preschool Considerations

    Learning opportunities in the early years of a child’s life are critical to cognitive and social development.  Neuroscience research has shown that beginning at birth, children’s brains begin to make connections within their environments at a dizzying pace.  Neuronal development regulates windows of time for optimal opportunity for consolidation of skills such as motor development, emotional control, math, and language and vocabulary, all of which begin before the age of 3 (Sousa, 2000; Ramey & Ramey, 2004).  Based on this information, it stands to reason that children who are not exposed to learning-rich environments will have fewer opportunities to develop neural connections in these areas.  Ramey & Ramey (2004) noted that there is an “undeniable cumulative toll of limited learning opportunities and low expectations for children from high-risk home environments” (p.475).  Their examination of studies of the pre-K educational performance of high-risk students showed that they were around 2 years behind students who did not live in at-risk conditions (Ramey & Ramey, 2004). 

    Early literacy research has also shown that children who do not live in language-rich environments have vocabulary, memory, print, and oral language deficits that directly impact their early reading skills (Sayeski, Burgess, Pianta, & Lloyd, 2001).  These children may begin kindergarten with vocabularies that are noticeably smaller than other children their age, may not know the letters of the alphabet, and may not be familiar with the use of books and print (Kafer, 2004).  The lack of these skills significantly contributes to the achievement gap and may impact a child’s education even into high school (Kafer, 2004).  Children who attend high-quality preschool programs tend to have stronger language skills and perform higher on reading tests than students who do not participate in these learning experiences (AERA, 2005). 

    Environmental differences in children’s backgrounds may also impact the way they respond to classroom experiences when they enter the kindergarten setting.  Children coming from at-risk populations may come from a home setting that is significantly different than the classroom learning context.  Cultural differences from the mainstream population and/or exposure to poverty may cause difficulties with assessment because educators may be studying the environmental and developmental differences in children rather than their actual learning (Pianta & Reeve, 1990).  Because of this, students may be incorrectly targeted for interventions like special education, when in reality they may be experiencing a temporary developmental delay from lack of learning experiences that correlate to the school setting.  Participation in preschool programs can help bridge the differences between the home and school setting by allowing children to begin to acclimate to the school climate by engaging in age-appropriate activities that prepare them for the educational challenges of kindergarten. 

State Preschool Programs

            In order to attempt to level the playing field for children entering kindergarten, many states have increased their commitment to providing preschool programs for their students.  At this time there are no federally-mandated preschool regulations.  States are given the ability to determine the standards for any preschool program they provide, including criteria such as time, teacher credentials, funding, and eligibility (Bryant, Clifford, Saluja, Pianta, Early, Barbarin, Howes, & Burchinal, 2002).  Federal funds are available for programs like Head Start and Title I that address the needs of children from low-income families. In the mid 1990’s “one in seven 4-year-olds attended a school-based early education program” (Bryant et al., 2002, p.5).  Bryant et al. completed a survey of the preschool programs available in all 50 states in 2000 that showed much variability between the types of programs and whom they served.  Most preschool programs were based on the needs of children from low-income and English as a second language families, however some states, including Georgia, Oklahoma, and Minnesota, provided universal preschool programs.  Universal preschool programs are offered to all children in the district regardless of family income.  They tend to be school or center-based and require a significant financial commitment at the state level.  Recently, in response to increasing data documenting achievement gaps in children’s pre-reading skills, California studied the impact of moving to a more inclusive if not universal preschool model (Bridges, Fuller, Rumberger, & Tran, 2004).  Key findings from their study suggested, “that participation in preschool may close as much as half the gap in children’s developmental proficiencies among socio-economic and ethnic groups, a disparity that is firmly established at entry to kindergarten” (Bridges et al., 2004, p.2). 

            Most states, however, used an economic formula for determining preschool eligibility.  The programs also differed in the amount of time spent at school, (i.e. full versus half-day), the curriculums used, and the additional services that were provided to parents.  In addition, teacher credentials varied widely from state-to-state.  The extensive variability in services and programs makes it difficult to make broad comparisons between states; therefore it may be more beneficial to look closely at individual states to get an idea of what types of programs are currently being utilized. 

Virginia Preschool Programs

            Virginia is one of the states attempting to expand its preschool services in an effort to reduce the achievement gap of minority and low-income students.  In 2003, then Governor Mark Warner began the “Foundations for a Lifetime” program centered on four components related to early childhood education and care:  “early care and school readiness; family support; maternal and child health and nutrition, and early childhood infrastructure and coordination” (gettingready.org, 2007).  The Virginia Preschool Initiative (VPI), which had been developed from funding from the Virginia General Assembly in 1994, was considered a crucial partner in the program.  Although Virginia had programs such as Head Start, Title I, and Even Start that focused on providing extensive assistance to the most financially taxed families, a large population of low-income and at-risk preschool-aged children remained underserved.  The Virginia Preschool Initiative was started as an additional educational program to serve at-risk four-year old children not receiving assistance from other services.  Sayeski, Burgess, Pianta, and Lloyd (2001) outlined the eligibility requirements for VPI from the Virginia Department of Education.  The following factors were quoted as an index for eligibility in the VPI: 

1.      poverty;

2.      homelessness;

3.      parents or guardians are school dropouts, have limited education, or are chronically ill;

4.      family stress as evidenced by poverty, episodes of violence, crime, underemployment, unemployment, homelessness, incarceration, or family instability;

5.      child or developmental problems;

6.      limited English proficiency (p.5).

Programs were required to have teachers specifically trained in early childhood development, have low student to teacher ratios, and to provide a full-day program. 

            Current Virginia Governor Kaine has continued the commitment to provide early childhood education to the most needy of students.  He developed the “Start Strong” council to investigate new ways of creating access for as many four-year old children in the state as possible.  In February of 2006, the Virginia Senate increased funding to the VPI program by $600 a child. A review of the VPI by the Start Strong Council reported that 100 school divisions in Virginia were participating in the program.  22 districts were eligible and not participating and 14 were not eligible to receive VPI funds (Start Strong Council, 2006).  The lack of funding and space were the major reasons listed by division not participating in the program.  An additional report for the Start Strong Council from 2006-2007, backed the effectiveness of the VPI program by reporting documentation of increased reading scores by students on the preschool version of the state phonological awareness screening test.  The report also highlighted the need of the state Head Start and VPI programs to work together with other community organizations to ensure the best use of resources for all students. 

            Little research has been done to examine the effectiveness of the VPI program on later school performance.  In fact, the Frequently Asked Questions section of the Start Strong Council web page states that additional studies are not needed to determine the programs effectiveness since local divisions have documented increases in the reading scores of students who participated in the VPI.  The Council also recommends expanding the program but notes many constraints, including lack of space and funding, to enrolling additional four-year olds in the program.  This is in contrast to a July 2005 report by Voices for Virginia’s Children, who recommended funding be increased to the current VPI program to ensure quality programs and that intensive monitoring be conducted on the effectiveness of the initiative.  While it appears that the VPI may be a substantial step in helping Virginia provide preschool services to all children, it is evident that much research and investigation remains to be conducted on the actual effectiveness of the program in reducing the achievement gap for minority and low-income students.

Implications for Policy and Practice

            A review of the Virginia Preschool Initiative brings to light several implications for policy and practice for other states considering adopting preschool programs in an attempt to close the achievement gap in their school districts.  One implication in the literature regarding both programs in Virginia and other states is the need for federal, state, and community programs to work together to promote the best possible use of all resources for the greatest number of students (American Federation of Teachers, 2002).  The strong implication of a relationship between socio-economic status and school achievement highlights the need for all at-risk four-year olds to receive preschool services to level the playing field for their entrance to elementary school.  While all children could benefit from a positive transitional experience from preschool to kindergarten, it is especially important for students from low SES backgrounds to have motivating school experiences at an early age.  In order to be most effective in addressing the achievement gap, programs must incorporate local resources, including ones targeting health care and nutrition, as part of preschool.  Increasing these community services gets to the heart of what Ladson-Billings called the “achievement debt” by working to change environmental factors that may affect a student’s ability and willingness to learn. 

        Another implication that needs to be addressed for best practice is the unintended consequence of the current low SES preschool service model in excluding many other children who may also benefit from these services.   Programs, particularly in the state of Virginia, are targeted primarily toward minority and low-income families.  In some areas, these populations may be perceived as the same, possibly discouraging non-minority families from pursuing preschool programs for their children.  Districts need to work closely with community resources, such as doctors’ offices, libraries, and recreation centers, to distribute information to all parents with young children.  Although funding continues to be an issue for many areas, universal preschool could be used as a way to ensure that all children of preschool age are given the opportunity to access early education services. 

        A final area that needs to be addressed before advocating preschool as a “cure” for closing the achievement gap is the increased importance of quality teacher training.  Research has shown significant differences in the effectiveness of instruction between teachers with degrees in early childhood education and non-degreed teachers (American Federation of Teachers, 2002; Fantuzzo, Bulotsky-Shearer, McDermitt, McWayne, Frye, & Perlman, 2007; Mead, 2004).  Substantial considerations should be given to increasing the compensation for teachers of our youngest students and to providing them quality on-going training in best teaching practices.  Until preschool teaching is viewed in the same light as K-12 education, it is likely that high staff turnover rates and limited staff educational backgrounds will continue to hinder the amount of learning that could take place in preschool programs.  Changing just these requirements could make large strides toward the effectiveness of preschool programs in addressing the achievement gap of our most vulnerable students. 

        Research has shown that the achievement gap between minority and non-minority students is alive and well in American schools.  The contribution of socio-economic status to the gap has recently become an important topic in the field of education, especially when looking at the performance of kindergarten students.  While the verdict is still out on whether or not preschool programs like the Virginia Preschool Initiative will be able to make a significant stride in helping to close the achievement gap, it is clear that we can no longer take the education of our youngest citizens for granted.  Expanding preschool services to include more students and community resources may just be a baby step toward bridging the gap, but it is one way that we can try to give all of our students a motivating introduction to organized education. 

References

Alliance for Virginia’s Students. (2006, February 23).  Senate updates funding for

at-risk four-year olds. Retrieved March 30, 2007, from https://www.vastudents.org/toolbox/press/Index.cfm?pressReleaseIF=5.

American Educational Research Association.  (2005).  Early childhood education:

        Investing in quality makes sense.  Research Points, 3, 1-4.

American Federation of Teachers. (2002 July).  Early childhood education:  Building a

strong foundation for the future (Educational Issues Policy Brief No.15).  Washington, DC:  Author.

Bridges, M., Fuller, B., Rumberger, R., & Tran, L.  (2004, September).  Preschool for

California’s children:  Promising benefits, unequal access (Policy Brief No. 04-3).  Berkeley, CA:  Policy Analysis for California Education & UC Linguistic Minority Research Institute. 

Bryant, D., Clifford, R., Saluja, G., Pianta, R., Early, D., Barbarin, O., Howes, C., &

Burchinal, M.  (2002).  Diversity and directions in state pre-kindergarten programs.  Chapel Hill:  The University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, NCEDL.

Fantuzzo, F., Bulotsky-Shearer, R., McDermott, P., McWayne, C., Frye, D., & Perlman,

S. (2007).  Investigation of dimensions of social-emotional classroom behavior and  school readiness for low-income urban preschool children.  School Psychology Review, 36, 44-62.

Fryer, R. & Levitt, S. (2004).  Understanding the black-white test score gap in the first

            two years of school.  The Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 447-464.

Kafer, K. (2004).  A head start for poor children? Backgrounder, 1755, 1-4.  Retrieved

             March 30, 2007, from www.heritage.org/research/education/bg1755.cfm.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2006).  From the achievement gap to the education debt:

 Understanding achievement in U.S. schools.  Educational Researcher, 35, 3-12.

Lee, V. & Burkham, D. (2002).  Inequality at the starting gate.  Washington, DC:

  Economic Policy Institute.

Mead, S. (2004, September).  Open the preschool door, close the preparation gap (Policy

    Report). Progressive Policy Institute.

Ramey,C.& Ramey, S. (2004).  Early learning and school readiness:  Can early

    intervention make a difference?  Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 50, 471-491.

Rothstein, R. (2004).  Class and schools.  Washington, DC:  Economic Policy Institute.

Sayeski, K., Burgess, K., Pianta, R., Lloyd, J. (2001).  Literacy behaviors of preschool

children participating in an early intervention program (CIERA Rep. No. 2-014).  Ann Arbor, MI:  Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement.

Slavin, R. & Madden, N.  (2002).  “Success for All” and African-American and Latino

student achievement.  In J. Chubb & T. Loveless (Eds.), Bridging the achievement gap (pp.74-90).  Washington, DC:  Brookings Institution Press.

Sousa, D. (2001).  How the brain learns.  Thousand Oaks, CA:  Corwin Press.

Start Strong Council. (2006, December 6).  Developments in Virginia Preschool Initiative

and Head Start programs. Retrieved March 30, 2007 from www.education.virginia.gov/.../StartStrong/MeetingMats/Presentations/VPI&HS%20 Developments.ppt.

Start Strong Council.  (2007).  Start Strong Council:  Frequently asked questions. 

Retrieved March 30, 2007 from http://www.education.virginia.gov/Initiatives/EarlyChildhood/StartStrong/FAQ.cfm.

Voices for Virginia’s Children (2005, July).  Universal pre-k:  Smart investing in early

    education (Issue brief in early childhood).  Voices for Virginia’s Children.

Academic and Professional Growth Home
Portfolio Home