Scholars Debate the State of Early Childhood Research

On Wednesday, four prominent scholars, Timothy Bartik, Dale C. Farran, William T. Gormley Jr., and Russ Whitehurst, joined AEI’s Katharine B. Stevens to discuss the research base of early childhood programs, what it has offered the field, and what questions it has left unanswered. (A full video of the event can be accessed here.) The panel specifically focused on what the research says about the effects of pre-K on student academic achievement in the short- and long-term and what gaps remain in the current pre-K research.

Much of the panel discussion centered around the question of whether current research provides adequate support for expanding pre-K programs across the country. While multiple studies have found positive academic gains as a result of pre-K in a number of states, including Oklahoma, Georgia, New Jersey, and West Virginia, a recent Tennessee study found that, by third grade, children who participated in the state’s pre-K program were actually doing worse on some academic and social measures compared to peers who were not enrolled in the program.

William Gormley argued that the fact that different studies have reached different conclusions about the extent of pre-K effectiveness doesn’t necessarily mean any one of these studies is flawed. Gormley stated that, “I’m inclined to believe that all of the studies have reached basically the right conclusion about their respective sites. And even though there are differences in methodologies, the differences in methodologies are not driving the differences in those outcomes.” Gormley went on to argue that the issue might not be so much the quality of pre-K programs themselves, but rather the differing levels of instructional quality students receive in K-3rd grade once they leave pre-K programs. Gormley highlighted recent research suggesting pre-K gains can be sustained if advanced academic content is taught in kindergarten as opposed to content that is repetitious or redundant. Even when children attend a high-quality pre-K program, if they then matriculate into a dysfunctional K-12 system it can be very difficult to sustain the gains made in pre-K.

The panelists disagreed over how best to respond to the current gaps in the research on pre-K effectiveness. Russ Whitehurst pointed out that about $30 billion in combined federal and state money is being spent each year on early childhood education and argued that claims for a high return on investment for pre-K programs are “based on very weak evidence.” Whitehurst noted that such a large amount of money might better be used on other programs that could benefit children, such as a paid family leave policy that would allow parents to spend more time at home with their children.

Timothy Bartik argued that while not everything is known about the lasting benefits of pre-K, the evidence we do have clearly supports the call for increased investment in pre-K programs across the country. Bartik stated that, “We know enough to say that significant expansions of pre-K would have a high benefit/cost ratio…though that’s only the case if we’re willing to spend the money and time to make sure those programs are high-quality. If we’re not going to make sure those programs are high-quality…we might as well not bother.” Bartik emphasized that some degree of fade-out in later years occurs even among programs that have been proven to lead to positive long-term effects, such as the Perry Preschool Project. Bartik joined the other panelists in describing the difficulty of measuring program quality since indicators of quality, such as classroom climate and the nature of teacher-child interactions, are more difficult to measure.

Dale Farran emphasized that there’s still a lack of high-quality developmental research when it comes to pre-K and that gaps exist when it comes to measuring “soft skills” such as cooperation and empathy that might be linked to long-term life success. One thing all panelists agreed on is the need for further research concerning the fade-out of academic gains that sometimes occurs as students progress through elementary school. Fortunately, there’s good news on this front. The Institute for Education Sciences recently announced six research sites embarking on new studies to examine this issue. The new studies should help test the hypothesis that some pre-K gains fail to persist over time due to a lack of high-quality teaching and learning experiences once students leave pre-K and enter the formal K-12 education system.

The American Enterprise Institute will be releasing a report in the next few weeks that describes the four major research methods used in early childhood research and profiles ten of the leading early childhood programs around the country. And, for a discussion of facts and challenges to keep in mind about pre-K, be sure to read Laura Bornfreund and Lisa Guernsey’s recent article.”