Maximizing Returns from Pre-Kindergarten Education

1. Maximizing Returns from Pre-Kindergarten Education Conference on Education and Economic Development Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland November 19, 2004 W. Steven Barnett, Ph.D. National Institute for Early Education Research www.nieer.org (732) 932-4350, sbarnett@nieer.org

2. Overview Topics: • Trends and current landscape • Rationale for public investment • How to increase efficiency Efficiency determined by policies about: • Person—Who? • Process—How? • Context—What else?

3. Trends and Current Landscape • Preschool education is growing steadily • Patchwork of public & private programs • Most public programs target the poor • Many poor children still not enrolled • Enrollment is lowest at moderate income

9. Rationale for Public Investment in Pre-K • High Rates of Return • Large Externalities • Imperfect Information • Principal-Agent Problem • Myopia • Individual Risk

10. Economic Benefits of Early Education Well-established • Increased achievement • Reduced grade repetition and special education • Increased educational attainment • Increased employment, productivity, and earnings • Less welfare dependency • Reduced crime and delinquency Some evidence • Less abuse and neglect • Increased maternal employment and earnings (child care) • Decreased health care costs and mortality

11. Three Benefit-Cost Analyses

12. Perry Preschool: Educational Effects

13. Perry: Economic Effects at Age 27

14. Perry: Arrests per person by age 27

15. Abecedarian Reading Ach. Over Time

16. Abecedarian Math Achievement Over Time

17. Abecedarian : Academic Benefits

18. CPC: Academic and Social Benefits at School Exit

19. Economic Returns to Pre-K for Disadvantaged Children Cost Benefits B/C Perry Pre-K $16,264 $277,631 17.07 Abecedarian $36,929 $139,571 3.78 Chicago $ 7,417 $ 52,936 7.14

20. Person: Who Should Get Public Pre-K? • Targeting is costly and imperfect • Head Start misses most poor children • About half of Head Start children not poor • Benefits do not stop at the poverty line • Many nonpoor have similar problems • Benefits decrease gradually with income • Georgetown study of UPK in OK

21. Educational Failure is Common for Middle Class Children Middle class children have fairly high rates of the problems that Pre-K reduces for poor children. IncomeRetention Dropout Lowest 20% 17% 23% 20-80% 12% 11% Highest 20% 8% 3% Source:US Department of Education, NCES (1997). Dropout rates in the United States: 1995. Figures are multi-year averages.

22. Cognitive Readiness Gap

23. Social Readiness Gap

24. Process: Improving Quality and Outcomes in Pre-K • Outcomes of models not fully replicated • Teaching is inadequate • Teachers poorly qualified, poorly paid • Curriculum lacking • Class sizes sometimes too large • Standards and accountability needed • Leadership and supervision required

25. Effects of Models v. Large Scale Models Head Start/ Public School Special Education 19.6 4.7** Grade Repetition 14.9 8.4* **p<.01, two tailed t-test with unequal variances *p<.05, two-tailed t test with unequal variances

26. Preschool Classroom Quality is Too Low Excellent Good Minimal

27. Teaching Quality in Urban NJ Classrooms (PCI, by Item) 1999

28. Children’s Experiences in Three Curricula

29. Some Negative Curriculum Effectsthrough Age 23

30. Some Positive Curriculum Effects through Age 23

31. Process: Research Needs • Requires RCT’s • Age of start and years • Length of day and year • Fine tune class size and ratio • Fine tune staffing and support • Services beyond the classroom • Choice and competition

32. Context: Changing policy, Changing World K-12 policies must synchronize Education is more important NCLB requires closing the gap High rates of poverty and low ed. persist Nation needs higher productivity Crime has become even more costly

33. Conclusions • Public Pre-K will and should grow • Public Pre-K must be improved • Universal programs may be more efficient • Quality can and must be raised • Balanced curriculum is part of quality