E arly child development: what we have learned from monitoring Clyde Hertzman HELP, UBC

1. Early child development: what we have learned from monitoringClyde HertzmanHELP, UBC

2. Why??? Because early human development influences the life course

3. Sensitive Periods in Early Brain Development Pre-school years School years High Numbers Peer social skills Symbol Sensitivity Language Habitual ways of responding Emotional control Vision Hearing Low 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 Years Graph developed by Council for Early Child Development (ref: Nash, 1997; Early Years Study, 1999; Shonkoff, 2000.)

4. Life Course Problems Related to Early Life 2nd Decade 3rd/4th Decade 5th/6th Decade Old Age • School Failure • Teen Pregnancy • Criminality • Obesity • Elevated Blood • Pressure • Depression • Coronary Heart • Disease • Diabetes • Premature • Aging • Memory Loss

5. Why??? Because human development is an emergent property of experience at all levels

8. Why??? Because human development does not care about institutional boundaries

11. Linkage of EDI to Success in Grade 4 90.0 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 0.0 Percent not meeting expectations Reading Numeracy Number of EDI vulnerabilities Zero One Two Three Four Five

13. A Population Based Measure

14. What Does the EDI Measure?

16. What the maps reveal… • • Large local area differences in the proportion of developmentally vulnerable children • • The high proportion of avoidable vulnerability • The degree to which socioeconomic context explains and does not explain variations in early development • Which communities are doing better or worse than predicted…….to set up the study of ‘why’

17. EDI  SES Relationship

18. EDI  SES Relationship

19. What the maps reveal… • • Large local area differences in the proportion of developmentally vulnerable children • • The high proportion of avoidable vulnerability • The degree to which socioeconomic context explains and does not explain variations in early development • Which communities are doing better or worse than predicted…….to set up the study of ‘why’ • Proportionate universality in programs and policies

20. On average, disadvantaged communities have poorer outcomes, However, most vulnerable children live elsewhere Socioeconomic Disadvantage Socioeconomic Advantage

21. What does it take to reduce inequality? High vulnerability EDI Low vulnerability SES Disadvantaged Advantaged

22. Vulnerable children are distributed across communities and the SES spectrum HELP SES Index High Low

23. Targeted programs? High vulnerability Majority of vulnerable children receive no benefit EDI Vulnerability may be reduced for targeted groups Low vulnerability SES Disadvantaged Advantaged

24. Targeting programs towards low SES leave many vulnerable children without access HELP SES Index High Low

25. Universal programs? High vulnerability Barriers to access may prevent all from benefiting EDI Potential to steepen the gradient Low vulnerability SES Disadvantaged Advantaged

26. Proportionate Universality Universal access at a scaleandintensitythat addresses barriers at every level High vulnerability Gradient flattened at both ends of the SES spectrum, but proportionate to level of risk Barriers to access EDI 10 -15% Low vulnerability SES Disadvantaged Advantaged

27. What the maps reveal… • • Large local area differences in the proportion of developmentally vulnerable children • • The high proportion of avoidable vulnerability • The degree to which socioeconomic context explains and does not explain variations in early development • Which communities are doing better or worse than predicted…….to set up the study of ‘why’ • Proportionate universality in programs and policies • Trace change over time

28. Lessons Learned Business as usual does not lead to progress

29. BC 30.9% 2.2% From Wave 3 School Districts

30. Lessons Learned Local action has not led to sustained progress in ECD, but wherever sustained progress has occurred, local action has been essential.

31. Lessons Learned Local ecologies for children really do function as complex adaptive systems.

32. Lessons Learned Proportionate universality best implemented locally

33. Lessons Learned Cross-sectional comparisons of test scores conceal more than they reveal.

34. Starting ready for school? Registered every year? Progressing through grade levels? Participating in school assessments? Passing school assessments? 34,913 children

35. Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5 Column 6 Column 7 Column 8 Study Population at K EDI Score at K Registered Every Year Grade Transition FSA Participation at Grade 7 FSA Outcome at Grade 7 FSA Participation at Grade 7 FSA Outcome at Grade 7 79% 82% Reading Scale Numeracy Scale Reading Scale Numeracy Scale 88% Vulnerable on 1 or More Scales 89% 15,832 Passed 15,214 Passed 98% 19,307 Wrote 19,191 Wrote 3,475 Failed 3,977 Failed 21,742 Ideal 2,435 Did not write 2,551 Did not write 92% 22,190 Yes 223 Passed 204 Passed 264 Wrote 262 Wrote 24,198 Not vulnerable 2,008 No 41 Failed 58 Failed 448 Not ideal 184 Did not write 186 Did not write 66% 65% 79% 34,913 79% 4,546 Passed 4,391 Passed 93% 88% 6,921 Wrote 6,823 Wrote 8,666 Ideal 2,375 Failed 2,432 Failed 9,330 Yes 10,572 Vulnerable 1,745 Did not write 1,843 Did not write 1,242 No 112 Passed 89 Passed 143 Missing 183 Wrote 171 Wrote 664 Not ideal 71 Failed 82 Failed 481 Did not write 493 Did not write Studying Children’s Development Over Time Source: J.E.V. Lloyd & C. Hertzman (2012) Manuscript under review

36. Thank You www.earlylearning.ubc.ca