A Media Analysis Approach to Understanding the Diffusion and Policy Entrepreneurs of the Universal Preschool Movement

1. A Media Analysis Approach to Understanding the Diffusion and Policy Entrepreneurs of the Universal Preschool Movement F. Chris Curran, Ph.D Student Peabody College, Vanderbilt University Introduction Sample and Methods Results The United States’ public education system is increasingly being referred to as P-12 rather than the traditional K-12. This change in terminology reflects the movement to include early childhood education, namely preschool, as a part of the traditional public education system. Within this movement, universal preschool represents the most complete adoption of early childhood education into the traditional system. By “universal preschool”, it is meant a government funded early childhood education program open to all students at no cost. Universal preschool contrasts with targeted programs such as Head Start that focus on a defined subpopulation of students. While municipalities and the federal government are engaged in the debate surrounding universal preschool, the work presented within concerns itself with the role of states in the spread of universal preschool. To date, the literature currently reflects a lack of analysis on the reasons for state adoption of policies of universal preschool. The purpose of this study is to explore the role of print media as a means of policy diffusion and propagation of policy entrepreneur’s agendas. Research Questions: The specific questions addressed in the media analysis were as follows: 1) To what extent did the media reference other states’ universal preschool programs during the time leading up to a state’s adoption of universal preschool? 2) To what extent did the media reference a specific policy entrepreneur during the time leading up to a state’s adoption of universal preschool? 3) How does the print media’s portrayal of other states’ universal preschool policies and policy entrepreneurs differ between states that have adopted policies of universal preschool and those that fell just short of adopting such policies? Sample: The sample consisted of print media articles contained in the LexisNexis Academic Newspapers and Wires database. Given that Georgia was the first state to adopt a policy of universal preschool and could, therefore, not have been influenced by a policy of universal preschool in another state, Georgia was omitted from the media analysis. Several other states were removed from the sample due to a lack of available print media articles, representing a lack of media coverage of the policy adoption. The final sample consisted of two states that have adopted policies of universal preschool, namely Florida and Illinois, and one state that nearly adopted such a policy but fell just short, namely California. Method: A search was conducted using LexisNexis Academic Newspapers and Wires. The search was restricted by state and limited to the two years prior to adoption of universal preschool in the state. In order to identify a sufficient number of pertinent articles, four different keyword variations were used, namely “universal preschool”, “preschool for all”, “universal prekindergarten” or “universal pre-k”. Retrieved articles whose content was actually about preschool were coded for any mentions of other states’ universal preschool programs as well as any mentions of specific policy entrepreneurs in that state. -The media referenced other states’ policies at a greater rate in states that eventually adopted a universal preschool policy than in the state that did not adopt the policy. Diffusion Maps -The rate of media reference of policy entrepreneurs was fairly consistent across states examined. -Of the two states that went through referendum/proposition votes, editorials were more positive in the state that adopted the policy than the one that did not adopt the policy. Background Literature Conclusions Adopters of policies of universal preschool: Georgia (1995) New York (1997) Oklahoma (1998) West Virginia (2000) Florida (2002) Illinois (2006) Iowa (2007) Louisiana (2008) Of the states that have adopted policies of universal preschool, only three have currently reached the point of full implementation, namely providing the service to all interested four-year olds. Other states are still phasing the policy into practice or have become stalled in the implementation phase due to budget concerns. Policy Diffusion: The theoretical lens of policy diffusion views diffusion as the means by which a policy or innovation is transferred from one state to another (Berry and Berry, 1999; Walker, 1969). Preschool: -Targeted preschool programs have shown positive short-term academic outcomes (Abbott-Shim, Lambert, & McCarty, 2009; Casto & Mastropieri, 1986; McKey et al., 1985; Puma, Bell, & Cook, 2005). -Targeted programs have also demonstrated long term positive outcomes such as increased college attendance and decreased crime rates (Barnett, 1992; Belfield, 2006; Casto & Mastropieri, 1986; Currie & Thomas, 1995; Ludwig & Miller, 2007; McKey et al., 1985; Milagros, 2005; Puma, Bell, & Cook et al., 2010; Reynolds, 2011). Media Portrayal: -A previous analysis found universal preschool to be a state and local policy (Brown & Wright, 2011). -Found it to be a largely liberal policy (Brown & Wright, 2011). -The media referenced policy entrepreneurs at a greater rate than other states’ policies of universal preschool. This suggests that policy entrepreneur theoretical lens may be more appropriate than a diffusion theory lens for studying universal preschool. -Other state’s policies were mentioned at a higher rate in states that actually adopted the policy than in states that considered but failed to adopt the policy. This suggests that policy diffusion may still have played a role in pushing the policy to adoption. Figure 1: Universal Preschool Policy Adoption Figure 2: Universal Kindergarten Policy Adoption Evidence from Media Florida: "One of the things that really compelled me to do this was the experience that my own children had in pre-K…” –Alex Penelas, Former Miami-Dade County Mayor (Associated Press, 2002 February 14th) Penelas said his interest in pre-K came from witnessing its impact on his own children. He modeled his amendment on the universal pre-K program that Georgia has had since the early '90s and is funded from lottery ticket sales. "I know what my children got and I'd like to have the same opportunity for other children…” –Alex Penelas, Former Miami-Dade County Mayor (Sarasota Harold Tribune, 2002 October 6th) "If the state of Georgia can do it, God knows, Florida can do it." – George Sheldon, Former Florida State Education Commission Candidate (St. Petersburg Times, 2000 August 31st) Emerging trends: -Personal experiences drove efforts of Florida’s policy entrepreneur Alex Penelas. -Florida was well aware and likely influenced by Georgia’s universal preschool policy. Illinois: "The data is too strong to ignore," Blagojevich said of numerous studies that show a preschool education leads to better test scores through an educational career. (Chicago Daily Herald, 2006 May 13th) "It's those precious years between 3 and 5 when kids learn the most…" –Rod Blagojevich, Former Governor of Illinois (Copley News Service, 2006 July 25th) "Nationwide, state pre-K is almost all about 4-year-olds. Illinois really is on the forefront if it is talking about all 3-year-olds.” – Steven Barnett, Education Researcher (Chicago Tribune,2006 February 12th) Emerging Trends: -Blagojevich used evidence of the positive effects on kids to promote the policy. -State policy makers were aware of other states’ policies, but preferred to focus on how their policy would expand on these by serving three year olds. Limitations and Future Work Limitations: -A majority of the states with policies of universal preschool lacked substantial media coverage of the policy adoption and consequently could not be analyzed. -Analysis was limited to print media and to newspapers contained in the Lexis Nexis database. -As a result, the analysis here may be biased due to the sources drawn from and may not be representative of policy adoption in other states. Future Work: -Event history analysis of state adoption of policies of universal preschool. References • Farrington, B. (2002, February 14th) Ballot initiative would make preschool available for all 4-year-olds. Associated Press. • Fineout, G. (2002, October 6th) Preschool measure up to voters; How strongly the Legislature would back the amendment is unknown. Sarasota Harold Tribune. B-Section • Jedlowski, J. (2006, May 13th) Pitching 'preschool for all' New program will help level education playing field, Illinois first lady says. Chicago Daily Herald. p.3 • Rado, D. (2000, August 31st) Candidate: Let all kids go to preschool. St. Petersburg Times. p.5B • Rado, D. (2006, February 12th) State eyes free preschool: Blagojevich plan would offer program to all 3- and 4-year-olds. Chicago Tribune. • Ramsey, M. (2006, July 25th) Preschool for All - or at least 10,000 kids. Illinois Wire. • Abbott-Shim, M., Lambert, R., McCarty, F. (2009). A comparison of school readiness outcomes for children randomly assigned to a Head Start program and the program’s wait list. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8(2), 191-214. • Barnett, W.S. (1992). Benefits of compensatory preschool education. The Journal of Human Resources, 27(2), 279-312. • Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. D. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. Theories of the policy process. Edited by P.A. Sabatier. Westview Press. • Brewer, C., Gasko, J. W., & Miller, D. (2011). Have we been here before? Lessons learned from a microhistory of the policy development of universal kindergarten. Educational Policy, 25(1), 9 -35. • Brown, C. A., & Wright, T. S. (2011). The rush toward universal public pre-k: A media analysis. Educational Policy, 25(1), 115 -133. • Casto, G., Mastropieri, M. (1986). The efficacy of early intervention programs: A meta-analysis. Exceptional Children. 52(5), 417-424. • Currie, J., Thomas, D. (1995) Does Head Start make a difference? The American Economic Review, 85(3), 341-364. • McKey, R.H., Condelli, L., Ganson, H., Barrett, B., McConkey, C., & Plantz, M. (1985). The impact of Head Start on children, families, and communities (Final report of the Head Start Evaluation, Synthesis, and Utilization Project). Washington, D.C.: DHHS. • Milagros, N., Belfield, C.R., Barnett, W.S., Schweinhart, L. (2005). Updating the economic impacts of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(3), 245-261. • Puma, M., Bell, S., Cook, R., Heid, C., Lopez, M., et al. (2005) Head Start impact study: First year findings. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation. Administration for Children and Families. • Puma, M., Bell, S., Cook, R., Heid, C., Lopez, M., et al. (2010) Head Start impact study: Final report. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation. Administration for Children and Families. • Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., White, B.A.B., Ou, S., Robertson, D.L. (2011). Age 26 cost-benefit analysis of the Child-Parent Center early education program. Child Development, 82(1), 379-404. • Walker, J. L. (1969). The diffusion of innovations among the American states. The American Political Science Review, 63(3), 880-899.