Voices from the Field: Stacie G. Goffin

”The role of higher education is crucial to early childhood education
becoming a recognized professional field of practice.”

Interview with
Stacie Goffin, Ed.D.
Principal
Goffin Strategy Group

Stacie Goffin

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

A recognized leader and author in early childhood education, Stacie Goffin serves as Principal of the Goffin Strategy Group and has led significant change initiatives spanning higher education, local, state, and national organizations; organizational development; and advocacy, resulting in change for systems, policy, and practice.

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Stacie:  I began my career as an early childhood special educator. After practicing as a classroom teacher for a number of years and earning my doctorate, I became an early childhood teacher educator, teaching at the undergraduate and graduate levels. I then went to the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation and had the privilege of being its first program officer for early care and education. From there I went to NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children) and directed the Accreditation Reinvention Project, which involved both the redesign of the association’s early childhood program accreditation system and developing the criteria to accompany the program standards that came out of the first national commission. These experiences gave me the opportunity to expand my understanding of early childhood education in terms of how it was viewed in different contexts and how differing responsibilities offer new levers for advancing the field. When I left NAEYC, I wasn’t sure what next I wanted to do. I became a consultant, presumably only for a short time, so I could reengage with the field in a broader way. Now, 12 years later, I am principal of the Goffin Strategy Group, which is dedicated to strengthening early childhood education’s ability to provide effective programs and services for children and families through leadership, capacity, and systems development.

Steven: What do you see as the role of advocates and others in improving the quality of early learning?

Stacie: As advocates, we tend to spend most of our time helping others to understand the importance of children’s earliest learning years, convincing them of the importance of the work we do, and developing supportive public policies on behalf of that work. I think we need to attend more to what I call “internal advocacy.” Children and their families deserve access to competent practitioners regardless of the program setting, and I believe we need to advance ECE as a recognized professional field of practice. This transformation would allow us to define ECE as a field of practice and assume responsibility for ensuring its practitioners have the knowledge, skills, and disposition necessary for effective practice, and to ensure systems are in place for verifying that our practices well serve serve children and their families.

Steven: How do you see the role of high education?

Stacie: The role of higher education is crucial to early childhood education becoming a recognized professional field of practice. One of the ways professions ensure their practitioners have the knowledge and skills necessary for effective practice is by focusing on the preparation that takes place in institutions of higher education. We need to attend in a deeper way to the role higher education plays in advancing early childhood education as a recognized profession. The issue is not only about what the field’s prospective professionals are learning in terms of their knowledge and skills; it’s also about the knowledge and skills of those preparing future early educators so, as a field of practice, we can be more confident that we are delivering on ECE’s promise.

Steven: Is there anything else you want to add?

Stacie: This is a defining moment for early childhood education. We increasingly are being made aware of the gap existing between our promises as a field of practice and our ability to fulfill those promises. In the absence of our assuming responsibility as a field of practice regarding this issue, individuals outside of ECE are defining our work. The time has come for us to develop consensus around the future we want for early childhood education and to begin working on bringing that aspiration to fruition.

Voices from the Field: Myra Jones-Taylor

“I think that is where we really need to take all this brain science that has allowed us to be in this position where we are now: talking about the importance of the earliest years and really infuse that in the daily practice of the providers who care for our children.”

Interview with Myra Jones-Taylor, PhD
Commissioner
Connecticut Office of Early Childhood

Myra Jones-Taylor

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Myra Jones-Taylor, PhD was appointed the first commissioner of the Connecticut Office of Early Childhood (OEC), established in 2013 by Governor Dannel P. Malloy. The agency’s mission is to coordinate and improve Connecticut’s birth-to-five programs and create a cohesive, high-quality system that supports the state’s youngest children in their development. She also oversees Connecticut’s Preschool Development Grant.

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Myra: It was a very circuitous route. I was getting my PhD in Anthropology and American Studies and I was planning on looking at welfare reform and I was thinking about issues of poverty. Everybody said you need to understand childcare. If you really want to understand the policy shifts that are happening, you should really pay attention to early childhood education and childcare. After I heard the 10th person telling me this, I thought maybe I should really pay attention to this. And I completely changed paths and focused on all these reforms that were happening around early childhood education and specifically how providers on the ground were reacting to them. So I ended up doing ethnography on early childhood education policy. And then that was it. I was going to go on and do my next project, which was also going to be about education and poverty. I was going work at the University of Pennsylvania, and then somebody called me and they said, remember that big mess that you were uncovering in early childhood education in New Haven? They want someone to come in and create a plan to fix it at the state level and I think you should give it a shot. I was really torn about going into academia anyway. I have this sense of urgency that I just wasn’t sure academia was going to be able to keep pace with. So when this opportunity presented itself, I really jumped at it. I thought, well, I can at least create this plan and come up with some way to have an impact. It was an incredible honor to be appointed to the lead agency that was the outgrowth of that plan.

Steven: What do you see as the role of state leaders, like yourself, in improving access to high-quality early learning programs?

Myra: There are two things that try to I focus on.. One is really figuring out this system of early childhood education. Twenty years from now, or ten years from now, I no longer want to be talking about blending and braiding funding. We really just need to figure out a better way to reflect the real need and get our federal partners and our state partners to rethink the way we currently fund early care and education. I think part of it is coming up with a new vision for the way that we serve young children in our early childhood education. That can start with three-year-olds and four-year-olds but it certainly needs to include birth to three-year-olds.

The other piece is: How does early care and education actually improve outcomes? Once you do all the tactical work of aligning policies to achieve quality and access – and not pitting one against the other – what does that quality piece look like? I think that is where we really need to take all of the brain science that has allowed us to be in this position where we are now – talking about the importance of the earliest years – and infuse that in the daily practice of the providers who care for our children. That comes through high-quality professional development. It comes through changing the conversation in communities around what is important for children and how we all need to rally around them to make sure they get that.

Steven: The President has proposed, for four years in a row now, high-quality, voluntary preschool for all four-year-olds. What do you see as some of the challenges and opportunities, particularly as it relates to equity.

Myra: I really hope that we get it this year. I hope that we could go further. The PDG, this has been huge for our state. It is allowing us to provide things in our state-funded preschool programs that we have always wanted to have but have not had the resources to include, such as delivering comprehensive services directly to children in the classroom; higher salaries; and more intensive coaching, mentoring and consultation for our providers. We can all point to what I was alluding to earlier, which is, there have been so many studies now, talking about the importance of the earliest years of a child’s life. We have all that research from neuroscience and we have all the studies that make a connection to the importance of high-quality early experiences for children, but more often than we had hoped our field falls short of providing early experiences that deliver on the promise of those studies. And every once in a while there will be some new study that may throw everything into question. But if you really peel it back, you will find that children may have had a high-quality early learning experience, and then they go into a K-3 experience that has not kept pace with the amazing experience that they had in their early learning setting. Or, you will find that a state put money into an early learning program where quality was absent. We will not see the outcomes studies tell us we should be seeing with access alone. Quality and access must go together. We know that together they make a difference. And no one should be asking these questions anymore about whether it is really worth the investment.

We need to be defining what quality looks like and how you support providers to make that happen. I think those are the biggest challenges right there. Quality costs money and providers need a lot of training. And this is a field that has been undervalued and underpaid for a very long time. And if we really want to get the good outcomes that we’re talking about, we have to have providers who can afford to take the classes that we’re saying they need to take, and who aren’t coming to work frazzled and stressed, and bearing the signs of poverty that they are just barely getting out of themselves. At the end of the day we need to ask ourselves: how do we really make this a system, regardless of the setting, that’s a high-quality setting with a workforce that is up for the task?

Open Discussion on the Role of Education Technologies in Early Childhood STEM Education

On April 21st, the U.S. Department of Education came together with the White House and numerous public and private partners to announce our shared commitment to improving Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) education in early learning (Preschool – 3rd Grade).  Early engagement in STEM is critical for our youngest learners because opportunity gaps in STEM can begin prior to preschool—and they can continue grow as students progress through school.  There are a host of ways that the public and private sectors can partner to better address this STEM opportunity gap in early learning, such as integrating STEM with the arts and literacy, and using education technologies including screen media (e.g., television, computers, videogames, tablets).  We believe that the use of technology can be an important tool for closing these gaps when used intentionally and appropriately in conjunction with other forms of pedagogy.

The U.S. Department of Education would like to initiate a discussion with the early learning and STEM communities on how best to engage and support parents, caregivers, educators, researchers and developers on how to eliminate opportunity gaps in early childhood STEM education, especially by leveraging education technologies. This conversation will inform federal policy decisions in the coming months.

Call to Action:

We ask early childhood educators and researchers, in particular, to help address these fundamental questions:

  1. Recommendations for screen media use in early childhood vary. It is difficult for educators, parents and caregivers to make informed decisions about which content is effective and how and when to use it. For example, how can educators, parents and caregivers best determine what content is age-appropriate?
  2. How can we make it easier for educators, parents and caregivers to select applications that are high quality and proven effective? What research gaps do we need to address to inform these types of decisions?
  3. How do we effectively support professional development (PD) for educators to facilitate the effective use of education technologies to close STEM opportunity gaps in early learning settings? How can education technologies help provide effective PD?
  4. How can we help media developers address the needs of diverse students and those with special needs to increase student engagement, and to promote social emotional learning?
  5. How can we bridge the opportunity gaps between STEM education, literacy, and the arts? What, if any, is the role of technology and screen media in these efforts?

Please submit your comments and questions in this open forum by 5:00 p.m. ET on Friday, May 13, 2016.  We seek open and robust discussion of these issues so that we can improve education outcomes for all young children and provide effective guidance for parents, caregivers, and educators.

Recommended Reading (in chronological order):

Media Use By Children Younger Than 2 Years
American Academy of Pediatrics (2011)

Technology and Interactive Media as Tools in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8
Fred Rogers Center and NAEYC (2012)

Envisioning a Digital Age Architecture for Early Education
New America Foundation (2014)

Tech in the Early Years: What Do We Know and Why Does It Matter?
Fred Rogers Center (2014)

Screen Sense: Setting the Record Straight
Zero to Three (2014)

Getting a Read on the App Stores : A Market Scan and Analysis of Children’s Literacy Apps
Joan Ganz Cooney Center (2015)

Beyond Turn it off: How to Advise Families on Media Use
American Academy of Pediatrics (2015)

Apps en familia: Guía para usar apps con tus hijos
Joan Ganz Cooney Center (2015)

Use of Technology to Support Early Childhood Practice: Full Report
Health and Human Services Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation (2015)

Opportunity for All? Technology and Learning in Lower-Income Families
Joan Ganz Cooney Center (2016)

Note: These resource materials are provided for the user’s convenience. The inclusion of these materials is not intended to reflect its importance, nor is it intended to endorse any views expressed, or products or services offered. These materials may contain the views and recommendations of various subject matter experts as well as hypertext links, contact addresses and websites to information created and maintained by other public and private organizations. The opinions expressed in any of these materials do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the U.S. Department of Education. The U.S. Department of Education does not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of any outside information included in these materials.

Thank you for your comments. The comment period is now closed.  Please join our list serv at www.ed.gov/early-learning for updates and progress on the joint statement.

Voices from the Field: Tammy Mann

“We talk about equity, but how do we break down this idea that children are being educated in environments that are segregated by virtue of the funding streams that support them?”

 Interview with Tammy Mann
President and CEO
The Campagna Center

Tammy Mann

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

For over 20 years, Dr. Mann has worked in the nonprofit sector in agencies devoted to improving outcomes for young children and their families. At the outset of her career, she worked on the frontlines as a psychologist, providing home visiting services to low-income pregnant women and families with very young children, holding senior executive positions at the Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute at UNCF and ZERO TO THREE. In 2012, she was appointed Commissioner of the Children, Youth, and Families Collaborative Commission in Alexandria where she serves as the first elected chair. 

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Tammy: I went straight into graduate school right after I finished my undergraduate degree in psychology. I was really focused on working with adults, honestly, and my first practicum sort of introduced me to people who were surprisingly all very fascinated with their early experiences and how they sort of thought about those and the young people that they had become. So it was simply being curious about what kind of power that represents for people. I was living in a city at a time where there was a lot being written about young children being exposed to crack cocaine. I was in Detroit in the 80s. And I was surprised to hear the doomsday kind of statements that were being made about young children. That sort of interchange along with people also talking about the early years just kind of made me fascinated. And fortunately I was in a program after I finished my masters, where I got to work with a guy in developmental psychology who was very much committed to mentoring and supporting me. I got involved in developmental health and became a clinician in Detroit, working as a home visitor with moms with young children under three dealing with depression and a whole lot of other issues. So it was really about the desire to want to see how we could intervene and support families, when their children were the youngest and vulnerable, to avoid years of having to fix things down the line. I kind of came in to this from a curiosity perspective and fell in love with the work, the people that were doing the work, and the power that the work represented — and just never looked back.

Steven: What do you see as the role of community-based providers like The Campagna Center in improving access to quality early learning programs?

Tammy: From Campagna’s angle, we are serving a little over 500 children under the age of 5 as the thrust of our work, and we are committed to doing our best to make sure that the children and the families we serve are gaining access to what they need and that the children are benefiting socially and emotionally and intellectually in all the areas of development that set them up to be on track for being able to do well when they transition in the school. That’s our commitment and what we try to live up to, and I think because we are part of the community that operates from a non-profit perspective, clearly our ability to partner and work with others, whether they are other non-profit providers and or with our schools, represents a very important opportunity to ensure that not just what we are doing under our umbrella is the best it can be, but we are working together with others in the community who are committed to that same goal and making sure we are sharing resources and supporting each other and the work. So we have a terrific collaborative here going on in our community that’s really fashioned around building a broad tent for people that have their hands on working with children during this age. We are a very important part of the tapestry of the early education community that is so vital to providing access, not just four years of age but really looking at children from birth forward.

Steven: Why would you say the President’s proposal to provide high-quality early learning and development programs for our children is important to our country, and what do you see as some of the challenges and the opportunities, particularly as it relates to equity?

Tammy: In terms of what it represents for our country — and I won’t go through the research case with you, I know you get that case very well — I will say one of the things that I was most excited about in terms of the plan was that it focused on appreciating the 0-5 perspective, on what it means for our country to invest in the education and well-being of young children. And I think that’s a really important message so I was pretty excited to see that. And the thrust is making sure what we are doing is aligned, which is a buzz word I really hate using, but I will use it for the sake of brevity, and recognize that the connection that it offers into our K-12 system and for the benefit of children and families that there is truly coherence to what is happening outside of their homes when children are in our care and the care of other early learning organizations and schools that we are truly working together to make sure kids have what they need. These invests early on can make big dividends down the line. I was really excited about the 0-5 vocal point and the opportunity to partner with child care where significant numbers of children are having early learning experiences every day across the country. This whole sense of we can’t get too myopic where we’re focusing because we miss hundreds of thousands of children who are absolutely being impacted by the quality of the experiences that they are having. So the opportunity to partner and bring to life the resources in learning — the two way street of learning from what they are experiencing and what we bring — is beautiful. I will just say I had a pretty long taxing day yesterday and I came to my office before I was leaving here at 7:30 pm or so, and someone had placed on my desk a copy of the before and after picture of learning environments. We did elect to compete in the Early Head Start-Child Care Partnerships, and our community of infant toddler care is really by and large delivered through a network of family childcare providers that are regulated. Even though it is one of the hardest places to get to the high mark that we want to see happen in terms of all the credentialing and everything, we elected to go there because that’s where children in our community at that age are being served. I took a look at a picture that our staff had taken of what the home environment looked like before we were able to deploy resources and supports with the 16 providers that we’re connected to and then what the environments looked like afterwards. It just made my heart sing because it’s not just the children that we are serving that qualify for Early Head Start that benefit, but it is also the other children who are in those environments that are having the residual opportunities to benefit. We talk about equity, but how do we break down this idea that children are being educated in environments that are segregated by virtue of the funding streams that support them? I believe we have an opportunity to be a little bit more creative. It’s not easy work to do — and that’s not because these are people who don’t care and aren’t committed to wanting to do the best they can do but you know — but being able to pay for quality matters. I think that often gets the short shrift in the equity conversation because we can aspire to wanting to see the highest of high credentials that represent one dimension of what it means to create equitable learning environments, but we can’t afford to finance that solely on the backs of parents.  How do we get there without unintentionally decimating or demoralizing or making access much more challenging for families who otherwise wouldn’t be able to work if you’re talking about using a childcare partner angle to diversify the income of children you’re serving? And the schools certainly — we are working with our schools as we’re trying to push at this issue of making the most reasonable funding stream to achieve some of the things we desire on the equity side. It is important work and we feel fortunate to be a part of pushing at this in our own situation.

 

Voices from the Field: Danielle Ewen

“We did succeed in the weave-in strategy [in ESSA] that NAEYC and others have been promulgating for years, and that gives us a huge opportunity to really grow understanding about what young children need in classrooms…”

Interview with
Danielle Ewen
Senior Policy Advisor
Education Counsel

Danielle Ewen

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Danielle Ewen served in numerous leadership positions in child care and early education policy before coming to Education Counsel as a senior policy advisor. She previously served as the Director of the Office of Early Childhood Education in the District of Columbia Public Schools, where she oversaw the operations of programs serving three- and four-year old children in high quality, comprehensive classrooms. Early in her career, she worked as a Policy Analyst at the US Department of Education in the Office of Migrant Education.

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Danielle: Well, I’m hind of a policy wonk to my very heart, and my senior honors thesis in college was about child care policy, and I actually did lots of phone interviews from California to people in Washington, including Helen Blank, when she was still at CDF (Children’s Defense Fund). So I sort of was born into it in a way. That’s how I started. Then I went to policy school and was a Presidential Management intern at the Department of Education. And from there I went on to a number of policy organizations including CDF and CLASP (Center for Law and Social Policy) and always did policy about young kids.

Steven: What do you see as the role of policy makers and advocates, with whom you work now in your position, in improving access to quality early learning programs?

Danielle: That’s a big question. I think there are probably three things. I think we have an obligation to always talk, whether we are in the policy realm or advocates or both, about what’s best for kids and their families. So keeping that at the forefront of the conversations is our first obligation. Our second obligation is to really think about how the early childhood system and the K-12 system can come together to provide access to quality education for kids that need it and have never had that, or who are in communities that are underserved. The third thing is to really make sure that young kids are part of the conversation that we are having.  With the big changes that are going on with ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act), it’s very easy, especially in the K-12 world, for early childhood programs – and even K-1-2-3 – to get left out of the big conversations about education reform. Our kids are in those systems, our kinds need access to the highest quality we can provide and good teachers and great programs. If we are not part of those conversations wherever policy conversations are happening, then we won’t get the best outcomes for our kids.

Steven: What opportunities for early learning do you see in the new education law and what do you see as some of the challenges?

Danielle: That’s a great question. I’m going to start with the challenges because I think there are two big challenges. The first challenge is that it is not an early childhood law and that we are at best a tertiary concern for many folks and folks that haven’t already been thinking about early childhood as part of their effort to implement it, won’t have this at the forefront of their mind. So I think the nature of the law is one big challenge for the early childhood world. The second challenge is big. There are these large buckets of reform built into the law — creating new accountability systems, reviewing assessments across states, thinking about school improvement, thinking about teacher effectiveness and evaluation systems, and continuous improvement of stakeholder engagement. And in none of those places in the law, is early childhood even mentioned. And yet, we need to be at the table. We need to be part of the conversation in every one of those areas so that whatever states come up with is appropriate for young kids from birth through third grade, depending on which part of the curriculum folks are willing to talk about in the K-12 frame. And there’s a real danger that folks representing early childhood and early elementary won’t be listened to in a real way, and we will either get policies that aren’t good for kids — push down, bad assessment, indicators that don’t really apply to our kids. Or we will miss opportunities to really think about how to include indicators of quality early childhood, like CLASS new disparity data into the kind of systems we want to build to make sure there are high-quality pathways to all kids and families. So those are the challenges.

And I think the opportunities are all the places where it’s an allowable use. I’m really excited where the definition of “professional development” in the bill includes early childhood providers, includes helping school leaders understand child development. I’m excited that we are not just an allowable use, but the language around understanding what the Head Start standards are, understanding what it means to provide a quality environment, is now embedded in state responsibilities. If LEAs are going to use the money that way, states have to explain and help them implement in a high quality way. I’m really excited that early childhood is included explicitly as an intervention for targeted populations, homeless children, and language minority kids. We did succeed in the weave-in strategy that NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children) and others have been promulgating for years. And that gives us a huge opportunity to really grow understanding about what young children need in classrooms, what good teaching and learning looks like for young children and how to grow access to high-quality programs.

 

Voices from the Field: Albert Wat

“More so than ever before, early childhood educators, program directors, and policy leaders should be able to see themselves in our nation’s most significant public education law, moving us closer to a P-12 system.”

Interview with
Albert Wat
Senior Policy Director
Alliance for Early Success

 Albert Wat

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Albert Wat is a part of the Leadership Team at Alliance for Early Success, leading a portfolio of state and national partnerships and investments focused on pre-K and the education continuum birth through grade three. Previously, he served as a Senior Policy Analyst in the Education Division of the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Research Manager at Pre-K Now. In 2014, Albert served on the committee of the Institute of Medicine’s study, Transforming the Workforce for Children Birth through Age 8: A Unifying Foundation.

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Albert: I have been working in education generally for a little bit more than twenty years actually. And in about only half of those years have I been in early learning. I did not intentionally seek out a career in early learning. I was interested in policy and research. So I was doing a master’s degree in education policy at George Washington University. At the end of the program, I was looking for opportunities where I could use that degree, and it was one of those, you know, being at the right time and the right place. I applied for a job at Pre-K Now. They liked me and I liked them, and you know, it worked out from there. So that’s how I got in there. I mean, I like to think that there were some foundational pieces laid. Before that I was doing more community-based work in schools and in the community. And I did a good amount of work around early literacy and family literacy. So those concepts are very familiar to me. I was also a psychology major. It helped me a lot in terms of understanding the science behind what a policy is trying to do.

Steven: How is the work that happens in the states and the efforts that the Alliance does, important to the national movements in early learning?

Albert: I think even though it is not the explicit mission of the Alliance, one of the things that the alliance does is to build capacity in the field to maintain, sustain and grow the movement in early learning. So let me give an overview of how the Alliance does this. You know, the Alliance raises funds from different foundations across the country. And we grant the money out to a variety of national, policy, advocacy, and research organizations that focus on early childhood issues. By doing so I think what we are trying to do is to increase the coherence with which foundations on what does and does not work, and create more coherence around the advocacy effort at the state and national levels. In additional to providing the grant money, we also cultivate a network of state and national organizations, so they can leverage each other’s efforts. We can help them connect to organizations and provide some clear, user friendly information to help their legislative officials. Also in the process, what we are doing in terms of supporting this network is also increasing everybody’s understanding of the research, practices, policies and advocacy of early childhood. We focus on three areas: early learning, health issues and family supports as they relate to young children from 0-8. All those activities I think help build and create the momentum in national level.

Steven: Can you talk a little bit about the opportunities and challenges you see in the new ESSA?

Albert: As I’ve said, I think the best thing about ESSA in terms of early learning is that, more than ever, early learning is reflected in our country’s primary education law. That’s a good thing because I think that reflects a lot of our understanding in the past 10 to 20 years of how kids learn, when the achievement gap appears, and what we need to do before kindergarten to move in onto achievement. There’s more explicit language in the law about the extent to which early childhood programs, educators and the kids in those programs can benefit from those various funding and titles within ESSA. Obviously, Title I is serving the low-income population. But also, the titles around teacher quality, professional development, English language learners, even charter schools, and of course through the literacy from birth to Grade 12 program, early childhood has a part of that. In the literacy program 15% of funds need to be spent on kids from 0-5. Other than that, it’s really up to the discretion of local and state leaders to take advantage of all those funds that can be used for young children. And I will come back to that in a little bit.

The other part of the law obviously is the Preschool Development Grants. I do think that’s important that it is in the law. It is a good foundation to build on. It focuses more on strategic planning, collaboration, coordination for 0-5 within the state, and maybe not as focused on expanding programs or even approving policies that states are working on. All I have to say is that both in terms of the preschool development grant portion of the law and the other titles I mentioned earlier, there’s a really big role for state level leadership, whether it’s inside or outside government to maximize the potential of the law to afford high-quality early learning opportunity. I think chiefs and governors are going to be the stakeholders to work with. And advocates, at the state and local level, are also very important –it is really up to those folks to bring up the profile of early learning as they are developing plans for ESSA at the local level. At the Alliance, we will be working with our state partners to do some of that work. We have a network of state advocacy organizations that we support and a lot of them I know are very interested in what the opportunities behind this law and what it can do for early childhood education.

If I can talk a little bit more broadly, beyond ESSA, at the federal level—I think a lot of the people in the field would agree that the Office of Early Learning has been a great asset to the field at the national level and has really raised the profile of early childhood education. And beyond that, really integrated that issue into different policies and grant opportunities. However the election turns out, our hope is that there would still be a robust role in the Department of Education for early learning. Even if the Department is not going to be as prescriptive, as specific in how it supports early childhood, there’s still a lot the federal government could do to support early childhood. There’s a lot they can do to build on what they are already working on – maybe give more discretion about funding opportunities that can be used for early childhood education. I also think we can still do a lot to encourage and intensify action where more action needs to be taken. A good example of this is the infant toddler issue. I think a lot of state policy makers still struggle to figure out what the role of government is when it comes infant toddler care. I think the federal government can raise the need to invest in that age group and provide services to give all children a good foundation before kindergarten. Early childhood partnerships has been doing that and I think there’s more to be done around how to leverage health care law, resources and infant toddler issues.

Voices from the Field: Laura Bornfreund

“Children are learning from birth. And to make sure all kids have the opportunities they need and deserve when they enter kindergarten and later in life, there needs to be a greater investment in access to high-quality early education.”

Interview with
Director of Early & Elementary Education Policy
New America

Laura Bornfreund

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Laura Bornfreund is Director of Early & Elementary Education Policy at New America. She examines state and federal policies related to learning and teaching birth through grade 3. She writes on a variety of topics including the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, federal education grant programs, teacher preparation, retention, evaluation and support, kindergarten, and early childhood assessment.

Steven: How did you both begin your work in Early Learning?

Laura: I actually started out as a traditionally-trained fourth grade teacher and became interested in the earlier grades because at that fourth grade level, I had so many non-readers or nearly non-readers in my class. So I became really curious about what was happening in the younger grades and what needs to be done in the earlier years to prevent that. But it wasn’t until I left teaching and went to work for the city of Orlando that I got more directly involved in the birth to five years. I helped to implement the city’s Parramore Kidz Zone project, which was modeled after the Harlem’s Children’s Zone. And with that effort, I primarily worked to develop the initiative in that birth to five space. Some of what we did included working with the Orange County Early Learning Coalition to improve the quality of child care providers that were serving some of the kids in the neighborhood and working with families to help identify high-quality child care providers. For families that wanted to keep their children at home, we worked with Healthy Families Orange to do playgroups, parenting-support groups in the neighborhood, and then we also infused some additional city funds into child care subsidies to help more families gain access to the subsidies so they could work more or go back and get some training or schooling. I did that for four years and then moved up to here in DC and, after bouncing around a little bit, I joined New America’s early education initiative in 2010 and as you’ve probably seen, we’ve gone through a transition here and Lisa [Guernsey] has moved on to solely direct the Learning Technologies initiative and become deputy director of the Education Policy Program overall and now I’m doing the early ed work and we’ve changed our name to more reflect what we’re doing which our team is the Early Education and Policy Team. We wanted to be clear to both the birth to five community and the K-3 or K-12 community that we’re working across the continuum and that both those areas are important and need attention and focus.

Steven: What do you see as the role of think tanks like New America in improving quality and access to high quality early learning programs?

Laura: I think New America and similar organizations is to amplify the research on children’s learning birth through third grade; elevate promising state polices and state and local approaches ensuring high-quality learning during that span and help to put that research and our findings in front of policy influencers and policy makers. Just as one example, in November, we released a scan of all 50 states and DC’s birth through third grade policies with an emphasis on literacy. The goal of that project, which was called From Crawling to Walking, was to elevate the policies we think matter most when it comes to make sure children are on track to becoming good readers by the end of third grade, and then also to spotlight those states that have good policies in place. New America is well positioned to do this kind of work because we’re not partisan. We’re not a membership organization. We’re not advocating for funding for a specific program or stream.   The early and elementary education policy team looks across the continuum covering a variety of topics. I like to say that New America is a cross between policy and journalism. Many of the individuals who work here started as reporters, including Lisa Guernsey. It brings a different perspective and a way to translate complex policy or research to a wider audience it helps to have that journalist perspective. And then also we have individuals here representing diverse viewpoints across the political spectrum which allows for interesting debates and general conversations on a variety of issues.

Steven: Why is the President’s proposal to provide high-quality early learning and development programs for our children important to our country and what do you see as some of the challenges and opportunities?

Laura: I think as I don’t have to tell a lot of readers of your newsletter – and this is becoming more increasingly known over the last decade: that children’s education does not begin when they enter kindergarten. Children are learning from birth. And to make sure all kids have the opportunities they need and deserve when they enter kindergarten and later in life, there needs to be a greater investment in access to high-quality early education. And to me it’s clear that the administration understands how important children’s earliest years are, and the President’s emphasis on high-quality early education has been really important to raising the profile of early learning across the country. That has led to increased federal efforts and encouraged states to be more active because of his use of the bully pulpit to talk about early learning. I think some of the real opportunities have been the collaborations between the departments that work on education. For example, the Department of Health and Human Services and the Department of Education working together to help children and their families have high-quality birth to five and crossing that continuum into K-3 high-quality opportunities. It’s also great to see Congress reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant with more of a focus on increasing quality. It’s exciting to see the proposed Head Start regs, which I think will be a step in the right direction for the field, and of course, more recently, the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act, which includes more emphasis on early education. I think the challenges are implementation. This is always a significant challenge –truly realizing policy and having it play out well on the ground. The work that the states and community have to do is really important and needs a lot of attention. I think another challenge is ensuring there’s a high-quality teacher and leader early ed workforce in place. The Transforming the Workforce report that was sponsored by HHS and ED and others is really important for giving some guidance to the field on what needs to happen. But there’re a lot of challenges to realizing the goals and recommendations the report lays out, and then just sustaining and continuing to expand the investment. It was good to see additional dollars in the latest budget, but you want to see growing investment for pre-K, home visiting and other birth to age 8 programs at the state and local level as well as the federal level. Finally I think a challenge is expanding the good work that is happening in birth to five – federal, state, and local levels—efforts that are is just beginning to expand into the overlooked K through third grade. It’s figuring out how to better connect those efforts to really allow for smooth and well-scaffolded transitions for families and their children between pre-k and the early grades.

Voices from the Field: Marcy Whitebook

“Right now, if you major in early childhood, the projections are you will have the lowest lifetime earnings of any college graduate. We have to flip that on its head.”

marcy-whitetbook

Interview with Marcy Whitebook
Director & Senior Researcher
Center for the Study of Child Care Employment
Institute for Research on Labor and Employment
by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Marcy Whitebook, Ph.D., joined the Institute and established the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment in 1999, as a researcher focusing on issues of employment in settings for young children, the relationship between good jobs and the quality of services available to children and families, and appropriate and accessible professional preparation for teachers. The Center recently published a brief, Early Childhood Higher Education: Taking Stock Across the States.

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Marcy: Well, I was a Head Start volunteer. The first two summers of Head Start I was still in high school, and I loved it. Then when I finished college, I had been thinking a lot about development and I didn’t major in development in college, but I was thinking a lot about poverty and development and the role of women and women going back to work. So I thought, well good childcare, which is what we called it then (the 1970s when I graduated from college), is sort of the key to a lot of this. We can help children get off to a good start – we didn’t have that language then. We can help women work and also be connected to their children and their families. It just seemed to me like this was a good place to put my energy. I decided I’m going to be a teacher – we called them nursery school teachers then – and I thought that’s what I’m going to do so that’s how I got started.

My first job was in a childcare center and basically I didn’t have to have any qualifications. They just were like whoa, you worked in Head Start. Great! Can you come work here? And it became obvious to me very quickly in that experience that I did not know what I was doing. I was like “Wow, this is hard.” I knew how to clean kids’ faces, but I thought this seems complicated. The kids seem similar but different. How do I really do this? And I had some good mentors, people who were trained. Then, I went to school. I thought “oh I’m going to take classes” because this is complicated and everybody thinks it’s easy. The more I got into it I realized the more complicated it was and the more I needed to understand about development, how children develop similarly and differently and then what was the right way to provide experiences for children that help them go to wherever the next place was. But very early on I went “Gee, we’re not getting any money for doing this.” My other friends were going to enter the medical profession or to do different things. And I’m thinking this is ridiculous how little we are paid, but I was also really upset by how we didn’t have time to plan, there was a lot of turnover, and all the things that became my career really. We weren’t being treated like teachers of older children, and that was problematic for doing the job well. I figured that out pretty early in the experience, and because I was a young person with a goal of making the world a better place, I thought okay we’re going to fix this.

Steven: Can you talk about how teacher preparation and support for that early childhood education workforce is important for early learning?

Marcy: I think the IOM report has done a really good job of saying that the different requirements we have for people doing this work masks the complexity and sort of makes people think that anybody can do it. But I think that throughout human history, people have taken care of children and we can all take care of children in some basic way. That’s why we still have the human species right? But when you’re with a group of children, you have to be making many judgments and assessments and decisions all day long in terms of are children developing normally and, if there’re not? Is development proceeding in a normal progression? Are they developing more slowly in this area or that area or is there something gone array here? So you have to have a basic understanding of development in order to be able to figure out what the children in your group need. But then just because you have a group of three year olds or a group of two year olds or you might have a mixed group of three and four year olds, even though they are in the same chronological age, in those early years of development, there is a wide range of normal in terms of some kids talk really early and some kids talk a little later. The language development will be okay even if they start putting together words at a different point and the same thing with some of the motor development. So it’s also figuring when you have a group of children, where are all the kids on the developmental trajectory and how do I make sure that the learning I’m trying to facilitate touches them where they are. How do you do that for a whole group of people? It’s really complicated right? And you’re also addressing issues around social-emotional development as well as cognitive development and motor development. So you have to be thinking on multiple levels at the same time and thinking about and thinking about how any one activity or learning experience addresses those multiple levels.

You know when I first started it was more theory than science right. A lot of the things we thought were true have turned out to be true, but how do you understand what’s the theory about what’s going on and what’s the science about what’s going on? And then pedagogically what are the ways to engage children that are age-appropriate and it’s different? What you do with a group of four year olds is not the same as what you do with a group of two year olds so I think that education does not necessarily make you good at all those things, but it lays a foundation of knowledge that helps you to guide the development of your skills and practice so you can get good at doing that. So it’s the same thing as a doctor or a lawyer. They have to master a lot of knowledge, but then how good they are at this when they are thinking on their feet when they see someone in front of them and can they weave that knowledge and take those skills they’ve practiced and apply them in the right moment. So to me education is not the only part of it but it’s absolutely the cornerstone of that.

I also think that these higher ed inventories – we’ve now done inventories in seven states – show that in our higher education programs, the opportunities for field-based practice and field-based experiences that really help people strengthen their skills and taking that knowledge and applying it, are really uneven. They are uneven by age and by child. We provide a lot more field-based learning in teacher preparation for teachers who are working with children in kindergarten and older than we do for those working with younger children. Even in terms of the content of our education, we tend to focus more on older children than on infants and toddlers. It does seem like its somewhat responsive to state certification; if you have a P-3 system, you’re more likely to include rigorous content for preschoolers, but our higher education programs have not caught up with what we’re saying we need and what IOM is saying in the zero to eight period. Yes, people can specialize by age group, but we need a base of knowledge and practice for everybody. So there’s work to do there to bring us into the 21st century on that.

Steven: Can you talk a little bit about why the President’s proposal to provide high-quality early learning and development programs for all children is important for our country and what do you see as some of the challenges and opportunities?

Marcy: I think that by elevating early learning at the national level the President has really helped to raise this as an issue that the country’s talking about, and I think that through that leadership there’s been a growing recognition on the part of Americans how important this is. Of course it’s been bolstered by a lot that was already going on in the states and then with the Early Learning Challenge Grants and Preschool Development Grants, there’s been a lot of action and emphasis at the state level. I think by shining a spotlight on the issue and giving resources, that’s really helped for us to see movement. Earlier this year, the President said no one should be daycare-poor. We still have a long way to go because the system we have is that most of the funding for early childhood is at the federal level in contrast to K-12, which is mostly state-funded. We still don’t have enough money in the system to make sure that even just all the children living in low-income families have access to affordable services. We’re a long way from that. We’re serving a fraction of the children and so we still have a system where the parent’s ability to pay has a lot to do with what kind of experience the children have and it’s not necessarily equitable. We have this system that’s been packed together with different intents over the years that in most states you have multiple sets of qualifications for people working with children in the same age group depending on the funding and the purpose of the program that the children end up being in. It’s a little bit the luck of the draw and not really equitable for people.

Although we’ve identified early childhood as a strategy for educational reform and for addressing the effects of poverty, the truth is that early childhood jobs for many people create poverty, and they really challenged the people doing them and their families. Because of the lack of resources that really impacts the quality of care. So I think that what the president’s effort has pointed out is that we need a new way of investing in a comprehensive way for early learning in the United States. It’s going to take time, but I think his administration set the stage hopefully for another administration moving us closer to having a system of early education and care that really provides and is equitable and affordable for families, high-quality, and becomes a really good 21st century job. I think the big challenge is that because the system doesn’t have enough resources in it, it’s almost like we can’t talk about these jobs. We’re telling people to get an education, but they don’t get much of a premium for that education. We can’t fix the jobs because we still have so many children to serve. And I think that we have to recognize that fixing the jobs and serving children well are the same problem. If we can make it more affordable for families and we can improve the jobs, we’re then creating a win-win-win for everybody. The families do better, kids will do better, and the people, who choose this work, will do better and will be able to meet their responsibilities. With more support, the people, who have invested in their education and training, will flock to these jobs.

These are not jobs that are going to be traded offshore. We’re not going to lose early childhood jobs, and it’s a win for their families. I think the challenge is really getting people to see that the work of caring for and educating young children should be a sought after 21st century job that it can be a middle-class job that can attract people who’ve invested in their education and training. Right now, if you major in early childhood, the projections are you will have the lowest lifetime earnings of any college graduate. We have to flip that on its head. We need a strategy for changing the jobs so we can really change the services and for realizing that this could be an incredibly attractive 21st century job.

Voices from the Field: Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner & Donna Norton

“In most states in the nation, early education costs more that college so we’re really showing how important this is to moms across the nation and educating leaders about how critical affordable early education is for families and for educating their kids.”

Interview with
Executive Director/CEO Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner and Deputy Director Donna Norton
MomsRising.org

MomsRising

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner is the Executive Director/CEO of MomsRising.org. Donna Norton serves as the Deputy Director. Together, they co-founded MomsRising.org, an on-the-ground and online grassroots organization of more than a million people who are working to achieve economic security for all moms, women, and families in the United States.

Steven: How did you both begin your work in Early Learning?

Kristen: MomsRising was launched in May of 2006 with a handful of moms and it has turned into over a million moms with members in every state of the nation in the decade that followed. Early learning has been a priority for our members since the beginning. In particular, our members care deeply about access, affordability, and excellence in early learning and in childcare opportunities for all children. And so from the very beginning, the launch of MomsRising is when our interest in early learning and childcare was also launched.

Donna: Just to echo that it’s a huge issue for our members. It’s become such a struggle for moms to figure out how to find affordable, high quality early learning. In most states in the nation, early education costs more that college so we’re really showing how important this is to moms across the nation and really educating leaders about how critical affordable early education is for families and for educating their kids.

Steven: Can you both talk a little bit about your backgrounds and how you came to this work?

Kristen: Joan Blades and I co-wrote the Motherhood Manifesto and then after the book was published, it was turned into a documentary film and we decided after that the next step was to work for change and so we cofounded MomsRising along with a committee of women including Donna. My son, who’s now 19 years old and healthy, was born with a primary immune system deficiency and I was working in the environmental policy field. I ended up having to quit my job in an unplanned way when he was born in order to take care of him and because he couldn’t be in childcare and early learning due to his illness. So I had a moment when I realized that I was my mom was primarily single when I was growing up and I realized that if I didn’t by luck have a husband whose job’s health care covered us in our time of need and who made enough money to cover food on the table and a roof over our heads and for this unplanned emergency that it could have been an outright disaster. And in fact, it probably would have been an outright disaster for my mom, who was single. I did some research and I started writing about the topic and looking about the topic and really started understanding that luck alone shouldn’t determine the outcome of a child’s life. Luck alone shouldn’t determine if a child can thrive or not. And so from there started writing about the policies in magazines. And I wrote a book called The F-Word: Feminism in Jeopardy and then co-wrote the Motherhood Manifesto, looking at what it takes to make sure that businesses and families can all thrive and having access to high-quality affordable early learning and childcare opportunities is absolutely critical to having our business, our families, and our economy thrive.

Donna: My story is that I was actually working in domestic violence, doing domestic violence prevention work and had two kids and was really struggling to make it all work and realizing that I was barely making any money after the costs of childcare for two kids and decided to stay at home for a couple of years cause it made more sense and really started reading about motherhood and realizing I wasn’t the only one struggling to figure out how to combine career and family and how to make it all work economically and logistically for my life and sort of reading about motherhood and came across Kristin and Joan writing their book and helping with their book and started working on motherhood issues ever since then.

Steven: What do you see as the role of MomsRising in improving quality and access to high quality early learning programs?

Kristen: The role of MomsRising is that we know 84 million moms in America really desperately need access to affordable high-quality childcare. And so our role is to open avenues for busy people to be heard because not only do we know that we have a national emergency when it comes to access to childcare and early learning that’s high quality. We know that we have moms, who are busier than ever, moms are juggling an unprecedented number of roles at the same time and so have very little time for advocacy and policy engagement. MomsRising’s job is to find the points at which moms can make the most difference, open avenues for those moms to share their experiences, share their stories, share their thoughts and feelings on policy, share their contributions and needs with leaders, who have the ability to make a difference with the media, who have the ability to help shape our culture and with each other so that each person knows that when this many people are having this many problems at this many times. We don’t have an epidemic of personal failings. We have structural issues that we have to address and solve together and in doing so, we are empowering our members to be engaged for the better of our country.

Donna: I think that parents have to be part of the solution and we’re part of the system for educating children that we have a lot of wisdom and knowledge to share and we also have a lot to learn so we need to be part of that solution.

Steven: Why is the President’s proposal to provide high-quality early learning and development programs for our children important to our country and what do you see as some of the challenges and opportunities?

Kristen: MomsRising applauds the president for putting childcare and early learning policy center stage when it belongs! One of the things that’s important about his policy placement is that for too long these policies have been set aside and siloed and ignored and since they don’t have economic impact. But with women now 50% of the labor force and 40% of primary breadwinners are moms, childcare and early learning polices are absolutely critical to our overall economic success so we at MomsRising applaud President Obama for raising these policies in a way that everybody needs to respond and be involved with them.

Donna: Echoing what Kristen said, it’s so important for our nation to invest in early learning and we’re so happy that the President has been a leader and really sharing that message. It makes so much sense in terms of our economy and where we are really getting a great return on investment in terms of where we’re investing in the budget. For every dollar that we spend on early learning, we get eight dollars in return –in terms of what it costs for remedial education, we have better earnings when people finish their education, better retention of students in schools so really totally makes sense for our nation to invest in early learning and we’re so happy the President has really taken leadership and prioritizing those investments. Then of course, the challenge is getting our whole Congress to agree to those investments and parents are really key in letting their members of Congress know this is a priority for families and a priority for our nation.

Voices from the Field: Elizabeth Burke Bryant

“We see this as a critical economic issue: we cannot, as states, have the kind of workforce we need if we have children starting out so far behind and never being able to catch up.”

Elizabeth Bryant

Interview with Elizabeth Burke Bryant
Executive Director of Rhode Island KIDS COUNT

by Senior Policy Advisor Steven Hicks

Elizabeth Burke Bryant is Executive Director of Rhode Island KIDS COUNT, a children’s policy and research organization founded in 1994 that provides information on child well-being, stimulates dialogue on children’s issues, and promotes accountability and action.

Steven: How did you begin your career in early learning?

Elizabeth: I started my career in early learning at the same time I began my career in child advocacy over 20 years ago. I was fortunate to be the first executive director of Rhode Island Kids Count. Right from the very beginning of our work to establish a child advocacy organization in Rhode Island, I knew that investments in early learning and early childhood development were the most cost-effective investments states could make along with access to health insurance, child abuse and neglect, and juvenile justice. Early childhood issues and early learning is at the core of our work and have been ever since Rhode Island Kids Count got started.

Steven: What do you see as the role of state advocates in improving the quality of early learning?

Elizabeth: Well, one of the things I’m privileged to be doing right now is that along with Cecilia Zalkind, the Executive Director of Advocates for Children of New Jersey, my New Jersey counterpart, we have received some logistical support from the Alliance for Early Success to form an ad-hoc group of state-based early learning advocates. We actually got going just at the time President Obama gave a very impassioned speech about the importance of early learning and there were opportunities coming up with the Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge and others, and the Preschool Development Grants were fortunately right around the corner. We just felt there was a missing element to federal policy development on early learning, which was that we really needed state-based advocates that are used to working with their partners in state government to launch and grow early learning programs at the state level to really help inform new, exciting federal opportunities in early learning and share a taste of what was going on at the state level – so really a two-way communication channel. We started regular phone calls with state-based advocates around the country to do just that and its worked really, really well.

We appreciate the Alliance for Early Success for bringing us all together but it’s been a real peer to peer learning and strategizing opportunity and what we have found are practical lessons learned from states that have been at the forefront of starting state pre-k programs with governors and legislative leaders. We really have a lot of lessons learned as we try to expand early learning through federal opportunities. We really see that state and federal partnerships are the only way to ensure that many more of our low-income children have access to high-quality preschool in the years before kindergarten.

Steven: Why is the President’s proposal to provide high-quality preschool for all four-year olds important to our country and what do you see as some of the challenges and opportunities?

Elizabeth: First, it’s incredibly important that the President has identified this as a very urgent issue for our country. I think there are some people who believe the job is done, that children have access to preschool but we know in our states and states across the country that huge numbers of children especially low-income children and children with high needs are completely left out and are never in a high-quality early learning program until they enter kindergarten and that puts them even further behind their more advantaged peers. The President – using his incredible bully pulpit to focus like a laser-beam on this issue – was so important and continues to be so important and I think that governors around the country really understand the importance. They’ve been leading the way with very little other than sometimes beleaguered state budgets to put the pieces together for state pre-k programs.

Having the pulpit of the Presidency to focus like a laser beam on it really helps state legislative leaders and governors. We know that there are ways to partner with the federal government of which we always had partnerships with, head start as well. It’s been interesting to see a lot of the ways that – thanks to Preschool Expansion and Development Grants – we have been seeing great partnerships between Child Care and Head Start and public schools. We think the President’s leadership was really important in focusing a lot of needed attention. We see this as a critical economic issue: we cannot, as states, have the kind of workforce we need if we have children starting out so far behind and never being able to catch up. I know in our state, our state leaders – Governor Raimondo, Senate President Paiva Weed, and Speaker Mattiello – all see early childhood education as a core part of Rhode Island’s economic strategy. Having the President put so much attention on this issue has been a way to raise the visibility of this issue and the sense of urgency to serve more children faster.