Crafting policy for Yale's youngest

For child study experts at Yale, the past two weeks brought multiple causes for celebration. As President Bill Clinton, LAW '73, unveiled his $22 billion child care plan and the state of Connecticut began to implement early-childhood initiatives worth about $40 million, the research of Yale's Child Study Center and the work of its Early Education Program saw fruition on larger scales.

Yet programs at Yale and in New Haven continue to push for more early-childhood research and resources, and to demonstrate the difficulty of accurately assessing progress. In both policy discussions and classroom settings, experts are struggling to improve child care while trying to expand to meet the rapidly growing needs of families.

`A long range vision'

In November 1997, Sharon Lynn Kagan published "Not by Chance," a report distributed to policymakers, academics, politicians, and educators outlining a long-term plan for early childhood education in America. Kagan is a senior associate in the Bush Center for Child Development and Social Policy, a subdivision of the Yale Child Study Center.

Kagan described the report as "a blueprint for child care for the next 20 years." While most recommendations on early education "have policy for the next legislation...this has long-range vision." The report was the result of a four-year project which included panels, task forces, and dozens of commissioned papers--the collective work of 250 national child care experts. "Not by Chance" advocates the streamlining of currently decentralized services in a country that, according to Kagan, "doesn't do enough for its children."

As President-elect of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, Kagan attended the White House's October conference on child care. The Presidential program that debuted last week, which includes child care subsidies, community grants for early learning, and more training for child care workers, was a huge step forward according to Kagan, but not as far reaching in scope as she would have liked. "The recommendations of ["Not by Chance"] actually go further than what Clinton has proposed," Kagan said. "Ours is more long term."

Yale has long been a leader in child care research. The University's Child Study Center was founded in 1911, when such an interdisciplinary department was virtually unheard of. A combination academic department, clinic, research center, and training site, the Center "cuts across academic departments," according to Director Donald Cohen, MED '66. "We have a long and venerable history at Yale of being concerned with children's issues," Kagan said.

Evaluating New Haven

Kagan's proposals include the basics, such as increasing funding and engaging parents, as well as more progressive approaches. One major tenet of the report is an advocated switch in the method of evaluating early childhood programs. Instead of input factors, such as teacher-student ratios and size of facilities, "Not by Chance" favors a "results-driven system," evaluating programs by the progress of children and their families. "This report is saying [that] how children are really doing doesn't [currently] come into play," Kagan said. Yet finding out "how children are really doing" is a time-consuming and expensive task.

One such evaluation approach is at work at 375 James St. in New Haven. There, the Lulac Head Start program operates a multi-room facility serving approximately 220 children and their families.

Lulac operates both non-profit private child care and Head Start classes, which are federally funded. A "school-readiness program" rather than day care, Head Start combines academic preparation with social support: medical checkups, counseling, etc. The child must be from the right age group--three and four years old--and from a low income family; Lulac specifically serves both the Fair Haven and Hill neighborhoods.

Executive Director Abel Pardo described the system that his center uses to evaluate and modify curriculum. Called an On-Site Program Review Instrument (OSPRI), this oversight uses both input and output measures and requires a team of outside consultants periodically to look through records, interview students and parents, and observe classes at the site. "This is the model," Pardo said. "It checks across component lines from health to education." A federal team must evaluate the site every three years; internal review by the same criteria is yearly.

Assessment versus capacity

But for Pardo, a far more pressing issue is Lulac's waiting list, which is 50 to 100 children every year even after staff helps families find alternate care. "Why do we need assessment if you can't even come close to meeting the needs of families?" Pardo asked. "To me, the issue is capacity. If the money is directed at programs, where do you put the kids?"

"Capacity" refers to organizational as well as physical issues: Pardo wants to see more staff and supervisors as well as more Head Start classrooms within the current format. Right now, he tries to mitigate the capacity problem by holding one session for four hours in the morning, then bussing in different kids in the afternoon. He summed up his dilemma: "What is the need? Full day, full year. What can you do with the money? Half days."

Head Start's founder Edward Zigler insists, however, that quality control must be the primary focus of child care policies. "Quality improvement has precedence over expansion," Zigler, Sterling Professor of Psychology, said. Perhaps the foremost authority on early childhood education in the country, Zigler directs the Bush Center, which includes a division of Head Start research. As a young associate professor at Yale in 1964, Zigler was picked to join a team of academics framing the national program to attack poverty at the root by preparing poor children for public school success.

Later, Zigler directed Head Start, and has served as a consultant to every president since Lyndon Johnson. He has seen Head Start touted as the country's great answer to urban poverty and maligned as an ineffective solution whose results disappear in a few years.

"There's been so much confusion about the effectiveness of Head Start.... What happened with Head Start is that it became uneven in quality," Zigler said. "Quality control efforts simply were not very good. People weren't concerned about quality...all they cared about were getting more and more kids in the program." The Clinton administration "finally took the bull by the horns."

After a Head Start improvement and expansion committee--on which both he and Kagan served--developed a "road map" for how to improve the quality of Head Start, problem sites were closed or put on probation for the first time. "I've been fighting this battle for many years," Zigler said. The new streamlining of standards and assessment means that "we'll be able to report to Congress, `Here's what this [preschool] group can do.' That's a gigantic breakthrough." Both Zigler and Pardo should get their wishes. Clinton's proposal includes a $3.8 billion expansion of Head Start. But the increase, if it ever becomes law, will also strongly emphasize the assessment standards that concern so many researchers.

Classroom approaches

In Lulac's Head Start classrooms, groups of children draw and paint around low tables. Games and blocks are everywhere. One teacher (there are four to six children per instructor) helps a child with her letters, first in Spanish and then in English. A science corner provides basic lessons in buoyancy and aerodynamics. A kitchen offers snacks, as well as lessons in health and nutrition. A large red and white jungle gym waits outside. Pardo moves through the classes, stopping to speak to one child by name. He offers his finger to an infant, and coaxes a shy student out of his cubby. Part of the problem, he explained, is that middle income and lower-middle income families want this kind of care for their children, too.

Kagan agreed that government subsidies have set up a kind of paradox. As Carla Horwitz, a professor at the Yale Child Study Center, put it, "Often the kids that are getting best served are the very poor kids." Horwitz is part of a group from the Center that will serve as consultants to Head Start classrooms. Addressing the problem of quality care for those not subsidized is part of Horwitz's other job: director of the Calvin Hill Day Care Center.

Liz Oliner/YH Yale's Calvin Hill Day Care Center offers the kind of early education that experts would like to see on a national scale.

The Early Childhood Education program of the Child Study Center runs six Yale-affiliated child care programs. The University, however, doesn't support the programs financially other than by providing utilities and space in the form of Calvin Hill, a converted firehouse on Highland Street.

The Hill Center has a sliding tuition scale based on a family's ability to pay, and consequently depends on $30,000 a year in donations to break even. "There's no way to provide quality child care unless there's some kind of subsidy," Horwitz said.

A large chunk of the budget ensures a qualified staff. Most of the staff at Calvin Hill has been there for more than 10 years, a definite advantage in an industry where continuity is crucial, yet where turnover rates are about 43 percent. Child Study Center staff serve as consultants for children and staff development, administering training workshops and bringing in guest speakers. "People here think of teaching as an intellectual activity," Horwitz said.

In turn, the Hill Center serves as educational exhibit and training ground for undergraduate and graduate students enrolled in Child Development and Early Childhood Methods classes taught by Child Study Center staff. Caitlin Pike, TC '97, observed at the Center as part of a class requirement and is now a full-time employee paid with grant money.

Horwitz is adamant about the staff standards that Yale maintains, and though she naturally supports the expansion and funding of child care, she, like Kagan, is cautious of block grants without quality control. "Hallmarks of quality child care have to do with experience and background of staff," she said. "The major problem with the [Clinton plan] is that there's not a national standard.... If we could tie some of that to the money, that would be great."

Connecticut gets ready

Connecticut may have found a way. In a school-readiness bill sponsored by House Speaker Thomas Ritter (D-Hartford), the state has set aside $40 million to create more than 3,000 new preschool slots beginning this year, emphasizing early childhood education in poor areas. New Haven is one of the targeted cities. Programs must meet either Head Start standards or earn accreditation with the National Association for the Education of Young Children. "Connecticut had the sense to build in more quality control than other states," Zigler, who worked with Ritter on the bill, said. "It ought to be done on the state level." The bill was spurred by the desegregation order of Sheff v. O'Neill as well as new welfare legislation which puts parents back to work without explicitly providing for their children. In a panel recommendation, families above the program cut-off level would pay a sliding-scale fee. According to Nancy Close, co-director of the Early Child Education Program of the Child Study Center, the school-readiness grant gave Yale child care centers 14 more spots to fill with lower income children.

While such programs unite Yale's research and government money with the needs of area children, Zigler is studying how state-administered plans compare with Head Start. "The goal is that every child in America has good quality care, irrespective of income," Kagan said. She is currently researching how to finance a national child care and early education system, as well as preparing school-readiness standards.

Meanwhile, Calvin Hill preschoolers Liam and Mark looked up from their blocks, surprised to be asked about child care agendas. "We didn't find out our whole day yet," one explained. "Ask us tomorrow."

What do you think? Respond in Speak your Mind.

Back to News...