AJE Feature | Explaining the Worldwide Expansion of Early Childhood Care and Education by Christine Min Wotipka
Full-length article “The Worldwide Expansion of Early Childhood Care and Education, 1985–2010” by Wotipka, Rabling, Sugawara, and Tongliemnak published by the American Journal of Education available here.
It is hard to imagine a time when the value of early childhood care and education would be questioned. But in 1979, a World Bank working paper argued that “preschool interventions could not be justified.” Policymakers at the time considered early childhood care and education to be too expensive and its benefits were thought to be unknown. Today, such programs are widely considered to be vital for enhancing brain development and for preparing children for school. High-quality programs also provide safe spaces for young children, thereby allowing parents, especially mothers, to work. Around the world, enrollments in early childhood care and education have been expanding, although unevenly. As a result, the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals call for all children to have access to quality early childhood care and education by 2030.
In our paper, “The Worldwide Expansion of Early Childhood Care and Education, 1985–2010,” my colleagues and I aim to shed light on trends in early childhood care and education and to understand differences across a set of 117 countries. To do so, we use data from the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) on the participation of children at least 3 years of age in various kinds of formal, organized care and education services provided by private and public agencies.
Our findings show steady growth in early childhood care and education overtime for the world as a whole. In 1985, around 40 percent of preschool-age children attended one of these programs. By 2010, the figure exceeded 60 percent. While this figure seems impressive, it was quite a bit lower than the near universal enrollment of children in primary school in that year.
We also discover stark differences across groups of countries based on their economic and socio-political conditions. Countries considered by the International Monetary Fund to have advanced economies saw participation in early childhood care and education rise from around 70 percent to close to 97 percent. Those countries considered to have “emerging and developing economies” started with fewer than 1 in 4 children in such programs in 1985 but increased to over 54 percent by 2010. Finally, in former communist states of Central and Eastern Europe and Central Asia, over half of children participated in early childhood care and education in 1985 but that figure dropped dramatically with the collapse of these regimes in the early 1990s. By 2010, however, the average for this region had rebounded to over 60 percent.
Second, using the same data and quantitative methods, our paper explores characteristics of countries that could explain these trends over time. The results reported above signal to us that levels of national economic development matter but what else explains the growth in early childhood care and education over time? What about the rise of women’s status over this period? For example, between 1985 and 2010, women’s participation in higher education and the paid labor market increased dramatically as did the availability of contraceptives. We include these variables in our analysis.
We also consider the degree to which countries are connected to a global community in which early childhood care and education are valued and encouraged. The more countries are linked to this “world society,” say by having citizens who are members of international non-governmental organizations and by attending international conferences and ratifying global human rights treaties, could countries be more willing to promote early childhood care and education no matter the costs and challenges? These variables are also added to our analysis.
We find that, like the trend data, country wealth matters – richer countries have higher participation in early childhood care and education, but this matters less in more recent times. Also important is the availability of contraceptives – when fertility can be controlled, families and countries make greater and earlier investments in these fewer children. Our findings also suggest that growth in early childhood care and education may be related to having greater numbers of citizens who participate in civil society through international non-governmental organizations. Among these organizations are a growing number that focus on children’s issues.
Countries increasingly work together to expand and improve their educational systems “from womb to tomb.” In their efforts, they are joined by a range of governmental and non-governmental organizations, as well as nonprofits, schools, and youth groups, that now take for granted the participation of young children in formal care and education. While our work show dramatic rates of change over time, future research is needed to examine the quality of that care and education.
Christine Min Wotipka is Associate Professor (Teaching) of Education and (by courtesy) Sociology at Stanford University.
A defense of holistic admissions, by N.J. Barkauskas
A Critical Analysis of Family Engagement Policy in the Every Student Succeeds Act by Ariel Chung
Today, they connect school with families together, which is to monitor the development of children and improve the efficiency of early childhood education. The rate of children go to preschool become higher and higher. We also work on the differences between groups of countries based on their economic and socio-political conditions. Especially in some emerging and developing countries, people realize the importance of preschools and early child hood education, and until 2011, there over 60% children participate in preschools. The efficient of early childhood education is able to change the world and help some families succeed. Also, we use some methods based on statistic to do some analysis, for example, the woman involvement into the early childhood education positions become larger than before, which reflects the social norms and position preferences. Throughout this, richer areas tend to invest children to go to preschools and the world become smaller right now because of the further development of internet. Some preschools also include something international culture and norms all over the world, they cooperate with some governmental and non-governmental organizations, which is to improve the early childhood education. But it also mentions the “quality”, children deserve the best resources and professional teachers to lead them, and it still take a long step to get the success.
Nowadays, an increasing number of parents are more likely to place great emphasis on early childhood care and education, especially in a developed country. There is no doubt that children who before eight-year-old is a time of remarkable growth with brain development at its peak. Rich people and nations can offer more opportunities for children to construct knowledge and way of thinking. At the same time, because of lacking money and do not pay much attention to education, the trend of investment fund in early childhood education is lower in an undeveloped country and people from poverty. Therefore, participation in early childhood care and education hugely depends on the economic and socio-political conditions of countries. Furthermore, I am glad to see an increasing trend that each country donates money and pay more attention to early childhood education and care, it not only foster the potential of the future of counties but also give more equal rights for women to manage their body. Children are the backbone of the country’s future. The process from childbirth to adulthood is a continuous socialization process. The higher the level of social development, the stronger the child’s social adaptability. Social education for young children is not only the needs of their own survival and development but also the needs of social development.
This research sparks hope in me (and I hope others as well) that the world is moving in the right direction; towards a more sustainable and educated human population. The global comparison of the upward trends of early childhood care and education shows the important and significant impact that globalization is having on countries, regardless of their economic state. Of course, as outlined in this research, there is a significant difference between the percentage of young children that have access to early childhood education, which is dependent upon the economic state of their home country. This clearly shows that even in some of the poorest nations, they still see early childhood education as a priority. The research presented in this article also reiterates the importance of more advanced nations putting an emphasis on early childhood education. For example in the United States, by increasing access to early childhood education we not only are improving the lives and learning of our own children, but also are being used as an inspiration for nations around the globe to do the same. I agree with the concluding sentence of this paragraph; we need more research on the trends in the quality of this early childhood education in order to study just how much we truly are improving. I am curious to ask which is more important, ensuring that a higher quantity of children have access to early childhood education (even if that means sacrificing quality), or taking more time to ensure that children have access to quality early childhood education?
I think the global expansion of child care and education is a good thing because, With the improvement of living standards and the overall improvement of social and cultural quality, both the government, the society, and parents are paying much more attention to education, especially preschool education. At the same time, based on keeping the focus of preschool education on kindergarten education, they also strongly advocate and promote “zero-year education”, expanding the scope of preschool education from birth to preschool, to include family education, social education, kindergarten education, and other more extensive and comprehensive education fields. The original education system and kindergarten Settings have also changed a lot. Children’s Early Education is a good choice for many families. The advantages of preschool include consistency in structure and procedures, as well as an emphasis on early education (which can stimulate interest in learning). Most programs also teach children a variety of cognitive, social, emotional and language skills. There is now a lot of evidence that because they learn two languages at the same time, they have stronger brain circuits to support self-regulation. This may explain why preschool education helps them make rapid progress. Their ability to absorb new information and shift their attention from one task to another are skills they bring to the table.
Early childhood care and education (as you know) is becoming increasingly more important globally. Focusing on the United States, the accessibility for early childhood care is a part of the maternal/paternal leave debate, but is also strongly debated in education reform. In America there are states that have universal early childhood education, and states that don’t. Yet, no matter what research comes out about the benefits of early childhood education, nothing happens to ensure accessibility for it at the federal level. In New York City, where it costs more than normal to live, and accessibility is low, early childhood education is universally free. Yet in places like Kansas, and the Dakotas, where there schooling is widely accessible, no such programs exist. Why? Globally, this is an issue: funding for early childhood care and education. Funding in New York comes from taxes and the high population that is generating those taxes. Funding in rural places doesn’t generate enough taxes, nor receives enough federal funding to be able to implement programs such as universal free early childhood care and education into their schooling. I would imagine, this is why countries with higher GDP per capita can fluctuate with their educational funding and countries with lower GDP per capita have minimal educational options.
The availability of contraceptives seemed to be the most interesting inclusion in your analysis, one that I have not considered before. It would make sense though that as fertility becomes controllable, countries become more invested in providing early childhood education and development programs. On the other hand, a factor that came at no surprise was country wealth. Wealth allows for so many possibilities, and differs greatly across the world. If the United Nations goal is for all children to have access to early education programs, I am curious to see what strategies can be taken to mitigate the global wealth difference, and if this goal is reachable. A final factor you included that I again had not considered was involvement of individuals in a global community. This in particular is a factor I expect to be particularly challenging to overcome, seeing as nowadays it seems like many nations are taking steps away from a global community. Instead, these countries seem to be looking inward, and I feel this could be a huge set back in the UN’s goals. Take Brexit, or America current trajectory. Even a lot of Europe shares similar sentiments. It’ll be interesting to see whether involvement in international non-governmental organizations will rise, or in fact fall, due to these large scale shifts.
Early childhood care and education are not only beneficial to parents who work, but also help children develop psychosocial, vocabulary and communicative skills during critical early developmental years. Exposure to other children and a social environment outside the home helps a child become more responsive and enthusiastic about learning. Several studies show that early childhood education results a reduced need for special education program, better performance in grade school, higher chance of graduation and is economically better for the society overall.
On the other hand, early childhood care and education also takes away from time that children would otherwise spend with family or at home. As someone who has been in the formal educational system since I was less than 3 years old, I do believe there are many benefits to early childhood and pre-K programs, but as an adult, now whenever I visit my nieces and nephews who are all under 5 years old, I find it hard to understand how little 2-5-year-old children can be so busy and over-scheduled. This makes me wonder how the demands of the current way of life affects children and the amount of time they get to spend around family members. Growing up i spent a lot of time around extended family, and for that i am still very close to them, but I cannot imagine the same being the case for my nieces and nephews. What kind of affects might this have on how close children are to family members?