Returns to Public Investments in ECEC Oslo, Norway Implementing Policies for High Quality Early Childhood Education and Care

Returns to Public Investments in ECECOslo, NorwayImplementing Policies for High Quality EarlyChildhood Education and Care (ECEC)January 24, 2012 Steve Barnett, PhD

Why invest in ECEC? First 5 years lay foundations for language, academic abilities, habits & socio-emotional development The window for change does not close after age 5, but “catch up” is costly Worldwide more than 200 million children under 5 are failing to reach their developmental potential Preschool interventions can enhance development and yield high economic returns

ECEC programs 0-5 in the US producelong-term gains: 123 studies since 1960 All Designs HQ Designs HQ Programs 1 0.9 0.8 0.7Effects (sd) 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 Treatment End Ages 5-10 Age >10 Age at Follow-Up

What determines cognitive gains?Time of Follow-Up NegativeResearch Design Quality PositiveIntentional Teaching PositiveIndividualization Positive(small groups and 1 on 1)Comprehensive Services Negativen= 123 Studies

Effects of ECD Programs for 4 Outcomes by Type of Program: Global Research 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 Cognitive Social Schooling Health Nutrition Cash EducationNores and Barnett, 2009.

Key LessonsImmediate impact should be twice the size of the desired long-term impactMultiple approaches effectiveEducation is a key componentComprehensive services negative in the US, positive elsewhere—results depend on context/need

Potential Gains from ECEC InvestmentsEducational Success and Economic Productivity Achievement test scores Special education and grade repetition High school graduation Behavior problems, delinquency, and crime Employment, earnings, and welfare dependency Smoking, drug use, depressionDecreased Costs to Government Schooling costs Social services costs Crime costs Health care costs (teen pregnancy and smoking)

Economic Returns to Pre-K for Disadvantaged Children (In 2006 dollars, 3% discount rate) Cost Benefits B/C  Perry Pre-K $17,599 $284,086 16  Abecedarian $70,697 $176,284 2.5  Chicago $ 8,224 $ 83,511 10Barnett, W. S., & Masse, L. N. (2007). Early childhood program design and economic returns: Comparative benefit-cost analysis of the Abecedarian program andpolicy implications, Economics of Education Review, 26, 113-125; Belfield, C., Nores, M., Barnett, W.S., & Schweinhart, L.J. (2006). The High/Scope PerryPreschool Program. Journal of Human Resources, 41(1), 162-190; Temple, J. A., & Reynolds, A. J. (2007). Benefits and costs of investments in preschooleducation: Evidence from the Child-Parent Centers and related programs. Economics of Education Review, 26(1), 126-144.

Perry Preschool Economic Effects Program No Program Earned >$20K at 27 29% 7% Earned >$20K at 40 60% 40% Employeed at 40 76% 62% Own Home at 27 36% 13% Own Car at 40 82% 60%Had savings Account at 40 76% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Perry Preschool Crime Effects Program No ProgramDiscipline Problems 14% ages 6-12 27%Arrested >5X by 27 7% 29%Arrested >5X by 40 36% 55%Violent Crime by 40 33% 48% Drug Crime by 40 14% 34% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Key LessonsEconomic returns can be extremely highReturns generalize across different kinds of programs but vary with effectivenessSoft skills matter as much as hard skills

Enhanced Pre-K in Mauritius: Results of a Randomized TrialIntervention: Nutrition, Education, &Exercise Ages 3-5, teacher-child ratio 1:5.5 v. 1:30Outcomes: Decreased behavior problems, conduct disorder, crime and mental illness at ages 17-23Malnourished children gained more

ECEC Investments Around the Globe Argentina: Preschool increased achievement & self-control (e.g., attention and behavior) in 3rd grade Colombia: Nutrition, preschool education & health care increased school age cognitive ability. Germany: Preschool increased school success of migrants. UK: High-quality preschool increased achievement. Uruguay: Preschool increased educational attainment and decreased dropout.

Economic Returns Globally Estimated returns for middle- and low-income countries are 6:1 to 18:1 from increased earnings alone. A 25% increase in preschool education would yield an estimated return of US $10.6 billion globally. The Lancet, Volume 378 (9799), p. 1276, 8 October 2011

Why Universal Public ECEC?All children gain from better ECEC Disadvantaged gain morePeer effects for disadvantaged substantialBest coverage of disadvantagedHigher cost, but a larger net benefit

Effects of Universal ECECOECD test scores higher and more equal as access approaches 100%France: Ecole Maternelle increased incomeNorway: universal child care increased earnings and employmentArg. Uru. and UK: universal preschool raised long-term achievementUS states: universal Pre-K improved test scores and executive function for all childrenDenmark, Quebec: universal child care null or negative effects on children--quality matters

Universal ECEC Returns Depend on Policy and PracticeReturns to public ECEC investments depend on intensity and qualityQuality depends on teachers, class size, and classroom composition (peers)Quality depends on leadership and a continuous improvement cycle with reflection & planningProven designs, high standards, adequate funding, and evaluation all help

NJ Raised Quality in Public and Private 60Percentage of Classrooms 50 47.4 40 34.6 32.2 30 27.7 19.9 20 16.0 12.1 10 3.9 4.2 0.0 0.2 1.7 0 1.00-1.99 2.00-2.99 3.00-3.99 4.00-4.99 5.00-5.99 6.00-7.00 00 Total (N = 232) 08 Total (N = 407) ECERS-R Score (1=minimal, 3=poor 5= good 7=excellent)

Conclusions ECEC can be a strong public investment  Increased achievement  Job and GDP growth  Decreased economic and educational inequality and fewer social problems Universal ECEC can yield a higher return and greater equality than targeted ECEC Intensity and quality are the keys to high returns Continuous improvement cycles can assure quality

References1. Barnett, W. S. (2011). Effectiveness of early educational intervention. Science, 333, 975-978.2. Barnett, W. S., & Masse, L. N. (2007). Early childhood program design and economic returns: Comparative benefit-cost analysis of the Abecedarian program and policy implications, Economics of Education Review, 26, 113-125.3. Behrman, J. R., Cheng, Y., & Todd, P. E. (2004). Evaluating preschool programs when length of exposure to the program varies: A nonparametric approach. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(1), 108-1324. Berlinski, S., Galiani, S., & Gertler, P. (2009). The effect of pre-primary education on primary school performance. Journal of Public Economics, 93, 219–234.5. Berlinski, S. Galiani, S., & Manacorda, M. (2008). Giving children a better start: preschool attendance and schoolage profiles. Journal of Public Economics, 92, 1416-1440.6. Burger, K. (2010). How does early childhood care and education affect cognitive development? An international review of the effects of early interventions for children from different social backgrounds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25, 140-165.7. Camilli, G., Vargas, S., Ryan, S., & Barnett, W.S. (2010). Meta-analysis of the effects of early education interventions on cognitive and social development. Teachers College Record, 112(3), 579-620.8. Diamond, A., & Lee, K. (2011). Interventions shown to aid executive function development in children 4 to 12 years old. Science, 333, 959-964.9. Dumas C. & Lefranc, A. (2010). Early schooling and later outcomes: Evidence from preschool extension in France. THEMA Working Paper 2010-07. Université de Cergy-Pontoise.10. Engle, P. L., Black, M. M., Behrman, J. R., Cabral de Mello, M., Gertler, P. J., Kapiriri, L., et al. (2007). Strategies to avoid the loss of developmental potential in more than 200 million children in the developing world. The Lancet, 369, 229-242.11. Engle P.L., Fernald L., Alderman, H., et al, and the Global Child Development Steering Group. (2011). Strategies for reducing inequalities and improving developmental outcomes for young children in low-income and middle-income countries. The Lancet, 378, 1339-53.12. Fernald, L. C. H., Gertler, P. J., & Neufeld, L. M. (2008). Role of cash in conditional cash transfer programmes for child health, growth, and development: An analysis of Mexicos Oportunidades. The Lancet, 371, 828-837.13. Havnes, T. & Mogstad, M. (2011). No Child Left Behind: Subsidized Child Care and Childrens Long-Run Outcomes. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3(2): 97–129.

14. McKay, H., Sinisterra, L., McKay, A., Gomez, H., & Lloreda, P. (1978). Improving cognitive ability in chronically deprived children. Science, 200(4339), 270-278.15. Naudeau, S., Kataoka, N., Valerio, A., Neuman, M., and Elder, L. (2010). Investing in Young Children: An ECD Guide for Policy Dialogue and Project Preparation. Washington, DC: World Bank.16. Neidell, M., & Waldfogel, J. (2010). Cognitive and noncognitive peer effects in early education. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 92(3), 562-576.17. Nores, M., & Barnett, S. (2010). Benefits of early childhood interventions across the world: (Under) Investing in the very young. Economics of Education Review, 29, 271-282.18. Raine, A., Mellingen, K., Liu, J., Venables, P., Mednick, S. A. (2003). Effects of environmental enrichment at ages 3-5 years on schizotypal personality and antisocial behavior at ages 17 and 23 years. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160(9), 1627-1635.19. Rindermann, H., & Ceci, S.J. (2008). Education policy and country outcomes in international cognitive competence studies. Graz, Austria: Institute of Psychology, Karl-Franzens-University Graz.20. Schweinhart, L. J., Montie, J., Xiang, Z., Barnett, W. S., Belfield, C. R., & Nores, M. (2005). Lifetime effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through age 40 (Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 14). Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Educational Research Foundation.21. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., Taggart, B. (2004). The final report: Effective pre-school education. Technical paper 12. London: Institute of Education, University of London.22. Temple, J., & Reynolds, A. (2007). Benefits and costs of investments in preschool education: Evidence from the Child-Parent Centers and related programs. Economics of Education Review, 26, 126-144.23. Waldfogel, J., & Zhai, F. (2008). Effects of public preschool expenditures on the test scores of fourth graders: Evidence from TIMMS. Educational Research and Evaluation, 14, 9–28.24. Walker S.P., Wachs, T.D., Grantham-McGregor, S. et al. (2011). Inequality in early childhood: risk and protective factors for early child development. The Lancet, 378, 1325-35.

http://www.oecd.org	1116
http://unjobs.org	89
http://translate.googleusercontent.com	10
http://mcmbo1.oecd.org	6
http://mcmbo1	3
http://207.46.192.232	2

Returns to Public Investments in ECEC Oslo, Norway Implementing Policies for High Quality Early Childhood Education and Care

by OECD Education on Feb 03, 2012

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

6 Embeds 1,226

Statistics

Returns to Public Investments in ECEC Oslo, Norway Implementing Policies for High Quality Early Childhood Education and Care — Presentation Transcript