1

Findings from the UK’s

Effective Provision of Pre-School Education Study

Edward Melhuish Birkbeck, University of London

University of Oxford & Oslo & Akershus University College

e.melhuish@bbk.ac.uk

Why the early years?

“ If the race is already halfway run even before children begin school, then we clearly need to examine what happens in the earliest years.” (Esping-Andersen, 2005)

“ Like it or not, the most important mental and behavioural patterns, once established, are difficult to change once children enter school.” (Heckman & Wax, 2004).

2

Early risk factors and poor outcomes

§  poor literacy and educational attainment §  anti-social and criminal behaviour §  unemployment §  substance abuse

§  poor mental and physical health

§  adult mortality

3

Interventions with Disadvantaged Groups

“If people keep falling off a cliff, don’t worry about where you put the ambulance at the bottom. Build a fence at the top and stop them falling off in the first place.”

3

ECEC as Intervention for Disadvantaged Children

There are several studies with similar conclusions – High Quality ECEC can improve development for

children from disadvantaged backgrounds e.g. Perry Preschool Project, Abecedarian,

Chicago Child-Parent Center

General Population Studies

Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE)

Later EPPSE

4

Effective Pre-School and Primary Education EPPE

Kathy Sylva – University of Oxford Pam Sammons – University of Oxford

Iram Siraj-Blatchford – Institute of Education, University of London Brenda Taggart – Institute of Education, University of London

Edward Melhuish – Birkbeck, University of London

EPPE Research Design

•  Adopts an educational effectiveness design •  Employs a mixed methodology involving: - large scale quantitative study, longitudinal tracking of sample

approx 3000 children from 141 different pre-school settings from age 3+ to 7 years, including multilevel analyses of pre-school centre effects

- focuses on a broad range of child outcomes (cognitive

progress and social behavioural development) and investigates impact of processes eg quantitative measures of centre quality

- detailed qualitative case studies of selected centres identified

from multilevel analyses as having positive effects on different child outcomes

5

Key Features of EPPE Mixed Research Design

•  Quantitative analyses enable comparisons across settings and by type of provision taking account intake differences in terms of significant child, family and home factors including prior attainments or social behaviour (estimates of pre-school centre effectiveness based on ‘value-added’ for cognitive progress and social behavioural development).

•  Detailed qualitative cases studies of more effective pre-school settings explore organisation and processes, including pedagogy, associated with positive child outcomes and increase understanding of best practice.

•  Six local authorities in England, covering urban, inner city, suburban and rural locations and a range of ethnic diversity and social disadvantage

•  Pre-school centres randomly selected within authorities to include: §  playgroups §  nursery classes §  private day nurseries §  day care centres run by local authorities §  nursery schools §  fully integrated centres

•  A ‘home’ sample approx 300 who have no significant pre-school experience

•  Approx 3000 children and 141 centres in total

A Stratified Random Sample

6

Effective Pre-School and Primary Education EPPE

Kathy Sylva – University of Oxford Pam Sammons – University of Oxford

Iram Siraj-Blatchford – Institute of Education, University of London Brenda Taggart – Institute of Education, University of London

Edward Melhuish – Birkbeck, University of London, & University of Oxford

www.eppe.ioe.ac.uk

EPPE STUDY in UK

25 nursery classes 590 children

34 playgroups 610 children

31 private day nurseries 520 children

20 nursery schools 520 children

7 integrated centres 190 children

24 local authority day care nurseries 430 children

home 310 children

School starts

6yrs 7yrs (3+ yrs)

Key Stage 1

600 Schools approx. 3,000 chd

16yrs

Key Stage 2

800 Schools approx. 2,500 chd

7

Quality and Duration matter (months of developmental advantage on literacy)

0123

456

78

1-2 years 2-3 years

low qualityaveragehigh quality

Effects of child, home, and pre-school compared

EFFECTS UPON LITERACY

home environment

social class

quality pre-school

duration pre-school

low birthweight

gender

Mea

n EFF

ECT

.6

.5

.4

.3

.2

.1

8

Home Learning Environment Parents asked about activities in the home. A home learning environment (HLE) index constructed (Melhuish et al., 2001).

Seven activities linked to development.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 not occur very frequent

Reading to child Library visits Painting & drawing Playing with letters Playing with numbers/shapes Songs/ poems /nursery rhymes

The Home Learning Environment in the early years has powerful long-term effects “What parents do is more important than who parents are”. (Melhuish et al., 2001)

9

Social class and pre-school on literacy (age 7)

1.8

2.0

2.2

2.4

2.6

2.8

Professional Skilled Un/semi skilled

Social class by occupation

Mean

year

2 re

ading

leve

l

Pre-school

Expected minimum

No pre-school

0

Scor

e at

ent

ry to

pri

mar

y sc

hool

Score at entry to EPPE project (3 years+)

Which are effective centres?

10

Combining quantitative and qualitative methods From quantitative analyses we identified ECEC centres that were particularly effective. Then qualitative case studies looked at what made them effective.

Five areas were particularly important: •  Quality of the adult-child verbal interaction. •  Knowledge and understanding of curriculum. •  Knowledge of how young children learn. •  Adults skill in helping children resolve conflicts. •  Helping parents to support children’s learning

at home.

Effective Pre-schools

11

Good outcomes are linked to:

Adult-child interactions that involve ‘sustained shared thinking’ and open-ended questioning to extend children’s thinking

Sustained shared thinking: An episode in which two or more individuals “work together” in an intellectual way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate activities, extend a narrative etc. Both parties must contribute to the thinking and it must develop and extend.

Sustained shared thinking

Modelling later outcomes

Child Factors

Family Factors

Home-Learning-

Environment

READING

MATHEMATICS

Primary School Pre-school

12

Mothe

r’s  Edu

ca.on  

Father’s  E

duca.o

n  

Socio-­‐e

conom

ic  statu

s  

Home  le

arning  

environ

ment  

High-­‐q

uality  p

re-­‐scho

ol  

Primary

 school

 

0.7  

0.1  

0.0  

0.3  

0.2  

0.5  

0.4  

0.6  

0.8  

Family  i

ncome

 

Effect  size  in  stan

dard  devia.o

n  un

its  

Literacy  Numeracy  

Effects  upon  Age  14;    literacy  and  numeracy  

Combined Impact of Pre- and Primary School - Maths

Reference Group: No Pre-School and low Primary School Effectiveness

0.09

0.35

0.59

0.41 0.46 0.56 0.59 0.59 0.63

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

low medium high

Low Medium High

Effe

ct S

ize

School Effectiveness

Pre-School Effectiveness

13

Pre-school Quality and Self-regulation and Pro-social behaviour (age 11 and 14)

Self-­‐regula.on  

Low  

0.05  

0.00  

0.15  

0.10  

0.25  

0.20  

0.30  

Medium  

High  

Pro-­‐social  behaviour  

Effect  size  

0.02  

0.17  

0.25  

0.16  

0.18  

0.23  

Pre-­‐school  quality  

2.00

1.00

0.00

-1.00

-2.00

Res

idu

al S

core

4

4 4 4 4

6 6 6 6 6

55 5 5 5

3 3 3 3 3

2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1

3 Years Reception End Year 1

Key Stage 1

End Year 5

Key Stage 2

Time

Group % 8.2% 19.6% 18.8% 17.3% 23.2% 12.9 %

-3.00

1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 3 5 5 5 4 4 4 6 6 6

Trajectories for Numeracy

14

EFFECTIVE PRE-SCHOOL PROVISION IN NORTHERN IRELAND (EPPNI) Study in Northern Ireland 850 children followed from 3 to 11 years of age. Similar results to EPPE in England. At age 11, allowing for all background factors, The effects of quality of pre-school persist until age 11 years High quality pre-school – improved English and maths, And improved progress in maths during primary school.

Children who attended high quality pre-schools were 2.4 times more likely in English, and 3.4 times more likely in mathematics, to attain the highest grade at age 11 than children without pre-school.

What matters 3 elements for good educational and social success Good Home Learning Environment (before school) Good preschool for longer duration Good primary schools Those children with all 3 will out-perform those with 2 who will out-perform those with 1 who will out-perform those with 0 All other things being equal

15

Conclusions •  From age 2 all children benefit from preschool. •  The quality of preschool matters. •  Part-time has equal benefit to full-time. •  Preschool effects persist until teenage years •  High quality preschool can protect a child from

effects of a low effective school.

The Impact of Research on Policy DfES’s Analytical Strategy (DfES, 2006) “The results of the EPPE study have already had a significant impact on policy development in early years, especially through clearly demonstrating the vital influence of the quality of provision on successful outcomes. Continuation of the cohort will enable us to understand the lasting impact of early years experience and the factors which either enhance or negate this” (DfES, 2006, p20). Her Majesty’s Treasury. (2004), Choice for parents, the best start for children: a ten year strategy for childcare. Norwich: HMSO. ‘the main source of analyses of the impact of pre-school provision on child development in the UK is the Effective Provision of Pre-School Education Project (HMT, 2004, p65).

16

Effects on policy in UK

•  Free part-time pre-school from age 3 (2004) •  Extension of parental leave (2004) •  10-year Childcare Strategy (2004) •  Guidance for Children’s Centres (2005) •  Childcare Bill (2006) •  Acceptance that money spent on pre-school

produces savings later

LESSONS

1.Early years are very important 2.Preschool is part of infrastructure for a

successful society 3.High quality preschool boosts development 4.Parenting is also very important 5.Preschool lifts population curve.

17

Tensions in policy making

•  Universal or targeting •  Individual community designed, or standardised with central guidelines

•  ‘interventions’ or ‘system reform’ •  Structural solutions, workforce solutions,

cultural change

ECEC as part of society’s infrastructure ECEC is a means of advancing educational

and social development for all and it becomes part of the infrastructure for long-term economic development (Melhuish & Petrogiannis, 2006).

Some countries, e.g. China (Shenglan, 2006)

have adopted this perspective in their focused development of ECEC.

18

Example References Melhuish, E. et al. (2008). Preschool influences on mathematics achievement. Science, 321, 1161-1162. Barnett, W. S. (2011). Effectiveness of early educational intervention. Science, 333, 975-978. Heckman, J.J. (2006). Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science, 132, 1900-1902. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I. and Taggart, B., (Eds) (2010). Early Childhood Matters: Evidence from the Effective Pre-school and Primary Education Project. London: Routledge Melhuish, E. C. (2004). A literature review of the impact of early years provision upon young children. London: National Audit Office. www.nao.org.uk/publications/0304/early_years_progress.aspx OECD (2009). Doing Better for Children. www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/doing-better-for-children_9789264059344-en OECD (2011). Doing Better for Families. www.oecd.org/social/family/doingbetter European Commission (2011). Early Childhood Education and Care: Providing for all our children with the best start for the world of tomorrow. ec.europa.eu/education/school-education/doc/childhoodcom_en.pdf Melhuish E (2011) Preschool Matters. Science, 333, 299-300. Irwin, L. Siddiqi, A., & Hertzman, C. (2007). Early Child Development: A powerful equalizer. WHO. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2007/a91213.pdf UN (2010). The Real Wealth of Nations: Pathways to Human Development. New York: UNDP. http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/HDR_2010_EN_Complete_reprint.pdf World Bank (2007). Early child development : from measurement to action. Washington DC: World Bank Havnes, T. & Mogstad, M. (2011). No Child Left Behind: Subsidized Child Care and Children's Long-Run Outcomes. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3(2): 97–129. Naudeau, S. et al. (2010). Investing in Young Children: An ECD Guide for Policy Dialogue and Project Preparation. Washington, DC: World Bank. WHO (2008). Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Geneva: WHO http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2008/9789241563703_eng.pdf