« Where are the Cool YA and Chick Lit Teachers? | Main | Is Pre-k a Specific Intervention, or a Structural Reform? »

"If it is a Miracle, any sort of evidence will answer, but if it is a Fact, proof is necessary"

Recent blog posts on pre-kindergarten by Kevin Carey and myself have generated some questions and comment from individuals who believe Kevin and I are challenging or attempting to dismiss the evidence on the effectiveness of pre-kindergarten programs. Not at all--the body of evidence demonstrating that children can benefit from high-quality pre-kindergarten programs is one of the most robust in education policy.

But I do think the feedback I've received, as well as some of the arguments put forward by prominent pre-k advocates, do raise some important issues about how it's appropriate to think about certain types of evidence in education policy debates, and specifically how it's appropriate to think about the evidence on the effectiveness of pre-k programs.

As my fellow Ed Week blogger Rick Hess has written previously, there are different types of questions in education policy that we might seek evidence to address. One sort of question involves the efficacy (or lack thereof) of specific interventions and pedagogical strategies: ie, Does a specific early literacy intervention produce improvements in children's literacy skills? Is one math curriculum more effective than another? Does a specific coaching intervention produce improvements in teacher's instructional practice? etc. These types of questions are best addressed through randomized controlled trials and other designs that seek to determine whether or not a particular intervention or strategy "works."

But educational policy debates frequently focus on different types of questions, regarding how different structural arrangements affect educational productivity, quality, or outcomes ie, What happens when we allow different types of organizations other than school districts to operate public schools? What happens when we expand educational choices available to parents? What happens when we compensate teachers based on on-the-job performance, rather than credentials and experience (and what are the pros and cons of different models of doing that?)? These questions can certainly be addressed through empirical research, but they are not really amenable to the same type of "does it work" questions or the associated research designs as used to evaluate specific instructional interventions.

This raises the question: Is publicly funded preschool a specific intervention, or a structural arrangement? How we answer this question shapes how we should talk about research and evidence in pre-k. Tomorrow I'll write more about how I think we should answer this question.

(Bonus points to anyone who can tell me who the title quote to this post comes from.)

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Login |  Register
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Advertisement

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Technorati

Technorati search

» Blogs that link here

Tags

AFT
Alex Grodd
Ana Menezes
Andrew Kelly
appropriations
ARRA
Aspire Public Schools
authorizing
Better Lesson
Bill Ferguson
certification
charter schools
child care
children's literature
choice
civil rights
CLASS
Core Knowledge
curriculum
D.C.
democracy
early childhood
Early Learning Challenge Grant
economics
elections
English language learners
entrepreneurship
equity
Evan Stone
fathers
finance
fix poverty first
Hailly Korman
harlem children's zone
HEA
Head Start
head start
health care
Higher Education
home-based child care
homeschooling
housing
How we think and talk about pre-k evidence
i3
IDEA
income inequality
instruction
international
Jason Chaffetz
Jen Medbery
just for fun
Justin Cohen
Kaya Henderson
Kenya
kindergarten
KIPP
Kirabo Jackson
Kwame Brown
land use
LearnBoost
libertarians
LIFO
literacy
Los Angeles
Louise Stoney
Mark Zuckerberg
Maryland
Massachusetts
Memphis
Michelle Rhee
Michigan
Mickey Muldoon
Neerav Kingsland
New Jersey
New Orleans
NewtownReaction
Next Gen Leaders
Next Gen leaders
nonsense
NSVF Summit
NYT
organizing
parent engagement
parenting
parking
pell grants
politics
poverty
PreK-3rd
presidents
principals
productivity
QRIS
Race to the Top
Rafael Corrales
redshirting
regulation
religion
rick hess
Roxanna Elden
RTT
san francisco
school choice
social services
SOTU
special education
Stephanie Wilson
stimulus
story
Sydney Morris
tax credits
Teacher Prep
teachers
technology
Title I
unions
urban issues
Vincent Gray
vouchers
Waiting for Superman
Washington
West Virginia
zoning