Tell us what you think about . .

The Early Childhood Action Collective (ECAC) is an initiative of Public Health Management Corporation (PHMC), with grant support from the William Penn Foundation. ECAC is committed to building the knowledge base around high quality early childhood learning and identifying promising policies and practices to support the well-being of young children in Philadelphia and Pennsylvania.  

The PA Director Credential

As part of its work, ECAC is conducting a survey around director credentialing in Pennsylvania. Our goal is to better understand how the credentialing process works from the perspective of early care and education staff, including challenges to obtaining a credential and how well coursework applies to directors' day-to-day work. We plan to use survey findings to inform recommended changes to the current credentialing process, and to identify areas where technical assistance and professional development may help directors to better serve their students and support their staff and programs. 

If you complete the survey and leave your email address, you will be entered to win one of 10 $25 Visa gift cards!

Please take a few moments to complete the survey--your feedback will be valuable to improving director credentialing and training in Philadelphia.

Early intervention in early childhood classrooms

ECAC is also conducting a survey to better understand how ECE providers in Philadelphia work with young children with special needs. Results will inform a white paper on early intervention and inclusion of children with special needs in ECE classrooms in Philadelphia.

Please take a few moments to complete this survey, and to pass the link on to your staff/colleagues so they can complete the survey as well. 

If you complete the survey and provide your email, you will be included in a lottery to receive one of 20 $25 Visa gift cards once it has ended!

We would love it if you could complete BOTH surveys—and you will be eligible in both drawings if you do!

Finally, if you just love answering questions, you live in Philadelphia, and you want a chance for one more gift card, the folks over at Read by 4th would like to hear what you think too.


How Cities Embrace Their Infants and Toddlers

By Judy Reidt-Parker and Harriet Dichter  The brain undergoes its most rapid growth during the first few years of life. As cities like Philadelphia expand their pre-Kindergarten (pre-K) services, it is important to consider the supports, care, and education that very young children may receive prior to entering pre-K if we are to achieve the best results. With this in mind, we analyzed initiatives supported by and/or implemented in 11 cities that feature infant and toddler care.

Read the executive summary

Read the full brief

Evaluating PHLpreK

The National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) will be conducting a comprehensive, three-year evaluation of PHLpreK with the support of a $1.8M grant from the William Penn Foundation. NIEER will be examining classroom quality, assessing child development (including language, literacy, math, executive function, and social and emotional development), and interviewing pre-K providers. These activities will provide insights into the quality of programming and  will assist program providers and the City in making ongoing improvements to the program. NIEER will weigh in on the program’s design and implementation throughout the evaluation, and will also conduct  cost-benefit and economic impact analyses of the program. NIEER has evaluated several state preschool programs to date, including those in Arkansas, New Jersey, and Oklahoma, and has been involved in city evaluations in San Antonio, Seattle, and West Palm Beach, and there have been many other evaluations of preschool programs by a range of research organizations in cities across the country, including Boston, Chicago, Denver, and Seattle. 

New York City illustrates how evaluation can be used to inform program development and assist parents. NYC ramped up service very quickly in 2014 to provide services to 51,000 children (and subsequently expanded the program to serve even more children). FiveThirtyEight outlined the scope of the evaluation: staff at a sample of 200 of the City’s 1,600+ providers received surveys about program implementation; at a portion of these 200 sites, evaluators conducted student assessments, and at another portion of sites, the evaluators conducted teacher and parent focus groups. 

In addition, last month, EdWeek reported on ‘Quality Snapshots’ that NYC is currently providing to assist parents in choosing a preschool—including outcomes from the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R) (both are classroom quality measures), and a community survey. The snapshots also include contact information and hours for programs, and any additional services offered. These  are just one example of how outcomes of an evaluation can be used within the community in real time to provide value. 

Program evaluation has been encouraged form the federal level as well. The Preschool Development Grant awarded by the federal government requires evaluation of state programs as a tool for continuous improvement, and as a source of data for ongoing improvement of programs nationwide. A paper from CEELO in 2015 outlines various approaches those states have taken to evaluate programs, including guidance for state policymakers.

Some program evaluations have gone on to assess the impact of preschool programs over a long period of time, these include the Perry Preschool Project, the Abecedarian Project, and the Chicago Child-Parent Center; all have followed children into adulthood to determine the impact of programs on academic and other outcomes, including health, involvement in crime, and engagement in the workforce. 

For a look at what is known about preschool programs from a range of excellent evaluations, check out Investing in Our Future: The Evidence Base on Preschool. The website summarizes the results of a number of short- and long-term preschool evaluations, and explains what is known overall about the benefits of preschool programs.




Implicit Bias in Early Education and What it Means for Children and Teachers

A recent post by Kaiser and Rasminsky on children with challenging behavior examined the issue of implicit bias, and its role in the suspension, expulsion, and other potentially unfair treatment of very young children. We wanted to dig a little deeper. What is implicit bias? Why does it matter? What can we do to address it?

The Kirwan Institute describes implicit bias as the “attitudes or stereotypes that affect our understanding, actions, and decisions in an unconscious manner.” With such a broad definition, it is easy to understand that implicit biases affect us all—including young children—whether we are conscious of them or not. (You can test yourself for implicit bias here.) While evidence for implicit bias has been shown across the judicial, criminal justice, and health fields (among others), this brief post focuses on implicit bias in early education. It is particularly important because it stands to substantially impact children’s lifespan outcomes, and may play a role in shaping their own development of biases, both implicit and explicit. We present below a few studies, selected from a broad and growing body of literature on implicit bias in education, that may help us better understand what it means, which students may be most impacted by it, and what factors (e.g., teacher race) may influence implicit bias. 

Because this content only scratches the surface of the complex and intertwined issues of implicit bias, explicit bias, and social determinants of health and related outcomes (see, for example, disparities in preschool suspension), we encourage you to explore the resources listed at the bottom of the page and continue to learn about how implicit bias affects young children’s educational experiences.

In a seminal study in 1968, Rosenthal and Jacobson told elementary school teachers that a random set of students they had selected were likely to show significant intellectual gains. These students--although no different from their peers at the outset--showed significantly greater gains on test scores, particularly the students in grades one and two. This study was one of the first to suggest that teacher expectations influence student outcomes.  

A 2015 nationally representative survey by Gershenson, Holt, and Papageorge, collected data on teachers’ expectations for their students’ future success. The authors looked at pairs of teachers who provided their expectations for the same student, and looked at differences in expectations based on the interaction between teachers’ and students’ races. Nonblack teachers had significantly lower expectations for black students than did black teachers.

In 2016, Gilliam, Maupin, Reyes, Accavitti, and Shic, conducted two tests to assess biases in early care and education teachers. In the first test, teachers were told to expect challenging behaviors (although none were present), and then viewed a video of mixed race and sex preschoolers engaged in normal activities; teachers’ eye movements were tracked as they watched the video. Teachers gazed longer at boys than girls, especially black boys. In the second test, teachers read vignettes about a child with challenging behavior--you can read more about that in the study itself. Articles in The Atlantic, and YaleNews, and on NPR were among many reporting on the study—it is shocking to think about children as young as preschoolers facing bias, and considering the implications for their long-term school and life outcomes as a result.

There are some potential policies that may help to mitigate racial biases in ECE, according to a paper from the Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race and Ethnicity, including: 

  • Using data to identify disparate treatment based on student demographic features, and employing data-informed decision making processes to limit judgment calls for issues such as discipline and class placement;

  • Creating school cultures that are culturally representative and do not perpetuate stereotypes such as male-math associations; Hiring a diverse staff that reflects the experiences of the student body;

  • Providing professional development around implicit biases and cultural competencies;

  • Discussing race and bias with young students by using story-telling or perspective-sharing activities; Using representative classroom artwork and materials to include students of various backgrounds in varied roles and activities;

  • Providing clear definitions of appropriate and inappropriate behaviors and standardizing evaluation and punitive processes to reduce the influence of personal biases.

In their blog, Kaiser and Rasminsky suggest more personal practices that teachers and providers can adopt:

  • “It’s extremely important to build strong relationships with all the children we teach and use every interaction to show how much we care about them and believe in their ability to succeed. Little things mean a lot, for example, saying their names correctly. Mispronouncing or changing a child’s name insults the child, the family, and their culture and can have a lasting effect on a child’s self-image and world view.

  • Get to know the children’s families and learn about their lives and culture, paying special attention to those whose beliefs and experiences are different from yours. Head Start has shown us that family involvement and home-school collaboration improve children’s behavior at school. Home visits open doors, both literally and figuratively.

  • Make a point of connecting with people who are different from you. This can be hard because many of our neighborhoods are segregated, so use your ingenuity. Invite guest speakers into your classroom, attend a service at an unfamiliar church, or follow the example of Justin Minkel, 2007 Arkansas Teacher of the Year, and arrange a meet-up for families in a park or playground.”

Additional resources include: