Using data from the first cycle of the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth, this study examines the impact of junior kindergarten on children's later skills in math, above and beyond regional differences and individual/ household factors. It was hypothesized that earlier schooling would better prepare children for first formal learning of arithmetic, resulting in a more developed knowledge-base for optimal performance at the middle and end of elementary school. We also hypothesized that junior kindergarten attendance would reduce the performance gap between children from economically disadvantaged and those from advantaged families. Our results suggest that earlier schooling did not provide the cognitive boost that would lead to better performance in arithmetic, especially for girls. These results are above and beyond a number of controls (sex, age, region, SES, family functioning, family configuration, education, and family size). Junior kindergarten attendance did not help bridge the performance gap based on economic advantage/disadvantage. Primary school children from poor families who attended junior kindergarten did not perform on a par with their middle-class peers. This study makes an important case for enrichment in the central conceptual structures related to intuitive and informal mathematical knowledge through games and activities potentially featured in the junior kindergarten curriculum.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Beller, E.K. (1983). The Philadelphia Study: The impact of preschool on intellectual and socio-emotional development. In the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (Ed.), As the twig is bent ... Lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 333-376). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
2.
Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Do you believe in magic?: What we can expect from early childhood intervention programs. Social Policy Report , 17(1).
3.
Brooks-Gunn, J., Klebanov, P.K., & Liaw, F. (1995). The learning, physical, and emotional environment in the home in the context of poverty: The Infant Health and Development Program . Children and Youth Services Review, 17(1/2), 251-276.
4.
Bryk, A.S., & Raudenbush, S.W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. NewYork: SAGE Publications.
5.
Case, R. (1975). Social class differences in intellectual development: A Neo-Piagetian investigation. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Sciences/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement, 7(3), 244-261.
6.
Dehaene, S. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics . Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
7.
Deutsch, M., Deutsch, C.P., Jordan, T.J., & Gullo, R. (1983). The IDS Program: An experiment in early and sustained enrichment. In the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (Ed.), As the twig is bent ... Lasting effects of preschooI programs (pp. 377-410). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
Entwisle, D.R., & Alexander, K.L. (1990). Beginning school math competence: Minority and majority comparisons. Child Development , 61, 454-471.
9.
Entwisle, D.R., &Alexander, K.L. (1996). Family type and children's growth in reading and math over the primary grades. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 341-355.
10.
Entwisle, D.R., Alexander, K.L., & Olson, L.S. (1994). The gender gap in math: Its possible origins in neighborhood effects. American Sociological Review, 59, 822-838.
11.
Fennema, E. (1974). Mathematics learning and the sexes: A review. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 5, 126-139.
12.
Fuerst, J.S., & Fuerst, D. (1991). Chicago experience with early childhood program: The special case of the Child Parent Center Program. Unpublished manuscript . Loyola University, Chicago, IL .
13.
Ginsburg, H.P., Klein, A., & Starkey, P. (1998). The development of children's mathematical thinking: Connecting research with practice. In I. Sigel & A. Renninger (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Child psychology and practice (Vol. 4,5th ed., pp. 401-476). New York, NY: Wiley.
14.
Ginsburg, H.P., Pappas, S., & Seo, K.-H. (2001). Everyday mathematical knowledge: Asking young children what is developmentally appropriate. In S. L. Golbeck (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on early childhood education: Reframing dilemmas in research and practice. New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates .
15.
Goldstein, H. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. New York, NY: Edward Arnold.
16.
Gray, S.W., Ramsey, B.K., & Klaus, R.A. (1983). The Early Training Project 1962-1980. In the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (Ed.), As the twig is bent ... Lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 36-69). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17.
Griffin, S., Case, R., & Capodilupo, A. (1995). Teaching for understanding: The importance of the central conceptual structure in the elementary mathematics curriculum. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, & A. Marini (Eds.), Teaching for transfer (pp. 123-151). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18.
Hoffman, L.W. (1989). Effects of maternal employment in the two-parent family. American Psychologist, 44, 283-292.
19.
Jordan, T.J., Grallo, R., Deutsch, M., & Deutsch, C.P. (1985). Long-term effects of early enrichment: A 20-year perspective on persistence. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13(4), 393-415.
20.
Karweit, N.L. (1994). Can preschool alone prevent early learning failure? In R. E. Slavin, N. L. Karweit, & B. A. Wasik (Eds.), Preventing early school failure: Research, policy, and practice (pp. 58-77). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
21.
McLoyd, V.C. (1998). Socio-economic disadvantage and child development . American Psychologist, 53(2), 185-204.
22.
Pagani, L.S., Boulerice, B., & Tremblay, R.E. (1997). The influence of poverty on children's classroom placement and behavior problems. In G. J. Duncan & J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), Consequences of growing up poor (pp. 311-339). New York, NY: Sage.
23.
Pepper, K.L., & Hunting, R.P. (1998). Preschoolers' counting and sharing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(2), 164-183.
24.
Pineo, P.C., Porter, J., & McRoberts, H.A. (1977). The 1971 Census and the socioeconomic classification of occupations. Canadian Review of sociology and Anthropology, 14,91-102.
25.
Slavin, R.E. (1994). Preventing early school failure. In R. E. Slavin, N. L. Karweit , & B. A. Wasik (Eds.), Preventing early school failure: Research, policy, and practice (pp. 206-231). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
26.
St. Pierre,R.G., Layzer, J.I., Goodson, B.D., & Bernstein, L.S. (1997). The effectiveness of comprehensive case management interventions: Findings from the national evaluation of the comprehensive child development program. Research in Child Development and Family Studies, September, 1-29.
27.
Weikart, D.P. (1998). Changing early childhood development through educational intervention. Preventive Medicine: An Internafional Journal Devoted to Practice & Theory, 27(2), 233-237.
28.
Weikart, D.P., & Schweinhart, L.J. (1992). High/Scope Preschool Program outcomes. In J. McCord & R. E. Tremblay (Eds.), Preventing antisocial behavior: Interventions from birth through adolescence (pp. 67-86). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
29.
Weikart, D.P., & Schweinhart, L.J. (1997). High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. In G. W. Albee & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Primary prevention works. Issues in children's and families' lives: Vol. 6 (pp. 146-166). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
30.
Willms, J.D. (1996). Indicateurs de la performance en mathématiques dans les écoles primaires du Canada. In Grandir au Canada: Enquête longitudinale nationale sur les enfants et les jeunes (pp. 79-93). Ottawa, ON: Ministre de l'Industrie.
31.
Willms, J.D. (2002). Vulnerable children. Edmonton : University of Alberta Press and Human Resources Development Canada.
32.
Zigler, E., & Styfco, S.J. (1998). Applying the findings of developmental psychology to improve early childhood intervention. In S. G. Paris & H. M. Wellman (Eds.), Global prospects for education: Development, culture, and schooling (pp. 345 365). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
