This chapter examines how the previously distinct worlds of early childhood education (ECE) and K-12 public school education are being drawn together through the recent and rapid advances of prekindergarten programming in the United States. Tensions around teaching philosophies, teacher qualifications, and financing are presented to illustrate the complexities involved in bridging the ECE and K-12 worlds. Common theories from the Politics of Education, including Policy Innovation Diffusion Theory, Institutional Theory, and Micropolitics are used to further understand current trends and issues around prekindergarten implementation, as well as to identify areas for future investigation. Despite the inherent tensions, prekindergarten has the potential to serve as a bridge between these two historically distinct systems, resulting in a better overall education system for young children.
Ackerman, D.J., & Barnett, W.S. ( 2009, March). Does preschool education policy impact infant/toddler care? (Preschool Policy Brief, Issue20). New Brunswick: National Institute for Early Education Research.
2.
Amrein, A.L., & Berliner, D.C. (2002, March 28). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10. Available from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n18/
3.
Barnett, W.S., Epstein, D.J., Friedman, A.H., Sansanelli, R., & Hustedt, J.T. ( 2009). The state of Preschool 2009. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research . Retrieved from http://nieer.org/yearbook/
4.
Blase, J. (Ed.). (1991). The politics of life in schools: Power, conflict, and cooperation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
5.
Brooks-Gunn, J. ( 2003). Do you believe in magic? What we can expect from Early Childhood Intervention programs. Social Policy Report , 27(1). Available from http://www.srcd.org/spr.html
6.
Brown, C.P. ( 2009). Pivoting a prekindergarten program off the child or the standard? A case study of integrating the practices of early childhood education into elementary school. The Elementary School Journal , 110, 202-227.
7.
Camilli, G., Vargas, S.Ryan, S., and 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.
Carnoy, M., & Loeb, S. ( 2002). Does external accountability affect student outcomes? A cross-state analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 305-331.
9.
Center on Education Policy. (2007, June). Answering the question that matters most: Has student achievement increased since No Child Left Behind? Available from http://www.cep-dc.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=document.showDocumentByID&nodeID=1&DocumentID=200
10.
Choi, K., Seltzer, M., Herman, J., & Yamashiro, K. ( 2007). Children left behind in AYP and non-AYP schools: Using student progress and the distribution of student gains to validate AYP . Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 26(3), 21-32.
11.
Clifford, R.M., Cochran, M., & Kagan, S.L. ( 2003). Challenges for early childhood education and care policy . In D. Cryer & R. M. Clifford (Eds.), Early childhood education and care in the USA (pp. 191-210). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
12.
Cooper, B.S., Cibulka, J.G., & Fusarelli, L.D. (2008). Handbook of education politics and policy. New York: Routledge .
13.
Copple, C., & Bradekamp, S. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in Early Childhood Programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
14.
Dillon, S. ( 2008, December 16). Obama pledge stirs hope in early education . The New York Times. Available from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/17/us/politics/17early.html
15.
DiMaggio, P.J., & Powell, W.W. ( 1991). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. In W. W. Powell & P. J. Dimaggio (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 63-82). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
16.
Early, D.M., Maxwell, K.L., Burchinal, M., Alva, S., Bender, R.H., Bryant, D., et al. (2007). Teachers’ education, classroom quality, and young children’s academic skills: Results from seven studies of preschool programs. Child Development, 78, 558-580.
17.
Egertson, H.A. ( 2004). Achieving high standards and implementing developmentally appropriate practice-BOTH are possible. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 32(1), 3-9.
18.
Flessa, J. ( 2009). Educational micropolitics and distributed leadership . Peabody Journal of Education, 84, 331-349.
19.
Fuller, B. ( 2007). Standardized childhood: The political and cultural struggle over early education. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
20.
Goldstein, L.S. ( 2007). Beyond the DAP versus standards dilemma: Examining the unforgiving complexity of kindergarten teaching in the United States. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22, 39-54.
21.
Goldstein, L.S. ( 2008). Kindergarten teachers making "street-level" education policy in the wake of No Child Left Behind. Early Education and Development, 19, 448-478.
22.
Graue, E. ( 2008). Teaching and learning in a post-DAP world. Early Education and Development, 19, 441-447.
23.
Greenberg, M., & Schumacher, R. , (2003). Financing universal pre-kindergarten: Possibilities and technical issues for states in using funds under the Child Care and Development Fund and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Social Policy. Available from http://www.buildinitiative.org/files/universal_prek.pdf
24.
Grieshaber, S. ( 2008). Interrupting stereotypes: Teaching and the education of young children. Early Education and Development, 19, 505-518.
25.
Hanushek, E.A. ( 2009). Building on No Child Left Behind. Science , 326, 802-803.
26.
Hanushek, E.A., & Raymond, M.E. ( 2005). Does school accountability lead to improved student performance ? Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24, 297-327.
27.
Hatch, J.A. ( 2002). Accountability shovedown: Resisting the standards movement in early childhood education. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 457-463.
28.
Heckman, J.J., Krueger, A.B., & Friedman, B.M. (2003). Inequality in America: What role for human capital policies?Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29.
Hoyle, E. ( 1982). Micropolitics of educational organizations. Educational Management and Administration, 10(2), 87-98.
30.
Katz, L.G. ( 2009). Where I stand on standardization. Educational Researcher, 38(1), 52-58.
31.
Kelchtermans, G. ( 2007). Macropolitics caught up in micropolitics: The case of the policy on quality control in Flanders (Belgium). Journal of Education Policy, 22, 471-491.
32.
Lipsky, M. ( 1980). Street level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage.
33.
Lombardi, J. ( 2003). Time to care: Redesigning child care to promote education, support families, and build communities. Philadelphia : Temple University Press.
34.
Malen, B. ( 1994). The micropolitics of education: Mapping the multiple dimensions of power relations in school politics. In J. D. Scribner & D. H. Layton (Eds.), The study of educational politics (pp. 147-167). New York: Taylor & Francis.
35.
McLendon, M., & Cohen-Vogel, L. (2008). Understanding educational policy-making in the American states: Lessons from political science. In B. S. Cooper, L. Fusarelli, & J. Cibulka (Eds.), Handbook of educational politics and policy (pp. 30-51). London : Routledge.
36.
Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. ( 1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340-363.
37.
Meyer, J.W., & Rowan, B. ( 1978). The structure of educational organizations. In M. W. Meyer (Ed.), Environments and organizations (pp. 78-109). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
38.
Meyer, J.W., Scott, R., & Deal, T.E. ( 1983). Institutional and technical sources of organizational structure: Explaining the structure of educational organizations. In J. W. Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational environments: Rationality and ritual (pp. 45-67). Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
39.
Morrissey, T.W., Lekies, K.S., & Cochran, M.M. ( 2007). Implementing New York’s universal pre-kindergarten program: An exploratory study of systemic impacts. Early Education and Development, 18, 573-596.
40.
O’Day, J.A. ( 2002). Complexity, accountability and school improvement . Harvard Educational Review, 72, 293-329.
41.
Pfeffer, J. ( 1978). The micropolitics of organizations. In M. Meyer (Ed.), Environments and organizations (pp. 29-50). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
42.
Rogers, E.M. ( 2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.
43.
Sabatier, P. A. (Ed.). (2007). Theories of the policy process (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview.
44.
Schweinhart, L.J., & Fulcher-Dawson, R. (2009). Early childhood education . In G. Sykes, B. L. Schneider, D. N. Plank, & T. G. Ford (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 876-888). New York: Routledge.
Sipple, J.W., McCabe, L.A., & Casto, H.G. ( 2008). Educational Services for preschool children in New York State: Links among community-based organizations, prekindergarten programs, and school districts. Albany, NY: New York State Rural Education Advisory Committee.
47.
Sternberg, R.J. ( 2009). Good intentions, bad results: A dozen reasons why the No Child Left Behind act is failing our schools. In R. J. Sternberg, J. C. Kaufman , & E. L. Grigorenko (Eds.) The essential Sternberg: Essays on intelligence, psychology, and education (pp. 479-482). New York: Springer .
48.
Stone, D. ( 2006, February). Funding the future: States’ approaches to pre-k finance. Washington, DC: Pre-K Now. Available from http://www.preknow.org/documents/FundingtheFuture_Feb2006.pdf
49.
Stoney, L., Mitchell, A., & Warner, M.E. ( 2006). Smarter reform: Moving beyond single-program solutions to an early care and education system. Community Development: Journal of the Community Development Society, 37, 101-115.
50.
Tabor, M.B.W. ( 2008, June 17). Educators and the States try to shape preschool . The New York Times. Available from http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D04E4DB133DF934A25755C0A96E958260&ref=education_preschool
51.
Takanishi, R. ( 2010). PreK-third grade: A paradigm shift. In V. Washington & J. D. Andrews (Eds.), Children of 2020: Creating a better tomorrow (pp. 28-31). Washington, DC: Council for Professional Recognition and National Association for the Education of Young Children.
52.
Tout, K., Starr, R., Soli, M., Moodie, S., Kirby, G., & Boller, K. ( 2010, April). The Child Care Quality Rating System (QRS) assessment: Compendium of quality rating systems and evaluations. Washington, DC: Child Trends. Available from http://www.childcareresearch.org/childcare/resources/18554/pdf;jsessionid=DBE723C72BA637913923C6196D858527
53.
Van Horn, M.L., Karlin, E.O., Ramey, S.L., Aldridge, J., & Snyder, S.W. ( 2005). Effects of developmentally appropriate practices on children’s development: A review of research and discussion of methodological and analytical issues. The Elementary School Journal, 105, 325-351.
54.
Van Horn, M.L., & Ramey, S.L. ( 2003). The effects of developmentally appropriate practices on academic outcomes among former Head Start students and class-mates, Grades 1-3. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 961-990.
55.
Walker, J.L. ( 1991). Mobilizing interest groups in America: Patrons, professions, and social movements. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
56.
Warner, M.E., Adriance, S., Barai, N., Halla, J., Markeson, B., Morrissey, T., et al. (2004). Economic development strategies to promote quality child care. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. Available from http://government.cce.cornell.edu/doc/pdf/EconDevStrat.pdf
57.
Wein, C.A. ( 2002). The press of standardized curriculum: Does a kindergarten teacher instruct with worksheets or let children play? Canadian Children, 27(1), 10-17.
