Educational day care: Educational Childcare for Infants, Toddlers, and Young Children

Jody M.
Greenwood Village, CO

Queen J.
Atlanta, GA

Michael G.
Houston, TX

Not Sure Online Training is Right for You?
Take a Trial Course on Us Today!

LEARN MORE

psst…. you get to test drive our platform for free!

ChildCare Education Institute (CCEI) is the industry leader for online professional development.

Facebook Instagram Twitter Linkedin Pinterest

Services

Company

Trial Course

Enroll

Child care and education: quality, availability and parental involvement

Many parents say that too much parental involvement in a child’s education can be a bad thing, and about half of those with school-age children say they are satisfied with the level of their own involvement in their children’s education. Still, more than four-in-ten say they wish they could be more involved. This is particularly the case among black parents; about six-in-ten say they would like to be more involved, compared with about four-in-ten white and Hispanic parents.

Child care is a major concern for parents with children who are not yet school age. A majority of parents with one or more children younger than 6 say it’s hard to find high-quality, affordable child care in their community. Among parents with school-age children, about four-in-ten say it’s hard to find after-school activities and programs that are both affordable and high quality. Black parents – as well as those with lower incomes – are more likely than other parents to say this is a challenge for them.

This chapter explores parents’ involvement in their children’s education and school activities, as well as child care and after-school arrangements, across different socioeconomic and racial groups. It also looks at parents’ approaches to education, including how much pressure they put on their children to succeed academically and whether they would be disappointed if their children got average grades.

Parents have mixed views about children’s academic performance

Parents generally feel that children should never feel bad about themselves because of poor grades in school as long as they try hard; 41% say this is very close to their view, and an additional 34% say it is somewhat close. Still, about a quarter (23%) of parents say this is not too close or not at all close to their opinion.

Mothers are more likely than fathers to say the sentiment that kids shouldn’t feel bad about their academic performance as long as they try hard is very close to their own view; about half (47%) of moms say this, compared with a third of dads.

There are no significant differences on this question across generations or racial, educational or income groups, but there is a difference in how parents with different ideological leanings approach this. Fully half of parents who describe themselves as politically liberal say the notion that children should never feel bad about themselves because of poor grades as long as they try hard is very close to their own view; fewer conservative (39%) and moderate (32%) parents say this is the case. Despite this ideological difference, partisan splits are not evident on this question.

While parents generally agree that children shouldn’t feel bad about themselves because of poor grades as long as they make an effort, many say they would be very disappointed if their child got average grades in school. About one-in-five say this is very close (19%) to the way they feel, and about a third (32%) say it is somewhat close. Somewhat more fathers (22%) than mothers (17%) say this comes very close to their view, but about half in each group say it is at least somewhat close.

Parents who have a bachelor’s degree are considerably more likely than those who don’t to say that the statement, “I would be very disappointed if my child got average grades in school” comes at least somewhat close to their own view; 60% among college graduates say this, compared with 45% of parents with some college and 48% of those with a high school diploma or less. Similarly, parents with annual family incomes of $75,000 or higher are more likely than those with lower incomes to say this comes at least somewhat close to their view (58% vs. 47% of those with incomes under $30,000).

Most parents say they put the right amount of pressure on their kids

The large majority of American parents with school-age children say they put the right amount of pressure on their kids to do well in school (82%), but one-in-ten say they don’t put enough pressure on their kids, and 7% say they exert too much pressure.

Parents who do not have a college degree are twice as likely as those who do to say they don’t put enough pressure on their kids to do well in school (12% vs. 6%), although about three-quarters or more across education groups say they put the right amount of pressure on their kids. Similarly, those with lower incomes are slightly more likely than those with higher incomes to say they could be putting more academic pressure on their kids; 16% of those with annual family incomes below $30,000 say this, compared with 10% of those with incomes between $30,000 and $74,999 and 7% of those with incomes of $75,000 or higher.

Most parents are satisfied with the quality of education their kids are getting

Half of parents with school-age children say they are very satisfied with the quality of education their children are receiving at school, and an additional 36% are somewhat satisfied; just 13% say they are very (4%) or somewhat (9%) dissatisfied.

For many parents, opinions about the quality of education at their kids’ schools and views about their neighborhoods go hand in hand. Six-in-ten parents with school-age children who describe their neighborhood as an excellent place to raise kids say they are very satisfied with the education their kids are getting. About half (52%) of those who say their neighborhood is a very good place to raise kids, and fewer among those who rate their neighborhood as good (39%) or fair or poor (40%), are very satisfied with the quality of education their children are receiving.

Hispanic parents are more likely than white or black parents to say they are very satisfied with the quality of education at their kids’ schools (62% vs. 49% and 48%, respectively).

Can too much parental involvement in a child’s education be a bad thing?

About half (54%) of American parents say parents can never be too involved when it comes to their children’s education, but about four-in-ten (43%) say too much involvement could be a bad thing. Mothers are somewhat less likely than fathers to say too much parental involvement in a child’s education could be a bad thing (40% vs. 47%).

Views about parental involvement in a child’s education also vary by race and ethnicity, with white parents far more likely than black or Hispanic parents to say too much can be a bad thing. About as many whites say this (51%) as say a parent could never be too involved (47%). In contrast, only 23% of black parents and 28% of Hispanic parents think too much parental involvement in a child’s education could be a bad thing, while 75% and 67%, respectively, say parents could never be too involved.

Parents with a bachelor’s degree, as well as those with higher incomes, are more likely than those with less education and lower incomes to say too much parental involvement in a child’s education could be a bad thing. Six-in-ten college graduates say this, compared with 38% of parents with some college and 28% of parents with a high school diploma or less. On the flip side, at least six-in-ten of those with some college (60%) or no college (68%) say one could never be too involved, compared with 37% of parents with a college degree or more. But even among parents who have graduated from college, those with a post-graduate degree are more likely than those without to say too much parental involvement in their kids’ education could be a bad thing (65% vs. 57%).

Similarly, 59% of parents with an annual family income of $75,00o or higher say too much involvement could have negative effects. Four-in-ten parents with family incomes between $30,000 and $74,999 and even fewer (23%) among those with an income under $30,000 share this view.

Across generations, Millennials are more likely than older parents to say parents could never be too involved in their children’s education, but these differences are driven primarily by the views of Millennial moms. Overall, 61% of Millennial parents say one could never be too involved, compared with 52% of Gen X parents and 51% of Boomer parents. Like mothers and fathers in older generations, about half (51%) of Millennial dads say parents could never be too involved in their children’s education; 66% of Millennial moms share this view.

About half of parents wish they could be more involved

When it comes to assessments of their own involvement in their kids’ education, close to half (46%) of parents of school-age children say they wish they could be doing more, although somewhat more (53%) say they are satisfied with the way things are. Dads are somewhat more likely than moms to say they wish they could be more involved in their kids’ education (49% vs. 43%).

Self-assessments also differ by race and ethnicity. About six-in-ten (58%) black parents wish they could be doing more when it comes to their children’s education, compared with about four-in-ten white (43%) and Hispanic (41%) parents. There is not a clear link between parents’ education or income and assessments of their involvement in their children’s education.

Unmarried parents are more likely than those who are married to say they wish they could be doing more when it comes to their children’s education. While about four-in-ten (42%) married parents would like to be more involved in their children’s education, 56% of those who are unmarried say this is the case.

Moms who work full time are more likely than those who work part time or are not employed to say they wish they could be more involved in their children’s education (50% vs. 32% and 40%, respectively). Among dads, however, there is no significant difference in the shares of those who are employed full time (49%) and those who are employed part time or not employed (53%) saying they wish they could be doing more when it comes to involvement in their children’s education.²²

More than eight-in-ten (85%) parents with one or more school-age children say they talked to a teacher about their children’s academic progress in the 12 months prior to the survey, and at least six-in-ten attended a PTA or other special school meeting (64%) or helped out with special projects, activities or a class trip at school (60%). Overall, about four-in-ten (43%) say they did all three of these activities in the year prior to the survey, while about half (49%) did one or two, and just 8% were not engaged in any of these school-related activities.

Moms are somewhat more likely than dads to say they participated in each of these activities in the previous 12 months, although majorities in both groups say they have done each of these things.

For example, nine-in-ten mothers with school-age children say they talked to a teacher about their children’s academic progress in the 12 months prior to the survey, compared with 78% of fathers with kids in the same age group. Similarly, 67% of moms say they attended a PTA meeting or other special school meeting and 63% helped out with special projects, activities or class trips; among dads, 61% say they attended a school meeting and 57% say they volunteered to help out with a special project or activity.

White parents are somewhat more likely than black or Hispanic parents to say they helped out with a special project, activity or class trip in the 12 months before the survey (63% vs. 56% and 51%, respectively). But a larger share of black parents (75%) than white parents (63%) say they attended a PTA meeting or other special school meeting over that period; 68% of Hispanic parents say they did this.

Across socioeconomic groups, parents with higher incomes and those who attended college are far more likely than those with lower incomes and those with a high school education or less to say they helped out with special projects, activities or a class trip at their children’s school during the 12 months prior to the survey. About seven-in-ten higher-income and college-educated parents (69% each) say they did this over that period, compared with about half of those with annual family incomes less than $30,000 and those who did not attend college.

Parents with at least some college experience are also more likely than other parents to say they attended a PTA or other school meetings or talked to a teacher about their children’s progress in the 12 months before the survey. When it comes to participation in these activities, differences across income groups is modest at best.

After-school arrangements vary by income

Seven-in-ten parents say their school-age children go home after school, while about a quarter say they participate in after-school activities (18%) or use an after-care program (8%). Parents with higher incomes are more likely than those with lower incomes to say their children participate in after-school activities or go to an after-care program; 32% of those with annual family incomes of $75,000 or higher use one of these options, compared with 24% of those with incomes between $30,000 and $74,999 and 17% of those with incomes below $30,000. Parents with incomes below $30,000 are more likely to say their children go home after school; about eight-in-ten (79%) say this, compared with about two-thirds of those with higher incomes.

Parents of teenagers are more likely than those whose only or oldest child is ages 6 to 12 to say their children participate in after-school activities (22% vs. 12%), while after-care programs are a more popular option for those with younger school-age kids than for those whose oldest child is a teenager (13% vs. 4%).

Perhaps not surprisingly, parents in two-parent households where both parents work full time are more likely than those in families where one works full time and one works part time and families where only one parent is working outside of the home to use after-care programs (11% vs. 3% and 4%, respectively). But about the same shares of parents in families where both parents work full time (22%) and in families with one parent who works full time and one who works part time (25%) say their children participate in after-school activities; just 9% of families with one parent at home say this. In these families, 79% say their kids go home after school, compared with 68% in families where both parents work at least part time.

For some parents, good after-school programs can be hard to find

Most parents of school-aged children are upbeat about the availability of after-school activities in their community, although many say affordable, high-quality programs are hard to find. Roughly six-in-ten parents with children ages 6 to 17 say it is very (25%) or somewhat (34%) easy to find affordable, high-quality after-school activities and programs for school-aged children in their community. About four-in-ten say it is very (14%) or somewhat (25%) hard to find these activities.

Mothers (43%) are somewhat more likely than fathers (33%) to say it’s difficult to find good after-school activities where they live. And there are major gaps by race and socioeconomic status. Many black parents (56%) with school-aged children say it is hard to find affordable, high-quality after-school programs in their community; only 43% say this is easy. By contrast, about six-in-ten white (62%) and Hispanic parents (59%) say it’s easy to find these types of activities for school-aged kids where they live.

Parents from lower-income families have a more negative assessment of the availability of after-school programs in their communities than parents in higher-income families. Among parents with school-aged children who say their annual family income is less than $30,000, 52% say it is hard to find high-quality, affordable after-school programs where they live; 45% say this is easy. Parents from middle-income families lean in the opposite direction, with 55% saying it’s easy to find these after-school activities and 43% saying it’s hard. Parents with family incomes in excess of $75,000 have a much more positive view: 70% say it’s easy (and 29% say it’s hard) to find affordable, high-quality activities for school-aged children where they live.

Finding affordable, high-quality day care

About half (48%) of working parents with at least one child younger than 6 say their children attend day care or preschool, while 45% say their kids are cared for by a family member when the parents are at work, and 16% rely on a nanny or babysitter.

White parents with young children are more likely than non-white parents to say their kids attend day care or preschool (55% vs. 39%). Those with annual family incomes of $75,000 or more are about twice as likely as those with lower incomes to say their young children are in this type of child care arrangement (66% vs. 32%). In turn, those with incomes below $75,000 are far more likely than those with higher incomes to rely on a family member to care for their children while they are at work (57% vs. 35%).²³

Child care can be a major expense for working parents, and the cost has gone up significantly in recent years. Census data show that average weekly child care expenses for families with working mothers increased from $84 per week in 1985 to $143 per week in 2011 (both in 2011 dollars).²⁴ And the burden of child care costs falls more heavily on lower-income parents, as it takes up a larger proportion of their household earnings.

The challenges parents face in finding and affording child care for their young children are reflected in one striking finding from the survey: A majority of parents with one or more children younger than 6 say it is very (29%) or somewhat (33%) hard to find affordable, high-quality child care in their community. Mothers and fathers agree on this point. And there are few differences among parents from different races, income groups or educational backgrounds.

Unmarried parents are more likely than those who are married to say that it’s hard to find high quality, affordable day care where they live (70% vs. 58%). And families with two full-time working parents – who are highly likely to be in need of child care – are much more likely to say this is a challenge in their community than are those in families in which one of the parents does not work outside of the home. Among parents in families where both the mother and father work full time, 67% say it’s hard to find affordable, high-quality day care where they live. By comparison, some 53% of in families with a parent at home say the same.

How involved are parents in their young kids’ education?

Nearly half (45%) of parents with at least one child younger than 6 say that they have a child who attends a day care, preschool or pre-kindergarten program. An overwhelming majority of these parents (89%) say that, in the 12 months prior to the survey, they talked to a teacher or caregiver at their child’s day care or preschool about their child’s development. Mothers (90%) and fathers (87%) are about equally likely to say they did this.

About seven-in-ten (69%) parents whose children younger than 6 are enrolled in day care or preschool say they attended a parent meeting or other special meeting at the facility in the year leading up to the survey. Again, similar shares of mothers (72%) and fathers (66%) say they did this.

Half of parents with young children in day care or preschool say they helped out with special projects, activities or class trips in the year prior to the survey.

Half of parents read to their young children daily

Among all parents with at least one child under the age of 6, 51% say that they read aloud to their young children every day. An additional 31% say that they read to their children a few times a week. Some 8% say that they do this about once a week, and 9% say they read aloud less often than that.

There is a significant gender gap on this item: Mothers (58%) are more likely than fathers (43%) to say that they read to their young children every day.

White parents with young children are significantly more likely than non-white parents to say that they read to their young children daily. About six-in-ten (59%) white parents say they read aloud to their kids every day, compared with 39% of non-white parents. A higher share of non-white parents than white parents say they read to their children a few times a week (39% vs. 27%).

Parents with a bachelor’s degree are among the most likely to say they read aloud to their young children every day – 71% say they do. By comparison, 47% of parents with some college education and 33% of those with a high school diploma or less say they do the same.

Finally, while about six-in-ten married parents (57%) say they read to their infants or preschoolers on a daily basis, only 38% of unmarried parents say they do.

Child care – Early childhood education and care

Increasingly common, early childhood care plays an important role in children’s development and provides a valuable support to families with young children. It is therefore important to understand the impact of these services and to ensure their quality and accessibility.

Synthesis PDF

Complete topic PDF

Information sheets

Download the free PDF version here or purchase hardcopy prints from our online store.

Synthesis

Updated: February 2021

Topic Editor: John Bennett, M.Ed., PhD, OECD, France

Topic funded by:

How Important Is It?

Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) has become the norm in many European and North American countries, where most children of 3 years and upwards attend a regulated early education service. In addition, early childhood services represent much more than a drop-off location for working parents, but play an important role in child development by giving children an opportunity to engage in a range of educational and social activities. The increasing number of children in formal ECEC is largely attributed, on the one hand, to the convergence of research showing the positive influence of early education on school readiness and, on the other, to the rise in maternal employment, although even children of stay-at-home mothers are likely to attend some type of child care. In the U.S., for example, the majority (63%) of women with children under 3 years spend time in the labour force and their children experience considerable amounts of non-maternal care.

Despite the increasing take-up of early development services, their quality is frequently low because of the costs associated with maintaining quality. High quality is characterized by a qualified, well-paid and stable staff, low adult-child ratios, and efficient management. Research suggests, however, that much formal child care in the United States is of weak quality and is associated with some modest but long-term developmental risks, especially when very young children (below the age of 18 months or so) spend long hours in such services. Adverse outcomes are not merely by-products of low-quality child care but stem also from stress caused by separation, which suggests that parental leaves should be extended to one year, which is the increasing practice in European countries.

What do we know?

Society and child care

There are many differences in the organization of early education and care systems. In most OECD countries, early education for children 3-6 years is a shared responsibility between the family and the state and is often free and fully subsidized. The situation is more mixed where ECEC for children under 3 years is concerned: many governments generously subsidise and support parents to access child care, but others see child care as primarily a parental responsibility. A laissez-faire approach to young children and families, characterized by weak state support and the predominance of private provision, can produce significant inequalities in access. The recruitment of migrant care providers in child care can also generate imbalances in the roles played by states, families, and markets in the child care sector in both North and South. Governments that see care and education as a public responsibility increasingly integrate their care and education systems and are able, in consequence, to ensure better regulation, more equitable access and provide higher quality services to all children.

The current discourse on choice for parents needs realistic assessment. Although parents are assumed to be free to choose the facilities they deem most appropriate for their child, access to high quality care is, in fact, often limited and unequal. This is a particular challenge in systems dominated by private for-profit provision. Low-income parents can “choose” only what is available to them and must often resign themselves to restricted choice and poor quality. In short, while early childhood care and education may be viewed as a central plank of inclusive policy, the reality is that these services serve, in too many countries, to widen the education gap. This is particularly the case for immigrant and ethnic children, the parents of whom are greatly limited in their choice of services by environmental and economic constraints.

Democracy should be the fundamental principle that guides the provision and elaboration of ECEC services not only at the early childhood level by encouraging shared decision-making at local level, but also at community and political levels by making early education a matter of public debate and collective responsibility. In a democracy, individuals express not only personal preferences; they also make public and collective choices related to the common good of their society.

The impact of child care on child development

Child care settings have been linked to both positive and negative consequences for child development. Despite contradictory earlier findings about the effects of child care on cognitive and linguistic development, more recent research has consistently documented the enduring and positive effects of high-quality child care. Much research evidence exists to show that high quality early education provides a solid foundation for school readiness and academic achievement but selection bias is a potential problem for most studies of child care as it may confound variations in child and family characteristics with variations in child care contexts. Learning experiences in ECEC can also help children develop democratic values as well as social skills. A close bond with a care provider is also an index of the quality of future relationships. A caring environment is particularly valuable for children who experience insensitive care at home by reducing the risk of behavioural problems, serving as a protective factor and by providing opportunities for improved cognitive and language development. On the other hand, when combined with social and economic stressors at home, inadequate ECEC arrangements (poor quality child care, long hours, and instability) represent a double-threat to children’s attachment security. However, it is often difficult to identify ECEC as the cause of various developmental outcomes because of inseparable confounding factors, such as, issues of stability in care-giving and the characteristics of individual children and their families. The effect of child care is likely to vary not only based on these characteristics, but also as a function of the child’s personal traits and the ideologies surrounding child care in a specific cultural context.

What can be done?

Enhancing children’s experience in early child care requires that families, staff, administrators, and policy makers work together to address current challenges. In the early childhood centres, more attention needs to be given to appropriate pedagogies that reinforce the well-being and involvement of young children. At the family level, parents are encouraged to fulfill their child’s needs for close and private interactions and to create supportive connections between life at home and in the child care setting. 

Children’s experience can also be improved through the quality of ECEC services they receive. A high quality facility is one with qualified, well-paid, and regular care providers, reasonable adult-child ratio, and proper management. ECEC providers can boost the quality of care by being sensitive and empathic toward the child, e.g., helping them deal with the transition from home to child care and by providing activities that stimulate the child’s participation and communication. The aim should be to provide enriched interactions that encourages deep rather than shallow learning, exchange of ideas. Children’s involvement can be improved through activities that support the child’s autonomy (e.g., the introduction of new and challenging activities; responding to children’s ideas and interests; encouraging movement and exploration; allowing children to have a say in rule-setting). Policy makers and  care providers are also responsible for ensuring that all children have access to the same quality and amount of care. Close attention should be given to emotional and developmental problems so that early interventions can be integrated into the child’s routine. The child care setting should also provide a healthy and safe physical environment with a high adult-child ratio to ensure children’s well-being.

The democratic administration of child care services can play a key role in enhancing the child care setting by involving community, staff, parents and children in the decision-making process. A good child care program is one that acknowledges diversity, is unbiased and offers affordable high quality care to and offers affordable high quality care to disadvantaged and at-risk children. Appropriate remuneration, a solid education and ongoing training for all child care providers are essential to promoting the standing of the early childhood sector.

Improving the child care system is highly dependent on government support. Concrete actions by policy makers, already practised in many counties, are: matching paid parental leave to the rate and duration observed in Scandinavian countries; providing adequate public funding and developing tax policies that allow parents to make appropriate child-rearing choices, paying greater attention to children from poor or diverse backgrounds; integrating child care and early education under one ministry or agency and thereby enhancing quality, qualification requirements, accessibility and affordability.

Read more

Additional reading

Why is high-quality child care important for child development?

High quality child care can have a positive influence on children’s development and school readiness by providing valuable educational and social experiences. High quality child care is characterized as: 

• Having well-qualified, well-paid, stable staff, low child-adult ratios, and efficient management. 

• Offering a program that covers all aspects of child development  (physical, motor, emotional, social, language and cognitive development).

Research shows also that only high quality provision can deliver well-being and appropriate development to young children. As an increasing number of mothers are in the workforce and most children ages 3 and older now attend a child care facility on a regular basis, it has become critical that young children from all backgrounds should have access to high-quality child care and early education.

Publications

Child Care and the Development of Young Children (0–2)

Early Childhood Education and Care Systems: Issue of Tradition and Governance

Child Care and Its Impact on Children 2–5 Years of Age. Commenting: McCartney, Peisner-Feinberg, and Ahnert and Lamb

Early Day Care and Infant-Mother Attachment Security

Resources and bulletins

Thematic bulletin

The child care puzzle

Volume 3, No. 1 – March 2004

The Encyclopedia also recommends…

Twelve Flawed Statements of the Fraser Institute on Quebec’s Childcare Program

by Pierre Fortin, Department of Economics, School of Management, University of Quebec at Montreal

Early Childhood Education Report 2014: It’s Time for Preschool

Novembre 2014

Why is high-quality child care essential? The link between quality child care and early learning

Lessons in Learning, Early Childhood Learning Knowledge Centre, Canadian Council on Learning, May 2006

Early Education Services – Early Education Center

Rosemead Early Education Center 

The Rosemead Early Education Services Center is home to five infant/toddler classrooms and four preschool classrooms. 

Why does Brian, an Early Ed parent, love our program? Find out here.

Licensing

The Rosemead campus is licensed by Community Care Licensing, a state agency through the Department of Social Services, to care for children from birth through twelve years of age.

License #’s

Infant/Toddler – 191596580

Preschool – 191500469

School-Age – 198020768

Nutrition

In conjunction with the USDA and the California Department of Education Nutrition Services Department, Maryvale participates in the Child and Adult Care Food Program. Meals are planned in accordance with the appropriate meal pattern for your child’s age group. The meals provided, including breakfast, lunch and an afternoon snack, are varied and nourishing and included in the cost of tuition.

Tuition 

Fees for our Rosemead Early Education Programs are based on the age of the child and classroom staffing levels. 

Monthly Tuition Rates (effective July 1, 2022)

Registration Fee per child is $200 and is non-refundable – please plan carefully.

Please see your parent handbook for closure dates, and policies on attendance.

Breakfast, Lunch, and Afternoon Snack are provided for Infant/Toddlers and Preschoolers.

Tuition for all programs is billed monthly and due on the 1st of every month, a $25 late fee is applied if payment is not received by the 15th.

Monthly tuition is calculated at an average of twenty days per month.

Sibling Discount is 10% off the youngest child with 2 or more children enrolled.

There is a $25 credit card/debit card convenience fee. No convenience fee charged if using ACH account.

Payments declined using a credit card or ACH account will have a $30. 00 fee applied.

There will be no vacation or illness credits applied.

Families approved to have split payments within the month will have a $15 convenience fee applied per transaction.

Late pick up fees are – $2/minute after 6-6:14pm, $5/minute 6:15-6:29pm, $7/minute 6:30pm – charge is per child

Acceptable methods of payment for tuition are: Check, Money Order or direct debit from a checking account. Registration fee is only payable with  a MasterCard or Visa card.

Maryvale accepts third party payments through OPTIONS, GAIN, DCFS and other social service agencies. Families receiving benefits from any of these sources can enroll their children at Maryvale and the program (DCFS, OPTIONS, etc.,) will pay Maryvale directly.

Payment arrangements and Tuition Assistance are available. All requests must be in writing and approved by the Vice President, Early Childhood Education and Nutrition.

Have questions about tuition and fees? Use the Contact Early Education form or call the Rosemead Early Education Center at (626) 537-3311.

Tuition Assistance

Maryvale is well aware that for some families the tuition rates can be prohibitive – often for the very families who need the program the most. For this reason, in accordance with the Daughters of Charity’s Values of Compassionate Service and Advocacy for the Poor, Maryvale has established a Tuition Assistance Program and a private scholarship program.

If you need assistance in paying tuition, we strongly encourage you to apply for our Tuition Assistance Program. All families will be asked to submit an application and supporting documents to the Early Childhood Education Bookkeeper for consideration.

Click here to for more information in English/Spanish or Chinese/Vietnamese.

Early Education Leadership

The Vice President of Early Childhood Education oversees the operation of Maryvale’s two Early Education Centers, and provides direct supervision to the Center Directors.

Christina Moore
Vice President of Early Childhood Education

Christina Moore holds a Master’s Degree in Business Administration and a Master’s Degree in Education. She is credentialed by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing to Supervise Multiple Child Development Centers and holds a Program Director Permit.

Ms. Moore also brings a strong yet flexible leadership style and an unwavering commitment to healthy child development to her role at the Early Education Centers. Her guidance and expertise in all aspects of the educational experience ensures that the Early Education Centers strive for and achieve excellence in all areas of performance.

Center Director The Director(s) of Maryvale’s Rosemead Early Education Center must comply with rigorous requirements including a Bachelor’s Degree in Early Childhood Education or a closely related field or a Site Supervisor Permit issued by the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, which authorizes the holder to supervise one Child Development Center. In addition to holding a degree or credential the Director(s) must meet Community Care Licensing requirements for the program that they are supervising. The Director(s) is also expected to exemplify progressive thinking in terms of healthy child development and to embrace the curriculum and philosophy of Maryvale’s Early Education Centers.

Teachers The majority of our teachers have an Associate’s degree or higher in the field of Early Childhood Education and all of our teachers meet the minimum Title 22 regulations for the program in which they work- School Age, Preschool or Infant/Toddler. Our teachers are expected to be skilled in establishing bonds with children and guiding children in achieving healthy child and educational milestones.

Early Childhood Education and Care in the United States: An Overview of the Current Policy Picture | International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy

• Article
• Open Access
• Published: 20 February 2015

• Sheila B. Kamerman¹ &
• Shirley Gatenio-Gabel² 

International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy
volume 1, pages 23–34 (2007)Cite this article

• 53k Accesses

• 32 Citations

• Metrics details

Abstract

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) in the US includes a wide range of part-day, full-school-day, and full-work-day programs, under educational, social welfare, and commercial auspices, funded and delivered in a variety of ways in both the public and the private sectors, designed sometimes with an emphasis on the “care” component of ECEC and at other times with stress on “education” or with equal attention to both. Although ECEC scholars and advocates are increasingly convinced of the need to integrate all these program types, categorical funding coupled with diverse societal values continue to support the differences. The result is a fragmented ECEC system, of wide-ranging quality and with skewed access, but with some movement in recent years toward the integration of early childhood education and care.

Increased attention to early childhood education and care (ECEC) has been observed in all the industrialized countries but our focus here is on a current picture of ECEC in the United States (U.S.).

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) in the U.S. includes a wide range of part-day, full-school-day, and full-work-day programs, under educational, social welfare, and commercial auspices, funded and delivered in a variety of ways in both the public and the private sectors, designed sometimes with an emphasis on the “care” component of ECEC and at other times with stress on “education” or with equal attention to both. Although ECEC scholars and advocates are increasingly convinced of the need to integrate all these program types, categorical funding coupled with diverse societal values continue to support the differences. The result is a fragmented ECEC system, of wide-ranging quality and with skewed access, but with some movement in recent years toward the integration of early childhood education and care.

In what follows, we will identify and define the major program types, the context for current policy and program development, and the major issues.

Definitions

These definitions were drawn from Sheila B. Kamerman and Shirley Gatenio-Gabel, ECEC: “An Overview of the Current Policy Context” Debby Cryer & Richard M. Clifford, eds. Early Childhood Education & Care in the USA. Baltimore: Brooks, 2003, a version of the background paper prepared for the OECD Thematic Review of ECEC policies and programs.

The programs discussed here include preschools (kindergartens, pre-kindergartens, compensatory education programs, and nursery schools operated under education auspices), child care centers (often defined as programs in non-residential settings that provide education and/or care to children and include organized group programs such as Head Start) and family child care homes (both regulated and unregulated “child minding”). Parental care, relative care, occasional baby sitting (child minding) and care provided in a child’s own home are not included in this paper nor are programs only for children with special needs.

More Specifically

Kindergartens are preschool programs for the year before primary school entry, largely for 5 year olds. They may be half day or full school day. In 1965, only eighteen states in the U.S. funded public kindergarten; by 1970, eighty percent of five year olds attended public kindergarten and, in 2000, all states funded some sort of kindergarten, most universal. Kindergarten is a near universal experience now for American children, with about 98 percent of children attending kindergarten prior to first grade at least a half day, an essential introduction to primary school. About sixty percent attend a full school day program (Education Commission of the States, 2007; NCES, 2000). However, program content varies greatly across states.

Preschools (or nursery schools in US Census Bureau reports) include the range of programs offered under public and private education auspices or providing compensatory education under special legislation and are largely half-day or cover the normal school day (usually about 6 hours, e. g. 9:00am – 3:00 pm). By 1998 twenty eight states even funded some form of public pre-kindergarten education. (Kagan, 2005), and about the same number served 3 year olds. Only five states served more than 10 percent of that group in addition to child care centers and Head Start (see below). According to Barnett in his review of the research (2007) “Research clearly shows that high-quality preschool education improves later school success, employment and earnings. It has lessened crime and delinquency and unhealthy behaviors like smoking and drug use. In economic terms, high-quality preschool has returned to the individual and the public up to $17 on every $1 invested.” Head Start, the compensatory preschool program begun in 1965, is a federally funded preschool program, largely half-day, targeted on poor children and serving 3–4 year olds primarily. It provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, social and other services and enrolled almost 1 million children in 2004, about half of those eligible for the program, 12 percent of the nation’s 4-year olds and 8 percent of the 3-year olds. In 2004–05, $6.8 billion were spent on Head Start.

Center-based child care typically refers to full-day programs under social welfare auspices or free-standing and independent programs that offer care corresponding to the traditional working hours (e.g. 9:00 am to 5:00 pm or 7:00 am to 6:00 pm), and are open five days a week for the full year. Although most centers provide care to children aged 3–5 years, some provide care for infants and toddlers (1–2 years of age) as well as those aged 3–5. The boundary between preschool and center programs is fuzzy, at best. At their discretion, some child care centers may care for school-age children as well in their after-school programs. Almost all centers are regulated or licensed in some way by the states with regard to health and safety standards, staff-child ratios, maximum number of children per group, nutrition and have at the least annual inspections.

Family child care refers to care for several children (other than the provider’s own) in the caregiver’s own home. About 11 percent of children under age 5 (and under age 3), with employed mothers, were cared for in this arrangement. States regulate family child care homes through licensing or registration on one or more of the following criteria: square footage for activities, staff-child ratios, pre-service training requirements, criminal backgrounds, and immunization requirements. Licensing typically requires providers to meet minimum health, nutrition and safety standards, limit the number of children in a home; and sometimes requires programmatic standards. Registration, by comparison, requires or encourages providers to self-identify themselves to the state and certify that they comply with state requirements. Registration typically involves fewer inspections than licensing. Family child care may provide care during standard hours or during irregular hours (e.g., nights or weekends). Group family day care homes are private homes that provide care for sometimes as many as 12 children, may be required to employ at least one other adult to assist in the care of the children, and are more likely to be licensed than family day care homes. The number of hours and days of care provided are negotiated between the parent and provider in these home-based settings, but are generally available to accommodate the needs of full-time working parents, full-year. Some states specify the maximum number of infants and toddlers that a provider can care for in their home.

ECEC policies currently include the whole range of government actions (federal, state, and sometimes local) to influence the supply and/or demand for ECEC and program quality. These government activities include: direct delivery of ECEC services; direct and indirect financial subsidies to private providers of education and care such as grants, contracts, and tax incentives; financial subsidies to parents/consumers of ECEC such as grants and tax benefits to permit or facilitate access to services or to permit parents to remain at home and withdraw from the labor force at the time of childbirth or adoption for a brief period of time; and the establishment and enforcement of regulations.

ECEC Policy and Program Context

Generally, ECEC policies cover children from birth through state-designated compulsory school age. Compulsory school age is determined by the individual state and ranges from age five through eight years. Elementary (primary) school is compulsory for all children but it is at the state’s discretion whether or not kindergarten (the year before primary school begins) enrollment is mandated. Fourteen states and the District of Columbia, require children to attend kindergarten (Education Commission of the States, 2007). The other 36 states mandate the local school districts to provide kindergarten but it is the parents’ decision whether or not to enroll their child. Parents also have the option of enrolling their children in privately sponsored kindergartens. Only 10 states are required to offer full-day kindergarten.

There is no debate, at present, regarding whether compulsory school age should be changed or even made fully consistent nationally. However, there is debate with regard to expansion of prekindergarten services and/or the length of the prekindergarten and kindergarten days and which level of government should have responsibility for regulation and the setting of program standards.

For most children in ECEC programs, entry into a formal early childhood program would be when children are between three and five years old. Because of growing evidence that early intervention can be effective in compensating for early deprivation, mitigating and preventing disabilities in the future, and helping prepare young children for subsequent schooling -and because more women with children under age 3 are entering the workforce- there have been increased resources dedicated recently to providing services to children under age 3. In addition to care and education, these services may include health and nutritional screenings and may be coupled with family support services for parents including parent education, nutritional classes, various social service supports, and job training. There are specialized programs, also, which work with at risk populations, such as teens or substance abusers even prior to the birth of the child in preparation for parenting. Programs whose primary objective is to support the work efforts of parents accept children from three months of age (the maximum length of the federally mandated post-childbirth parental or family leave) through school age.

Table 1
Compulsory School Attendance Age across States in 2007

Full size table

Federalism: A Barrier to National Policy

The U.S. has no coherent national ECEC policy. The primary responsibility for education is at the level of the states, not the Federal government, creating a barrier to the development of a national system of ECEC. The federal government, through the Congress, plays an important role in formulating ECEC policies and goals and facilitates the states’ and localities ‘major roles in the actual implementation of programs to suit the particular needs and preferences of their regions. The federal government’s policy making efforts have primarily focused on making services available to children who are at risk, due to economic, biological, social, or psychological circumstances or combinations of these; providing child care services as an incentive for mothers receiving social assistance to gain entry to the labor force.

At the state level, policy decisions are made with regard to eligibility, extent of the supply and availability of services, allocation of services and benefits, scope and quality of services, including health and safety standards. At present, many state legislatures are taking a leading role in the development of ECEC policies, making larger investments in preschool programs and in programs that respond to the work responsibilities of poor families, especially those who are or are at risk of welfare (social assistance) dependency.

Historical Roots

As in most other advanced industrialized countries, ECEC programs in the U.S. evolved out of diverse historical streams including child protection, early childhood education services for children with special needs, and services to facilitate mothers’ labor force participation. The “official” history of ECEC in the U.S. begins with two developments: (1) day nurseries (child care centers), first established in the 1830s under voluntary auspices and designed to care for the “unfortunate” children of working mothers; and (2) nursery schools, developing from the early education programs in Massachusetts also first established in the 1830s. Day nurseries expanded subsequently in response to pressures created by the rapid industrialization and massive immigration which took place in the latter part of the century. They were custodial in nature, focusing primarily on basic care and supervision of the children. During war times—the Civil War, World War I, and World War II—these programs increased in numbers, only to decline when war ended. Kindergartens and nursery schools expanded slowly during the 19^th century and experienced a significant increase only in the mid 1960s and early 1970s when a confluence of factors led to the significant expansion of both program types.

Factors Affecting ECEC Developments

Labor market policy, public (social) assistance policy, education policy, child welfare policy, and child development research all have had and have a role in the expansion of ECEC policies and programs.

Chief among these developments is the dramatic rise in the labor force participation of women, especially married mothers. The rise in the number of single mother households has added to the demand, especially for full-day programs, since lone mothers are more likely than married mothers to work full time and female-headed families have been a rapidly growing family type.

A second major factor shaping ECEC policies at present is the so-called “welfare reform” legislation of 1996, and the provisions of the new public assistance legislation for poor lone mothers and children. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), requires that poor women with children aged 3 months and older “engage” in work within two years of claiming assistance and limits life-time receipt of assistance to a maximum of five years. These requirements mean that by far most poor lone mothers are now expected to work even when they have infants. One result has been increased Congressional recognition of the need for child care services, even if quality attributes and early education curricula have not received comparable attention.

Table 2
Labor Force Status of Mothers with Own Children under 6, 1975–2005

Full size table

Growing interest in primary “school readiness” is a third factor that has generated interest in ECEC in recent years. Research demonstrating the links that early learning experiences have with later school achievement, emotional and social well-being, fewer grade retentions, and reduced incidences of juvenile delinquency, are all factors associated with later adult productivity, and suggest the value of increased “investment” in ECEC (Barnett, 1995; Berrueta, 1984; Lazar, 1983; Yoshikawa, 1995; Currie, 2000; Brooks-Gunn, 2003; Hechman & Masterov, 2007). From this perspective, ECEC is increasingly viewed as a cost efficient and cost effective strategy whose benefits are reaped both during the school careers of each child, in their later life, and in the future economy.

Conflicting Values/Divergent Purposes

American society has long been conflicted in its attitude towards women and their proper roles and in its attitude towards government and the family and their appropriate roles. This tension emerges repeatedly in discussions regarding ECEC policies. Poor single mothers are expected to work outside the home and, despite a very different reality, there are many who still believe that middle class mothers should remain at home. Government’s involvement in the rearing of children is still viewed by some as trespassing into the private lives of its citizens.

ECEC responds to the changing work roles and composition of families, helps to equalize life opportunities for children in low-income families, assists in the assimilation of immigrants, and aids in enhancing child development and child wellbeing generally. Early on, publicly provided ECEC was designed to accommodate the social needs of vulnerable children, the educational needs of all young children, and the needs of working parents. Child care and early education developed separately, historically, and are still not well integrated. Through the years the two major functions of care and education have remained separate and often viewed as conflicting. One result has been the development of a wide and disparate range of ECEC programs of varying quality.

Issues

The Public/Private Mix

As with regard to most social services in the U.S., the private sectors (both non-profit and for-profit) play a major role in ECEC. For example, of all five year olds enrolled in kindergarten in 2003, 83 percent attended public kindergarten programs and 17 percent attended private programs. About half the children in nursery schools are in private schools. More important, private providers continue to dominate the delivery system: Family day care is almost all private. Of the three-year olds in preschool programs, most are in private programs but by age five, the overwhelming majorities are in public preschools.

Publicly-funded preschool programs typically serve children from disadvantaged families, while private preschool programs supported by parent fees are more likely to serve children from all backgrounds and the focus is more on the child than on providing support to the family.

Some employers, usually large firms, have become involved in ECEC typically by providing links with ECEC information and referral services, and to a lesser extent by becoming a provider of services to their employees. Such firms may offer employee subsidies or other benefits for child care, providing financial support to early childhood centers in the community, and participating in local or state collaborations to plan for future early childhood needs. Charitable foundations are important players in the policymaking arena through their funding of research and innovative programming; and religious organizations also play a significant role in ECEC service delivery.

Access and Coverage

In 2002, 11.6 million children or 63 percent of the 18.5 million infants, toddlers and preschool children under age 5, were receiving some type of care other than from their parents on a regular basis (U.S. Census, 2005a). The type of care a family decides to place their child in is dependent on a family’s income, family structure and ethnicity, age of child, maternal education, maternal employment and attitudes toward early care. Where poor single mothers are concerned, or employed parents, the need for care may begin in infancy or even when the child is three months old, because the U.S. has only a brief (three months) and unpaid parental leave following childbirth.^{Footnote 1} Children of mothers who are college graduates were substantially more likely to attend nursery school (preschool and center-based programs) in 2003 than children whose mothers did not finish high school (64 percent compared with 34 percent). (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2005b). Similarly, in 2003, 62 percent of 3 and 4 year olds from families with incomes of $50,000 or more attended nursery school, compared with 41 percent of those from families with incomes less that $20,000.

Although kindergarten coverage is essentially universal now, largely for 5-year olds, for the year before entering primary school, states vary in their provision of full and part-day kindergarten programs. About half of all kindergartners now attend full (school) day programs (U.S. Census, 2005a).

At four years of age, the proportion of children enrolled in center-based care rose to 69.2 percent,. Including kindergarten and primary school, almost 98 percent of 5 year olds are in some form of school or preschool) and of these, more than 75 percent are in kindergarten; the remainder are in primary school or center care.

Forty-four states now provide pre-kindergarten programs at least in some jurisdictions. Only three states, Florida, Georgia, and Oklahoma, however, approach offering a state-wide program of universal preschool for all four year olds.

Coverage for the Under 3s

About 60 percent of the under 3s had mothers in the labor force in 2006. Programs serving children under the age of three, generally focus on supporting the work efforts of parents. Yet despite this, ECEC programs serving children under the age of three are in short supply. Few states serve 3 year olds in pre-kindergarten programs, but 43 percent of 3 year olds are in center-based care. By the time a child reaches age three, parental preference for school- or center-based settings is striking.

In addition to child care programs, family support programs, sometimes also included with other ECEC programs, offer drop-in child care, information and referral services, weekly or monthly home visits and parenting classes aimed at strengthening parenting skills, and so forth. They commonly serve families with children under the age of three (though they may include older children) and some strive to link programs for children with parental supports, such as job training and education. These programs target low-income groups primarily and involve a caseworker to link services that are provided by other community agencies. Typically, they rely on public funds and private foundation support and provide services at no charge to their client families. Also typically, these programs target families in or at risk of poverty, teen parenthood, welfare dependency or are in immigrant groups struggling with acculturation issues (Gomby, 1995).

Half of the infants born in 2001 were in some kind of regular non-parental child care arrangement at 9 months of age (Kreader, Fergusson, & Lawrence, 2005). Most parents of infants choose informal or in-home care. For children under the age of one year, 26 percent were cared for by a relative (often a grandmother), 11 percent were in family day care homes, and 9 percent in center-based care settings.

The age at which families first place their children in care depends on the work status of the mother, household income and maternal education. Families more dependent on a mother’s income are more likely to place infants in care at an earlier age and use more hours of care than families less dependent on maternal income. Poor mothers might place their infants in care even earlier than three months. Poor children who are enrolled in center-based programs receive care of the quality equal to affluent children. Poor children who do not enter care by their first birthday are more likely to come from large families, experience persistent poverty, and have mothers with the least education. In contrast, mothers who earn the highest incomes were most likely to place their children between 3 to 5 months and to use in-home non-relative care for the first 15 months (NICHD, 1999).

Table 3
Percentage of children under 6 years old in type of ECEC, by age 1 Type of Non-Parental Arrangement

Full size table

Table 4
Number of preschool children under 6 years old, percentage in center-based programs, non-parental care, and percentage in various types of primary care arrangements, 2005

Full size table

Quality

There is no agreed on definition of -or standards concerning- quality of ECEC programs across both school-based pre-kindergarten programs and center-based and Head Start programs. Indicators of quality in centers continue to include: staff: child ratios; group size; caregiver qualifications (education and training), staff salaries; and turnover rates — among the dimensions of quality that can be counted and regulated, and staff child interactions and relationships among those variable that require direct observation.

Despite research demonstrating that high quality early childhood care and education can be beneficial to children, research has also demonstrated that the majority of children in the United States are placed in low quality care, some of which may be detrimental to the long-term development of children (Helburn, 1995; NICHD, 1998; Whitebook, 1989). Some states set high quality standards and monitor programs closely, while others place quality control at the local level. The scope and depth of programming varies greatly both across and within states, from comprehensive programs promoting health, social and cognitive development to others providing limited opportunities for social interaction and developmental stimulation. In some states, prekindergarten programs are administered by the state’s department of education and in others governance is deferred to local school districts, thus adding further to the variation. Some programs have responded to the needs of working families by extending hours, coordinating with other programs for a full-day of programming, or parents have made arrangements for children to be transported to other private programs. Transferring young children from one program to another creates further complexities and is less preferred (Mitchell, Ripple, & Chanana, 1998).

According to the 2006 State Preschool Yearbook, about one million children participated in state pre-kindergarten programs in 2005–2006. Barnett et al. (2006) note that the quality of these preschools ranges from excellent to poor and, as we have already seen, funding and access vary from state to state. Preschool quality improved in recent years as more states adopted comprehensive learning standards for their pre-kindergarten programs. Nonetheless, quality continues to vary across states. For example, 20 states did not require pre-kindergarten teachers to have completed a Bachelor’s degree. Ten states did not require teachers to have had special training for ECEC programs. And per child spending for pre-kindergarten was significantly lower than for grades K — 12 in primary school, with pre-K teachers being paid significantly less that for primary school.

Funding

The different histories, sources and levels of public investment perpetuate a false dichotomy in polices for ECEC programs. Federal funding for ECEC totaled more than $17 billion in 2005. It should be noted, however, that fees paid by parents for ECEC cover about 70 percent of the operating costs of these programs in the U.S.

The major federal sources of child care funds include the following: The Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) provides funding to the states to subsidize the child care expenses of working parents whose family income is less than 85 percent of the state median income, as well as for activities related to the improvement of the overall quality and supply of child care in general. Federally it is administered by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) in the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). At the state level, it is administered by the agency responsible for social service/welfare administration or employment related activities. In 2006, over $5 billion was appropriated for this block grant, matched by state funds totaling $2.2 billion and the transfer of funds from “welfare” (the Temporary Assistance to Needy Families program) of almost $1.2 billion (Child Care Bureau, 2007).

The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit in the Internal Revenue Code is a nonrefundable tax credit for expenses related to the care of a dependent child less than 13 years old, or a mentally or physically incapacitated spouse or dependent. In 2006, the maximum credit for one dependent was 35 percent of the first $3,000 spent on the care of one child and $6,000 for two or more. In 2005, the tax credit was valued at $2.7 billion. The tax credit is administered by the U. S. Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service.

Head Start funds direct grants to local programs providing comprehensive early childhood development, educational, health, nutritional, social and other services to primarily low-income preschool-aged children and their families. Most Head Start programs are part-day through the school year, though some local grantees coordinate with other programs to provide full-day care. Head Start is federally administered by the Administration on Children and Families (ACF) at DHHS. In 2005 it was funded at $6.9 billion, and served about 900,000 children, largely three and four year olds. A small number of children under age three are now enrolled in an Early Head Start program.

The Social Services Block Grant (SSBG, Title XX of the Social Security Act) provides grants to states for social services, which most states draw on for at least a portion of their ECEC services. The grants are federally administered by ACF at DHHS at about $400 million in 2005.

The Child and Adult Care Food Program provides federal subsidies for breakfasts, lunches, suppers, and snacks meeting federal nutrition requirements that are served in licensed child care centers, schools, and group and family day care homes to children age 12 or under. It is administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service and was funded at $2.1 billion in 2005.

Several other federal programs such as the Individuals with Disability Education Act (IDEA) provide funding for ECEC as well. IDEA established an entitlement to special education services for children ages three through 21 with disabilities.

Local school districts may also use other categorical federal funds to support preschool education and school-age child care in districts serving a high percentage of low-income children. Once such program, Even Start, provides grants to schools for family centered education to help parents of educationally disadvantaged students’ ages one through seven become full partners in their children’s education. Funding is also available from the 21^st Century Community Learning Centers program for grants to rural and inner city public schools to address educational and community needs during after school hours, weekends, and summers.

Administrative Responsibilities

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), within the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is responsible for federal programs which promote the economic and social well being of families, children, individuals, and communities. One agency in ACF is the Child Care Bureau which was established in January 1995 to administer federal child care programs to states, territories and tribes for low income children and families. The Bureau has initiated a variety of activities to improve the quality, availability and affordability of child care across the country. Education dollars flowing into early education programs in schools are administered by the U.S. Department of Education. Among its priorities are to supplement and complement the efforts of states, the local school systems, the private sector, public and private nonprofit educational research institutions, community-based organizations, parents, and students to improve the quality of education.

Most programs that channel federal funds to state governments are administered by their state counterparts to the federal agencies. Some states have established interagency collaborations similar to that on the federal level to enhance the coordination of early childhood education and policy.

Outside of government there are hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of private advocacy, think-tanks, research, outreach, university, foundation, and public policy institutions in the United States interested in early childhood education and care policies. Periodically, experts are convened at a national forum to debate issues related to early childhood education and care. Experts at these institutions interact with government officials on a formal and informal basis at privately and publicly sponsored conferences, public hearings, and throughout the legislative and budgetary process. The efforts at the federal level are mirrored in the individual states and in metropolitan areas.

Conclusions

Interest in and participation in out-of-home, non-parental child care has increased dramatically in the U. S. over the last few decades, as has policy attention and public funding. The pressures from employed mothers with young children continue to rise, and underscore the need for more accessible, affordable, and better quality ECEC services. The U.S. has carried out more extensive and more rigorous research on the impact of this dramatic change in how young children are reared and cared for than any other country. The hoped-for outcomes now include: the productivity of the current and future workforce; the prevention and reduction of social problems such as welfare dependency, juvenile delinquency, teen pregnancy, and school failure; support for the work, efforts of welfare-dependent and poor parents to help them achieve economic self-sufficiency; enhancing the development of young children; and helping parents fulfill their roles as nurturers and teachers to their children by providing skill training (Kamerman, 2001). International ECEC developments, especially in the European Union and in other OECD countries have far outpaced what exists in the U. S.

Preschool for 5 year olds in the form of kindergarten and a one year preparation for primary school is now taken for granted as being a universal experience, and increasingly covering a full school day. Preschool for 4 year olds is moving in this direction, albeit beginning with disadvantaged children first, and a debate continues as to whether public support should aim for universal coverage, or remain limited to the poor. Preschool for the 3 year olds is beginning to gain more attention, but infant and toddler care is still very limited, and largely in the form of informal care; and in contrast to other industrialized countries does not include a paid and job-protected parental leave as an option for infant care.^{Footnote 2} Federal funding has increased significantly since the mid-1990s, but is still inadequate to meet the need for decent quality, affordable care, and remains largely categorical. We know what high quality ECEC is and how important it is, yet most programs reflect at best, mediocre quality. Staff is often not in receipt of appropriate training, and when they are, may still not be paid adequately. Most important, of greatest concern, is the fragmented delivery system, still largely private and so divided between “care” and “education”, that even. Data on access, coverage, and funding is difficult to disaggregate.

Notes

1. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) was enacted in 1993 and provided for a 12 week job-protected but unpaid leave for employees in firms with 50 or more workers, at the time of pregnancy, childbirth, or their own illness or that of a family member. Employers can require that employees use their vacation and sick leave before claiming the family leave.

2. A few states have begun to move in this direction, but even in such states, for example, California, the leaves remain very brief.

References

• Barnett, W. S. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes. The Future of Children Long-Term Outcomes of Early Childhood Programs, 5(3), 25–50.

  Google Scholar 

• Barnett, W. S. (2007). Early education: A sound public investment. Paper presented at the 2007 Tennessee Early Childhood Summit. Retrieved October 4, 2007, from http://www.state.tn.us/education/prek/documents/Early_ED_Invest.pdf.

• Barnett, W. S., Hustedt, J., Hawkison, L., & Robin, K. (2006). The state of preschool 2006. National Institute for Early Education Research.

• Barnett, W. S., & Robin, K. (2006). How much does quality preschool cost? National Institute for Early Education Research. Retrieved October 4, 2007, from http://nieer.org/resources/research/CostOfEffectivePreschool.pdf.

• Berreuta-Clement, J. R., Schweinhart, L., Barnett, W. S., Epstein, A., & Weikart, D. P. (1984). Changed lives: The effects of perry preschool program on youths through age 19. Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 8. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Do you believe in magic? What we can expect from early childhood intervention programs. Society for Research in Child Development, 17(1), 1–14.

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Currie, J. (2000). Early childhood intervention programs. What do we know? Joint Center for Poverty Research (Working Paper No. 169).

• Gomby, D. S., Larner, M. L., Stevenson, C. S., Lewit, E. M., & Behrman, R. E. (1995). Long-term outcomes of early childhood programs: Analysis and recommendations. The Future of Children, 5(3), 6–24.

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• Gormley, W. , Jr. (2005). The Universal Pre-K Bandwagon. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(3).

• Hechman, J. J., & Masterov, D. V. (2007). The productivity argument for investing in young children. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  Book 

  Google Scholar 

• Helburn, S. (Ed.). (1995). Cost, quality and child outcomes in child care centers (Tech. Rep.) Denver: University of Colorado, Department of Economics, Center for Research in Economic Social Policy.

  Google Scholar 

• Kagan, S., & Stewart, V. (2005). Education in a global era [Special issue]. Phi Delta Kappan, 87(3).

• Kamerman, S. B. (Ed.). (2001). Early childhood education and care: International perspectives. New York: Columbia University, ICFP.

  Google Scholar 

• Kreader, J., Fergusson, D., & Lawrence, S. (2005). Infant and toddler child care arrangements. National Center for Children in Poverty.

• Lazar, I., Darlington, R., Murray, H., Royce, J., & Snipper, A. (1983). As the twig is bent. New Jersey: Erlbaum Associates.

  Google Scholar 

• Mitchell, A., Ripple, C., & Chanana, N. (1998, September). Prekindergarten programs funded by the states: Essential elements for policy makers. New York: Families and Work Institute.

  Google Scholar 

• National Center for Education Statistics. (1997). The Condition of education, 1997. U.S. Department of Education.

• National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Digest of education statistics. U.S. Department of Education.

• National Center for Education Statistics. (2006, October). Child care and early education program participation of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. U.S. Department of Education.

• National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Condition of education, Early Childhood Program Enrollment. U.S. Department of Education.

• National Institute on Child Health and Human Development. (1998). The childcare network. Washington, DC: NICHD.

  Google Scholar 

• Stoney, L., & Greenberg, M. (1996). The financing of child care: Current and emerging trends. The Future of Children, 6(2), 83–102.

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

• U.S. House of Representatives. (1998). Committee on ways and means, The green book. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

  Google Scholar 

• U.S. Bureau of the Census Current Population Report. (2005a). Who’s minding the kids? Childcare arrangements: Winter 2002. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

• U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2005b). School enrollment — Social and economic characteristics of students: October 2003. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

  Google Scholar 

• Whitebook, M., Howes, C., & Phillips, D. (1989). Who cares? Child care teachers and the quality of care in America: Final Report, National child care staffing study. Oakland, CA: Child Care Employee Project.

  Google Scholar 

• Yoshikawa, H. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and delinquency. The Future of Children, 5(3), 51–75.

  Article 

  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Compton Foundation Centennial Professor for the Prevention of Children, Youth, and Family Problems at the Columbia University School of Social Work and Director of the Columbia University Institute for Child and Family Policy,
   Columbia University, 1255 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, NY, 10027, USA

   Sheila B. Kamerman

2. Associate Professor,
   Graduate School of Social Services, Fordham University, Bronx, USA

   Shirley Gatenio-Gabel

Authors

1. Sheila B. Kamerman

   View author publications

   You can also search for this author in
   PubMed Google Scholar

2. Shirley Gatenio-Gabel

   View author publications

   You can also search for this author in
   PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to
Sheila B. Kamerman.

Rights and permissions

Open Access  This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Kindergarten and educational center

Centino: Kindergarten and educational center is a corporate website for children’s educational organizations. Suitable for centers of additional and general development, kindergartens, creative and sports sections. The structure, content and functionality of the site are designed taking into account the specifics of business in the field of education. The solution created directions by age, added a schedule, a photo gallery and an appointment for a trial lesson.

Develop an online project to find new growth points and increase the conversion to applications. Documentation and technical support will help with this! The documentation contains detailed instructions for working with the site. And technical support specialists will answer questions about the settings of the solution and the platform. Launching a website without programming knowledge has become a reality.

1. Designed to meet the needs of children’s centers. Design, structure, functionality developed for the needs of educational institutions.
2. 3 ready-made configurations for educational centers of any size. The display of site elements will adapt to the number of destinations and age groups.
3. Photo gallery to increase loyalty and engagement. Share pictures from the life of the training center with parents: place photos in albums from reporting concerts, classes and holidays.
4. News templates for publications in different formats. Content looks harmonious with any information: video report, album, audio or text only.
5. Landing pages for events on Sites24. Create landing pages to announce group recruitment, invite parents to an open day, or announce a new destination.
6. Schedule in 3 formats: table, picture and Google Calendar. The tool will help users to choose a convenient time for classes, sign up for a lesson and not miss an important event.

Centino: Kindergarten and Education Center has over 1000 combinations of settings. Design the site the way you want yourself: without long approvals and a programmer. Control the display of blocks through the settings widget. Experiment, select elements and save changes in 1 click.

3 types of ready-made combinations to complete the project, taking into account the number of company directions:

1. For small studios providing 1-3 services.
2. For educational centers with 3 or more areas of study.
3. For children’s centers with a large list of services and directions for different ages.

The customization options of the solution will help you create a unique design and highlight your corporate identity:

• Manage color scheme, page width, font type and size – choose your color and customize typography in 1 click.
• 9 options for hats and footer to make the design harmonious.
• 6 types of placement of advertising banners to draw attention to events and promotions.
• Manage the display of content sections: services, news, contacts, teachers, to customize the design in a single style.

Content should be useful and answer user questions. At the same time, the design is also important. Structured content is easier to read and understand. And different formats are pleasing to the eye and increase engagement. For these purposes, the multi-news functionality is implemented in the solution. It allows you to adapt content to current formats.

4 types of news design to create accents:

• Article – talk about the life of the center and post useful content in a familiar text format.
• Photo — create news based on photo reports and albums. A great option to announce the past matinee, open day or holiday.
• Video — publish recordings from reporting concerts, competitions and events. Such content is interesting both for parents whose children attend classes and for potential clients.
• Audio – post songs if you are recording in this format for performances. Actual for vocal studios, TV schools and acting classes. Also suitable for interviews.

One of the main tasks of the site is to ensure attendance at the center’s classes. Landing pages on Sites24 will help to announce such events. The structure is designed to collect applications and respond to the needs of the target audience. And the design of the blocks was created taking into account the general style. Create landing pages to launch new destinations, open recruitment for a group, or conduct master classes. Run ads on landing pages to get the right number of leads.

• Drawing master class set
• Recruitment to the “Preparation for School” group

The training program is compiled taking into account the abilities and skills of children. Tell us about the approach, techniques and features depending on age. Then the parents will independently choose the direction for the child and find answers to common questions. To do this, the solution implements convenient navigation by age. The direction selection block is displayed on the main page and in the drop-down menu of the header. Display services by age to make it easier and faster for users to select sections for children.

Schedule – the schedule of the center. Useful for parents whose children are already attending sections. And also needed by potential clients to select the time and day of classes. Use this tool for information and ease of use. There are 3 types of schedule available in the solution: table, picture and Google Calendar.

Full information about the directions and work of the children’s center answers the questions of parents and forms loyalty. The more you share about your teaching approach and methods, the deeper the engagement will be. Exceed user expectations. And you will definitely win the trust! To do this, the solution implements a system of flexible connections. Customize them to increase the conversion to applications:

• Add to the description of the directions of teachers and teaching methods to show competence.

• Tell us about the achievements of children in the classroom and about victories in competitions. Post news with photos, certificates and videos.

• Link services and reviews to promotions to attract new customers.

Parents carefully approach the choice of developmental activities for children. They read the description of services, analyze reviews, study the location of the center, etc. They pay special attention to photographs. They help to understand in what conditions the child will be engaged. Post images about the life of your center in the “Photo Gallery” section to build user loyalty. Share student success: add pictures from reporting concerts, classes, competitions, holidays, etc. Also, link albums to news to colorfully talk about events.

Process customer requests on time, take into account wishes and purchase history. This will help build long-term relationships and increase loyalty. To receive applications, feedback forms are installed on all pages of the site.

Choose the type of forms for collecting applications: on infoblocks, web forms and Bitrix24. In Bitrix24, addresses of visited pages of the site and UTM tags are transmitted. This will help determine the effectiveness of advertising sources and calculate ROI.

• Forms on infoblocks for 1C-Bitrix edition: Start and above.

• Web forms work for 1C-Bitrix edition: Standard and higher.

• Forms from Bitrix24 for all editions.

Optimize the work of managers! All applications, calls and letters will be stored in one place. And service tools will help manage sales. The solution implements simple integration with CRM systems: Bitrix24 and amoCRM. Connect CRM in 5 minutes to control the work and keep everything on time.

Fill in content sections to tell everything about the company. On the pages, users will find answers to questions, select a direction and leave applications. Add up-to-date and detailed information about your activities in special sections:

• Methods will tell about the approach to working with children.

• News and promotions will share articles about the company, events and great deals.

• Parental feedback builds loyalty.

• Teachers will show experience and competence.

• Groups by age will help you choose directions.

• Franchising will open up new branches and sources of income.

• The schedule will tell you the time and day of classes.

• Certifications help build trust.

More Internet Marketing Tools

Web analytics: assessment of results and search for growth points

Analyze traffic and user behavior on the site. This will help to identify strengths and weaknesses, evaluate traffic sources and determine the target audience. The solution implements integration with Yandex.Metrica and Google Analytics in a couple of clicks. Connect analytics systems and develop the project online.

Promote your brand on social media. Collect user segments on the site by parameters. Then run ads for a loyal audience. For these purposes, add VKontakte and Facebook pixels to the site in 2 clicks.

Grab your customers’ attention with images. Tell about the main events in the advertising feed. This is a block with dynamic scrolling of narrow images under a large banner on the main page. It can also be output statically. Post here the announcement of events, recruitment to a group or the opening of a new direction. Clicking on the image will take you to the detailed page.

Advertising banners will help draw attention to the event on other pages of the site. Add them to announce important news. There are 6 image layout options available.

Tell about the advantages and achievements of the company. Add teasers to the main page and descriptions of destinations to show competencies, territorial coverage and customer focus.

From words to deeds: post a trial lesson on the website to attract new clients to the center. You can also take a closer look at profitable offers in the form of promotions. Add discount conditions to the site to increase the number of applications. The main thing is to provide customer service – then they will want to come back to you, they will recommend you to friends and acquaintances.

Centino: Kindergarten and educational center is not just a ready-made solution. This is a site that will help you find potential customers and build strong relationships with parents whose children are already attending classes. The structure, functionality, design are developed taking into account the specifics. Therefore, to start, you only need to fill the site with content and add up-to-date information at least once a month. Even specialists who have no experience in programming will cope with this task! Everything is simple and affordable.

The capabilities and settings of the ready-made solution greatly simplify the work of managing the site. Develop your online project to solve as many needs of parents with children as possible. We will help you not stand still and find new growth points:

• Unlimited technical support throughout the year.
• Regular updates of the template development solution.
• Documentation on typical solution settings.
• Ready-made images adapted for children’s centers.
• Services in creation of design taking into account corporate style.
• Development of functionality for individual tasks.

• Standard discounts for the purchase of a turnkey solution.
• Priority technical support.
• Advice on finalizing the solution.

Kindergarten is not just a place to look after and care for children

In recent years, pre-school education has become an object of close attention. They talked about the lack of places in kindergartens. Don’t forget about quality. A few years ago, the federal state educational standard for preschool education came out, which canceled classes that have long been a source of pride for scientists and practitioners. About what problems modern teachers solve, issues of continuity, new forms and tasks of preschool education, as well as the development of inclusive practice in our city, we talked with Tatyana Dmitrievna Yakovenko, head of the department for preventive work with educational organizations, families and children of the MKOU DPO “GTsOiZ” Master, Associate Professor of the Department of Pedagogy and Psychology of the Institute of Natural and Socio-Economic Sciences of the National State Pedagogical University.

– Tatyana Dmitrievna, for a long time the main problem of preschool education was the insufficient number of places in kindergartens. At the beginning of 2016, Novosibirsk reported 100% availability of preschool education for children aged 3 to 7. Is it really, in your opinion, at present this most acute problem has lost its relevance?

– In recent years, we have managed to do an incredible amount to ensure the availability of preschool education in our city: every opportunity has been used to ensure that children aged 3 to 7 years old can attend preschool educational organizations and receive preschool education, which, according to the Law “On Education in the Russian Federation”, is considered as a full-fledged – the first level of general education. New kindergartens were built, old kindergartens were reconstructed, increasing in capacity; groups were opened at schools where appropriate conditions were created. Such a form as groups of short-term stay has been developed. And, of course, the buildings of kindergartens, which had been operated by some other organizations for many years, were returned to the municipality system, put in order and equipped with everything necessary. A lot of work to solve such a socially significant task was done by the Department of Education and the mayor’s office of the city of Novosibirsk. But there is still work to be done, given the fact that the Novosibirsk Region has a fairly good birth rate, and, of course, young parents are interested in making a career, earning money for a decent life, and giving their children a good preschool education.

– One of the options for solving the problem of accessibility is the development of variable organizational forms of preschool education. What are these forms and do they exist in our city?

– Considering the diversity of needs of parents as the main customers of educational services, the municipality in recent years attaches great importance to the development of varied forms of preschool education. Today, in the municipal system of preschool education, there are short-stay groups: these are adaptation groups, weekend groups, and very popular school preparation groups for parents, health-improving groups, and development groups. In addition, today there are such new forms of preschool education as a play support center for young children, and an early intervention service is beginning to take shape. Advisory centers have been set up for parents, where they can receive free advice, where the child can be diagnosed by specialists and any developmental disorders or risks can be identified in time. In the system of preschool education, there are also family kindergartens, which are also considered as one of the variant forms.

Of particular note is the fact that in recent years much attention has been paid to ensuring accessibility of education for a special category of children – with disabilities. For them, groups of short stay “special child”, lecotheques, groups in kindergartens of a compensatory orientation are created. Inclusive education is gaining momentum: children with special needs visit the group together with their normatively developing peers. At the same time, special educational conditions are created for children with disabilities, which include, in particular, psychological and pedagogical support, individual or group correctional and developmental classes, as well as a barrier-free environment.

– At present, special attention is paid to the organization of large educational complexes that combine pre-school, primary, as well as the stages of basic general and secondary complete education. Pre-school groups are being actively created in schools. Is all this effective, in your opinion? And how relevant is the issue of the continuity of preschool and school education?

– Ensuring the continuity between preschool and primary general education has always been considered as an urgent task. It would be very bold to say that it has been fully resolved today. But a lot is being done in this direction. Today, most leaders understand that it is important to ensure continuity at the level of programs and principles. But often these questions are solved somewhat formally. Continuity is often understood as the establishment of rather superficial contacts between kindergarten and school: children of the preparatory group visit a school that is geographically nearby several times a year, attend some holidays, attend a class in a lesson, and can meet their future teacher. The primary school teacher also visits the kindergarten, sometimes seminars and round tables are held where teachers discuss these issues.

But, indeed, true continuity is provided in large educational complexes, in educational centers, where kindergarten is a natural first step in education. The teachers of this school know the programs of preschool education, they understand what achievements of preschool age they can rely on in their work. At the same time, kindergarten teachers are becoming more aware of what today’s primary school is like, what teachers’ expectations are, what it means today to “prepare a child well for school. ” Competent educators are well aware that one of the main tasks of a modern kindergarten is to ensure, first of all, psychological readiness for school, the prerequisites for the child to master educational activities.

As an example, I will give an educational center – school No. 4 with a kindergarten, where a program has been implemented for many years, which then continues in an elementary school.

– A frequently discussed problem is the implementation of the federal state educational standard for preschool education. How is the implementation process going in our city? Can we already name the first significant results? What problems do teachers have in connection with the implementation of the standard in practice?

– For a long time, school teachers thought: “What awaits us with the introduction of the standard? Will the kindergarten turn into a government institution, where all aspects of the life of children will be strictly standardized? Now we understand that a good standard has been created. As the head of the group that led the development of the standard, Alexander Grigoryevich Asmolov, Doctor of Psychology, put it, “this is a standard for a child and for the sake of a child.” It defines the requirements not for a child of preschool age, but for preschool education: for the programs developed by kindergartens, for the conditions for the implementation of these programs. The results of mastering the programs are presented in the form of targets, that is, the possible age achievements of the child, provided that a favorable environment is created, provided that all requirements for programs and their implementation are met.

Today, kindergartens, based on the standard, on those exemplary programs that appeared on the FIRO website in due time, have developed their main general education programs. For children with disabilities – adapted educational programs. Work is underway to comprehend the content of activities, and the most pressing issue is the quality of preschool education. What is meant by quality, how to evaluate?

The educational standard, of course, presented new, very high, requirements for the professional competence of the educator, for their professional position, for personal qualities and skills.

As a matter of fact, today’s educators must be able to do something that they were not specifically taught in their time. First, to analyze, based on scientific psychological knowledge, the social situation of the development of each individual child, determine the zone of his actual and the zone of proximal development and create conditions for the development and individuality of the child, and initiative, and independence – in children’s activities specific to each age. This is a very difficult task.

In addition, today educators should be able to provide psychological and pedagogical support to each child and the entire group, to provide their group with conditions for maintaining not only physical, but also mental health – through the organization of communication, joint activities, spatial and object environment. Previously, this task was posed to educational psychologists.

It is difficult for many educators to work, because the standard required abandoning traditional educational activities, and what today is called directly educational activity in kindergarten should look like a joint activity with an adult and peers: play, constructive, visual, musical and etc.

This means that educators will really have to give up their position as the main source of information, the main expert. It is necessary to learn to be a partner for a child, an interested interlocutor, an older experienced friend.

The standard “reclaims” children’s play and experimental activities. And I, for example, as a psychologist, it makes me very happy. This is not a school-type activity – “I will tell you, and then I will ask questions.” The great Vygotsky wrote: a child learns by playing, drawing, experimenting, experimenting, constructing.

A very difficult task, which, as it seems to me, has not been successfully solved yet, although we have been talking about it a lot lately, is the establishment of partnerships with parents. The standard directs the teacher to establish a relationship of cooperation, not confrontation and dominance over parents. Collaboration is a complex technology that educators today must master.

Another difficult task today is to learn how to work with a group of children attended by different categories of children: both children with a conditional developmental norm and children with some kind of disabilities. The practice of inclusive education must be developed. Just the presence of an “unusual” child in a group does not make it inclusive. Inclusion involves the creation of special educational conditions, assumes that the teacher owns the technology of organizing joint activities, creating a favorable psychological climate in this group. The standard made very serious demands, and if teachers move in this direction, we can say that preschool education will rise to a new qualitatively different level in its development.

– In that case, have there been any new approaches to teacher training?

– It is wonderful that the understanding that teachers cannot be left alone with the above tasks came a long time ago. As soon as the draft standard appeared, pilot kindergartens were allocated in our city, which began to work under the guidance of teachers – specialists from various educational structures who provided scientific and methodological assistance. These are a variety of forms – from advanced training courses to workshops, round tables, scientific and practical conferences, webinars. And if a teacher is internally psychologically set up for development, today he has the opportunity to obtain information, the necessary skills, develop his personal qualities, acquire new professional competencies that will allow him to work more successfully.

– Tatyana Dmitrievna, as you have already said, today much attention is paid to ensuring the availability of education for a special category of children. How is inclusive preschool education presented in our city and what is your attitude towards inclusion?

– Children need to grow up together. For children with disabilities, this is a way of more successful socialization, for children with conditionally normative development, it is an opportunity to learn to live with “other” peers not in a state of confrontation, neglect and contempt, but acceptance as equals. This is an opportunity to develop tolerance, empathy, the ability to promote and help those who need it. And this requires conditions.

Novosibirsk is gaining experience in organizing inclusive education. I believe that today this experience is being developed more successfully in schools. And we can safely say that the best inclusive experience is presented in the schools of the Novosibirsk region. This is not accidental – on September 1, 2011, the project “Education and socialization of children with disabilities in the inclusive educational space of the Novosibirsk Region” was launched. Teachers of the region’s schools completed refresher courses, schools received funds to create an accessible educational environment. A lot of work was carried out by the Regional Center for Diagnostics and Consulting with the heads of these educational institutions to form an understanding of what inclusive education is, what its tasks, values, principles and technologies are.

A serious role in the formation of inclusive education in our city and region was played by the Pedagogical University, namely: the Department of Psychology and Pedagogy of the Institute of Natural and Social and Economic Sciences, of which I am an associate professor. This department, the only one in Siberia, trains teachers-psychologists of inclusive education. The department has extensive experience in organizing the so-called Scientific Schools on Inclusive Education, the participants of which were not only authoritative specialists in inclusive education, including foreign ones, not only scientists, but also practicing teachers. And, above all, those leaders, teachers who joined this project in 2011.

Kindergartens, unfortunately, were not included in this project. It can be said that the leaders of a number of preschool organizations themselves, interested in the development of inclusive education, made attempts to restructure the work of their kindergartens, applied for scientific and methodological assistance, to NIPKiPRO, NGPU, OTsDK and other structures in order to receive help, methodological and psychological support. Therefore, today the city has pre-school educational institutions, where a fairly successful experience of genuine inclusive education has been accumulated.

But “wild” inclusion still takes place to a greater extent, when different categories of children are involved in the same group, but children with disabilities sometimes do not receive targeted, thoughtful, comprehensive assistance.

Some kindergartens that call themselves inclusive have not yet established the work of councils. And without this, it is impossible to talk about inclusion, because it is possible to work to create conditions only based on the command principle. When a team of specialists works in concert: discusses the fate of each child, develops an individual educational route together, coordinates correctional and developmental work, educational work in relation to parents and teachers – only in this case can we talk about inclusive conditions.

Thus, to sum up: it is too early to talk about significant results of the development of inclusive practice in municipal preschool education, but, of course, there is progress!

– As we know, you and the city center for education and health “Master”, where you work, take an active part in the development of inclusive education in preschool educational organizations . ..

– Indeed, the department of preventive work with educational organizations, families and children of the City Center for Health and Education “Master” has been providing scientific and methodological advice to a number of kindergartens on the development of inclusive practice since 2011. We started working on a model of inclusive preschool education on the basis of kindergarten No. 406 “Alenka” in the Leninsky district. By the way, at the beginning of this academic year, this experience was presented at the Scientific School at the National State Pedagogical University and was highly appreciated by professionals.

Thanks to the joint work with practicing teachers, we have a fairly clear idea of ​​how the life of children, pedagogical activity and the work of the psychological, medical and pedagogical council in an inclusive preschool educational institution should be organized.

Today we supervise a number of kindergartens in the city, helping to develop inclusive practices. Currently, one of the collections of methodological materials for kindergartens is being prepared, which will reflect the positive experience of inclusive education. We also conduct seminars, consultations, conferences of various levels.

– What other areas of activity does the department of preventive work with educational organizations, families and children of the city health and education center “Master” implement?

– In general, one of the most important directions of the city center of education and health “Master” is the prevention of deviant behavior. With regard to preschoolers, it is not customary to talk about deviant behavior – we are talking about a violation of socialization processes. We proceed from the idea that if we provide full-fledged conditions for the socialization of a child during preschool childhood, then the risk of deviations at subsequent age stages is reduced. Therefore, all the work of the department is aimed at increasing the competence of teachers in providing conditions for positive socialization, individualization, development of the child’s personality in accordance with the requirements of the standard.

Work is underway in a number of areas. Thus, we have created the project “Scientific and methodological support for health-saving activities in kindergartens.” We have united more than 30 kindergartens around us, which have a very interesting experience in health-saving activities, and once a month we hold city pedagogical workshops, where a particular kindergarten presents its experience, and all other participants have the opportunity to discuss, comprehend and ask questions about this experience. Each workshop is very carefully prepared and in this sense becomes a form of increasing the competence of teachers.

Another area of ​​preventive work is to increase parental competence. Firstly, we have been conducting advanced training courses for teachers “Cooperation between preschool educational institutions and the family” for more than one year. New approaches to interaction with parents – this is what our listeners should understand: how to build a dialogue with parents today, what “partnership” means, how joint activities can be built, what tasks we can and should solve in cooperation with parents. These courses take place once or twice a year. And, it should be noted, the group is recruited instantly.

The second is the management of parent clubs. Without false modesty, I will say that it was I who initiated, organized and am the permanent host of several parent clubs in different parts of the city. In the Pervomaisky district, the Family Living Room operates on the basis of kindergarten No. 97, in the Kalininsky district, the parent club operates on the basis of kindergarten No. 85, in the Leninsky district, on the basis of kindergarten No. 406, in the Kirovsky district, on the basis of kindergarten No. 4 , in the Oktyabrsky district – this is the very first and large-scale parent club – today meetings are held in it on the basis of kindergarten No. 303.

By the way, this year we had a very interesting program – mothers-teachers were students of the parent club. After all, they often bring up other people’s children well, they see, they find the strength in themselves to correct something in the development of the child, to find an approach to it. At the same time, they do not have enough strength, time and patience to notice something in time in the development of their own child, to help him in personal development. And it turns out that mothers-teachers often make more mistakes in raising their children than “ordinary” mothers. And when such a program was offered to young educators, they readily responded, and, I must say, the club passed in one breath.

At each meeting there were at least 40 people, and we received a lot of feedback – words of gratitude, recognition that the club helped to look at ourselves from the outside, to better understand our own child, to correct something in parent-child relationships.

We also hold webinars at the invitation of the Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation Policy of the Novosibirsk Region, which are organized by the Regional Center for parents of preschoolers and schoolchildren throughout the Novosibirsk Region. In particular, I recently held two such seminars on the problems of the child’s relations with peers and on the problem of forming children’s interest in the book.

Naturally, we conduct individual counseling for parents: after all, the better parents cope with their function as the main educators, the more successfully they create a developing environment for their child at home, the lower the risk of various types of deviant behavior at subsequent age stages.

As I said, a large and significant part of the work is the scientific and methodological support of inclusive practice. In addition, our department supervises the work of all educational psychologists of preschool educational institutions. At the department there is a city methodological association of pedagogues-psychologists of the preschool educational institution, headed by our wonderful specialist Elena Ivanovna Subbotina.

Unfortunately, today not every kindergarten has a teacher-psychologist, or they do not always have the opportunity to work full-time, while the work of psychologists is “no end” and is in great demand. We help them in modern conditions to comprehend the main tasks of the activity of a teacher-psychologist, areas of work, the specifics of psychological and pedagogical support for children with disabilities, his family – through a variety of forms. We hold master classes, seminars, round tables. The Festival of Psychological Ideas, which was held for the fourth time this year, has become very popular.

– Tatyana Dmitrievna, what problem do you consider the most acute in the field of preschool education in Novosibirsk? And does our city have reasons to be proud?

– As a specialist, I am saddened that orthopedic groups, and with them the huge work to prevent serious disorders of the musculoskeletal system, to correct the disorders in the motor sphere that children have, are becoming a thing of the past. At one time, the city center for health and education “Master” had the most direct relation to this, in particular, was the initiator of the opening of such groups. Also, teachers were trained here, advanced training courses were conducted, and an orthopedic commission worked. It must be said that Novosibirsk, in terms of the level of orthopedic pathology, had decent results. I would like that today, with the closure of orthopedic groups, the practice of such assistance to children is not forgotten.

An acute problem is the relatively high number of groups in kindergartens, which, of course, prevents, in the true sense of the word, the implementation of an individual approach, the development of the child’s individuality, as provided for by the standard.

As I have already said, the practice of inclusive pre-school education is not so successful that one can speak of it as a very significant social and educational phenomenon.

At the same time, of course, we have something to be proud of! Firstly, in recent years we have a huge number of wonderful kindergartens with leaders of a new type, with project thinking, initiative and creative; and this means that developing pedagogical teams stand behind them.

I am glad that in preschool education a system of methodological assistance is being built at all levels – from the level of an educational institution to the city – for all categories of workers.

It should also be noted that recently we have made progress in understanding that parents are very important participants in the educational process, and today we are looking for effective forms of cooperation with them, involving parents in the life of the kindergarten, and increasing parental competence. I am glad that some teachers are well aware that parents have a lot to learn.

Variable forms of pre-school education are being developed so that different categories of families have the opportunity to satisfy their needs for educational services.

The Standard provided such an opportunity – and when developing educational programs, each kindergarten created its own variable part, which reflects its originality, established traditions, aspirations of teachers, sociocultural situation, our climatic and geographical conditions. And today in Novosibirsk there are many kindergartens with their own “special, unique face.”

I would like to note one more significant point – in recent years, issues of preschool education have been discussed at the highest level – at the level of state educational policy. Pre-school education, according to the law “On Education” is the first full-fledged level of general education. And today no one looks at the kindergarten just as a place to look after and care for children.

Today, as we said above, very high demands are placed on the kindergarten, but respect is also shown. It seems to me that it has become much more for teachers who work in the system of preschool education, and in general – for the system of preschool education that took shape many decades ago and is constantly developing.

It has never been in a state of stagnation. This system always employs people who are truly dedicated to their profession, who love young children, who feel and understand the child’s soul well, who know how to play, communicate, design, sculpt, draw and experiment with children.

This is a special category of teachers – they themselves have a piece of childhood, a special purity of perception of the world, trust and openness to the world, which, I must say, attracts children to them. And I am very pleased that there have always been such teachers in preschool education, and there are today!

Vodopyanova Maria

Educational portal of the city of Kirov – Unified information and educational portal of municipal educational organizations

Additional education certificates

Instruction video for parents; PFDO; MOC; Parents and children; Teachers; News; The documents; Frequently asked Questions.

The procedure for issuing directions (vouchers)

Working hours of recruitment commissions, procedure and terms for issuing referrals to municipal preschool educational organizations of the city of Kirov…

Acceptance of applications at the MFC

Parents (legal representatives) can register a child for subsequent placement in a kindergarten in …

News

Professional game of teachers “Knowledge transfer”

09.09.2022

From September 4, 2022, the first professional game on Russian television started on the Russia-Culture TV channel…

Read more

DYUTS them. A. Nevsky invites children to the city meeting “Young connoisseur of nature – 2022”

09. 09.2022

The city rally “Young connoisseur of nature – 2022” is held in order to deepen local history, environmental and conservation…

Read more

Parents about additional education certificates

07.09.2022

Since September 2020 in the city of Kirov, as part of the implementation of the federal project “Success of every child”…

Read more

Notice of compensation for the cost of gasification of households

08/24/2022

We would like to inform you about the possibility of receiving compensation for gasification of household expenses in the amount of actual expenses, but…

Read more

Congratulations to the winners of the regional competition of additional general educational general development programs

08/09/2022

Teachers of the Children and Youth Center of the Oktyabrsky district of Kirov and the Center for the Development of Creativity for Children and Youth “Rainbow”. ..

Read more

About the media marathon “#ThoughtsOut”

07/12/2022

Dear colleagues! We would like to inform you that during the period from 14.07.2022 to 11.08.2022 in the territory of…

Read more

About an independent assessment of the quality of education in 2022 in the city of Kirov

07/07/2022

On the basis of the order of the Ministry of Education of the Kirov Region dated 01/28/2022 No. 131 “On the organization of…

Read more

Anonymous survey of parents

05/26/2022

Dear parents! In order to reveal the facts of “everyday” corruption in the municipal educational organizations of Kirov in…

Read more

We invite parents to issue and activate additional education certificates

05/17/2022

According to the Regional Navigator of Additional Education for Children as of May 16 in Kirov: 34037 children in. ..

Read more

Schoolchildren are invited to the competition “Russian Azimuth – 2022”

05/11/2022

May 21, 2022 in the Dendrological Park at the address: Kirov, st. Traktovaya, 2a…

Read more

Information campaign about additional education certificates continues in Kirov

04/29/2022

On April 28, the municipal support center, together with the Department of Education of the Kirov Administration, held a webinar on…

Read more

The city festival of pedagogical technologies in the field of additional education for children ended in Kirov

04/29/2022

Two more master classes were held as part of the on-site stage of the city festival of pedagogical technologies in the field of additional…

Read more

Improving the mechanisms for managing the quality of education in the city of Kirov

27. 04.2022

A series of meetings and webinars for heads of educational organizations, deputy principals of schools,…

Read more

The government approved the concept of additional education for children until 2030

20.04.2022

Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin signed the concept of updating the system of additional education for children by 2030. Corresponding document…

Read more

The city festival of pedagogical technologies in the field of additional education of children continues in Kirov

04/19/2022

In Kirov, the full-time stage of the city festival of pedagogical technologies in the field of additional education for children continues. Already…

Read more

In Kirov, the full-time stage of the city festival of pedagogical technologies in the field of additional education for children began
April 14, 2022

Version for the visually impaired

MBDOU MO KRASNODAR “KINDERGARTEN № 109”

Information updated on 01/01/2022

Work plan

Methodological documents

kindergarten No.

8 G. Zvenigorod

1. Realized level of education
Preschool

2. Form of training
Full -time

3. Formative periods of training
From 2 to 7 years old, but no later than the age of 8 years old.

4. Description of the educational program with a copy attached

The educational process in the preschool educational institution is carried out in accordance with the Main educational program of preschool education of the municipal autonomous preschool educational organization MADOU kindergarten No. 8 of the combined type of the city district of Zvenigorod, the annual calendar curriculum, curriculum , schedule of organized educational activities.

The main educational program of preschool education MADOU kindergarten No. 8 (hereinafter referred to as the Program), developed in accordance with the Federal State Educational Standard for Preschool Education (approved by order of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia dated October 17, 2013, registration No. 1155, registered with the Ministry of Justice of Russia on November 14, 2013 year, registration No. 30384) and taking into account the “Exemplary basic general educational program of preschool education”, approved by the decision of the federal educational and methodological association for general education (minutes of May 20, 2015 No. 2/15).

The obligatory part of the OOP DO is developed taking into account the educational program of preschool education “From birth to school” / Edited by N.E. Veraksy, T.S. Komarova, M.A. Vasilyeva. – 4th ed. – M.: MOZAYKA-SINTEZ, 2016.

Part of the BEP DO, formed by participants in educational relations, was developed on the basis of the following partial programs and technologies:

• “Young Ecologist” S.N. Nikolaeva, Moscow, 2016
• “Mathematics in Kindergarten” by V.P. Novikov, 2016
• “Artistic creativity and design” L.V. Kutsakova, 2016
• “Ladushki” by I. Kaplunov, I. Novoskoltsev, 2010
• “Colored hands” by I. A. Lykova, 2018
• “Fundamentals of safety for preschool children” R.B. Sterkina, O.L. Knyazeva, N.N. Avdeeva, 2005
• “School of Road Sciences: Preschoolers about the rules of the road” Yu.A. Startseva, 2011.
• “Drawing with children 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7 years old” D.N. Koldina, 2016
• “Modeling with children 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7 years old” D.N. Koldina, 2016
• “Application with children 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7 years old” D.N. Koldina, 2016
• “Making with children 3-4, 4-5, 5-6, 6-7 years old” O.A. Mamaeva, 2016
• “Young ecologist” system of work in the younger group “S.N. Nikolaeva, Moscow, 2016.
• “Young ecologist” system of work in the middle group “S.N. Nikolaeva, Moscow, 2016.
• “Young ecologist” system of work in the senior group “S.N. Nikolaeva, Moscow, 2016
• “Young ecologist” system of work in the preparatory group” S.N. Nikolaeva, Moscow, 2016

5. Curriculum for 2020-2021 academic year

6. Annotations to the work programs of disciplines

• Annotation to the work program of the junior group Dandelion
• Annotation to the work program of the junior group Smorodinka
• Annotation to the work program Musical development
• Annotation for the work program of the preparatory group Asterisk
• Annotation to the work program of the preparatory group Solnyshko
• Annotation to the work program of the middle group Blackberry
• Annotation for the work program of the middle group Bell
• Annotation to the work program of the middle group Chamomile
• Annotation to the work program for the senior group Cherry
• Annotation to the work program of the senior group Beryozka
• Annotation to the work program Physical development

7. Calendar study schedule for the 2020-2021 academic year

• Work program for the 2021-2022 academic year

8. Methodological and other documents developed by the kindergarten to ensure the educational process

• Annual plan of educational work for the 2020-2021 academic year
• Schedule of organized educational activities for the 2020-2021 academic year

9. Implemented educational programs

• The main educational program of MADOU kindergarten No. 8 of the combined type Zvenigorod
• Adapted Core Preschool Education Program
• Health program “Grow healthy, baby!” for 2018-2021
• Brief presentation of the main educational program of preschool education

10. Information on the number of students for 2018

As of September 1, 2020, 341 pupils attend preschool.

11. Language of instruction. In accordance with clause 1, part 2, article 29 of the Federal Law “On Education in the Russian Federation”, education is conducted in Russian – the state language of the Russian Federation.

Kindergarten No. 71, Rused

Country of childhood

Let every child have a childhood,

There will be a home, a happy family.

And leave a legacy for everyone

Treasure of care and attention without hiding.

Let it sound more often, children’s laughter,

Read more…

The New Year is knocking at the kindergarten…

Every year at the end of December in all groups of our kindergarten festive New Year’s parties are organized. A beautifully decorated hall, an elegant Christmas tree, magnificent costumes, gifts, Santa Claus, the Snow Maiden and other fairy-tale characters were waiting for our children this year too! Read more…

• 2021-12-30
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Autumn came to visit us!

Golden leaves fall, fly,
Golden leaves cover the garden.
Many golden leaves on the paths,
We will make a good bouquet of them,
We will put the bouquet in the middle of the table,
Golden autumn has come to visit us.

Read more…

• 2021-10-25
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Autumn Festival

On September 29 and 30, 2021, an exhibition of crafts “Autumn Festival” was held in our kindergarten, in which children and parents took part.

In their works, the participants used various natural materials – cones, acorns, leaves, dried flowers, twigs, moss, vegetables.

Read more…

• 2021-10-04
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Goodbye, kindergarten!

Graduation ball in kindergarten is the most touching, most unforgettable of all holidays. The word “prom” for everyone, without exception, evokes certain associations. This parting, sadness, good parting words. And this holiday should remain in the memory of graduates forever. On May 25, in the group “Island of Friendship” a matinee “Goodbye, kindergarten!” was held. Read more…

• 2021-06-01
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Walk, carnival!

Hey, get ready, people!

Maslenitsa is visiting today.

Hurry, hurry, hurry!

Take your friends with you! Read more…

• 2021-03-12
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Rules of safe behavior on ice!

Winter is firmly fixed on the calendar, a mountain of warm clothes is waiting in front of the door, and your baby is already in full combat readiness before setting off to meet winter fun! The child just wants to spend time on the ice, especially where the rivers or lakes barely had time to freeze. For kids, it’s an ice adventure, and for parents, it’s endless excitement. Read more…

• 2021-01-26
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

This is how we celebrated the New Year!

From December 22 to December 24, New Year’s morning performances were held in our kindergarten. New Year is the brightest, kindest, brightest, magical and favorite holiday, not only for children, but also for adults. Read more…

• 2020-12-30
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Background information on the situation with man-made fires on the territory of the Irkutsk region 23 children (for the 3rd quarter of 2019years – 13 children, + 76.9%), 119 people were injured, including 11 children. Read more…

• 2020-10-14
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

HARDENING CHILDREN DURING THE SUMMER HEALTH PERIOD

Hardening is a powerful healing tool that reduces the number of colds. It has a general strengthening effect on the body, increases the tone of the central nervous system, improves blood circulation, and normalizes metabolism. The main means of hardening children are natural factors of nature – air, water, sun.

Read more…

• 2020-07-15
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Memo on preventing children from falling out of windows

The natural desire to ventilate the apartment every day makes many Russian families unhappy. Small children, even for a moment, left unattended, fall out of windows and get injured, sometimes incompatible with life.

Read more…

• 2020-06-26
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Parents, do not leave children unattended!

The role of the personal example of parents in the upbringing of the child

The child takes his immediate environment – family members as the standard of behavior. Reaching for a hot stove like a mom, trying to fix an outlet like a dad, or staring at his smartphone for a long time like an older brother. Read more…

• 2020-06-10
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Goodbye, kindergarten!

Graduation in kindergarten! This is the sadness of parting, this is the expectation of a new one, this is the first milestone of the child, summing up the first results, the realization of successes and achievements, the exciting expectation of entering school life! With what impatience children and adults are waiting for it, preparing for it.

Read more…

• 2020-06-08
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Dedication to heroes from great-grandchildren .

..

On a wonderful holiday, the ninth of May,
On the day when the whole world celebrates the Victory,
Sincerely, with love, sincerely congratulate
Warrior, defender, dear grandfather! Read more…

• 2020-05-13
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Physical education-hooray!

Dear parents, now, in self-isolation, you have become your child’s main and only teacher who has the opportunity to communicate with him “eye to eye”. Now you are an educator, a defectologist, a speech therapist, and a music director all rolled into one. Let this circumstance not scare you. Read more…

• 2020-04-27
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Attention! Measles!

PREVENTION OF MEASLES

Measles is an acute infectious disease characterized by general intoxication,
inflammation of the mucous membranes of the eyes,
nasopharynx, upper respiratory tract, and a characteristic rash.

Read more…

• 2020-02-26
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

FLU PARENT REFERENCE

FLU

NOTE TO PARENTS

Flu, caused by an ever-changing virus, is a respiratory illness that spreads from person to person primarily through airborne droplets and also through the hands that we cover our nose and mouth with when we sneeze and cough. Read more…

• 2020-02-26
• Category: News
• chat_bubble_outline No comments

Mother’s Day in kindergarten

There is an eternal word in our world,

short, but the most cordial,

It is beautiful and kind,

It is simple and convenient,

Read more .