ÉçÇøºÚÁÏ

Join our zero2eight Substack community for more discussion about the latest news in early care and education.

Ask kindergarten teachers what they need most from 5-year-olds, and few will say it’s children who can read full sentences or count to 100. They need kids who don’t melt down when a block tower falls, who can share crayons with a classmate, follow multi-step directions, communicate frustration without shutting down and focus in a busy classroom. 

Developing social-emotional skills like these is central to high-quality preschool and is what has helped guarantee for more than 60 years through national quality standards. The goal of the program was to counteract the effects of growing up in need, so low-income children wouldn’t lag behind before the race even begins.

But now, would rescind most Head Start regulations, putting that vision of readiness at risk. While the proposal is framed as a move toward flexibility and efficiency, removing national teaching, learning and program quality standards would in fact weaken the foundation that makes Head Start more than just a loose collection of local programs. It would make the quality of a child’s early education increasingly dependent on geography — the sort of zip code destiny that Head Start was created to counter.

A recent of six decades of research reinforces the wisdom of Head Start’s approach, showing lasting improvements in children’s social skills, emotional regulation and positive behavior. These effects can extend beyond the individual student to families, siblings, peers and even the next generation. Head Start’s robust federal standards are essential to how the program turns early opportunity into lasting economic mobility.

The plan to rescind those standards rests on the mistaken assumption that states would readily take over responsibility for quality and deliver it consistently. But most cannot and would not. State childcare or early learning licensing systems vary widely and generally ensure only a minimum floor for health and safety. They are designed to make sure children are not in danger, not necessarily to ensure high-quality teacher-child interactions or the development of self-regulation, relationship skills and responsible decision-making. 

In fact, many states do not require evidence-based readiness skills curricula in early learning, sustained educator coaching, regular mental health consultation or wellness screenings and follow-ups. Nor do they have equal funding, workforce capacity or monitoring systems.

As leaders of education nonprofits that prioritize teaching social and emotional skills with the goal of helping students become resilient citizens, we have seen the value of what Head Start does. That’s why David Adams created the Resilient Scholars Program, which integrates social-emotional learning into curriculum and classroom practices in the ‘s 22 New York City public schools — so those skills can persist beyond kindergarten and into the upper grades. And it’s why Jordan’s organization, , created its Second Step Early Learning program, which focuses on self-regulation, attention, emotional management, problem solving and relationship skills that young children need to succeed in kindergarten and beyond. That program operates in both preschools and Head Starts across the country.

Back when Jordan was a teacher in New York City, the roughest grade at the start of the year was invariably kindergarten because of the lack of a strong early learning feeder system (Head Start or otherwise). For most kindergartners, it was their first time being away from home for a whole day, thrown together with a bunch of other kids in some new place called school. The basic challenge of acclimating a class of 5-year-olds together toward the exercise of learning was exhausting.

If Head Start degrades, the result will almost certainly be more chaotic kindergarten classes with children not as ready to deal with one another, listen to their teachers or learn effectively. And that diminished social readiness capability will extend all the way to high school and beyond. High school students denied the readiness skills like those found in Head Start will be less able to manage their emotions, interact with peers, develop empathy and listen with the purpose of resolving conflict and leading. 

Replacing one national standard with a patchwork of state rules would make quality contingent on local resources. Children in underserved communities, who need the best preparation for school, would be at the greatest risk.

By contrast, Head Start’s federal standards connect learning with health, family engagement, mental health support and strong relationships with adults. We implore the administration to preserve and build upon this smart foundation rather than dismantle the conditions that help children arrive at school ready to learn.

Did you use this article in your work?

We’d love to hear how ÉçÇøºÚÁÏ’s reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.