What do we know about preschool?

To find answers, researchers in different disciplines from a number of universities and from the think tank Brookings set up a task force to review the evidence “on the impact of state-funded pre-kindergarten programs.”

The result is a new report, “The Current State of Scientific Knowledge on Pre-Kindergarten Effects,” released by Brookings and Duke University. Videos of related panel discussions are available here.

This effort produced “one, clear, strong message,” NPR reports. “Kids who attend public preschool programs are better prepared for kindergarten than kids who don’t.”

“This timely report can guide states and local communities, including several here in Massachusetts, as they continue to expand access to high-quality preschool,” Titus DosRemedios, director of research and policy at Strategies for Children, says.

Included in the report is a six-part consensus statement that says:

– Economically disadvantaged children and dual language learners often find greater “improvement in learning” than children who are more advantaged and more proficient in English.

– Pre-k programs that are more successful tend to have “well implemented, evidence-based curriculum,” and coaching for teachers. And having “orderly but active classrooms, may also be helpful.”

– The quality of children’s learning experiences matters before, during, and after their pre-K year. “Classroom experiences early in elementary school can serve as charging stations for sustaining and amplifying pre-k learning gains,’ in part by providing “individualization and differentiation in instructional content and strategies.”

– “Convincing evidence shows that children attending a diverse array of state and school district pre-k programs are more ready for school at the end of their pre-k year than children who do not attend pre-k.” Studies commonly show improvement in literacy and numeracy. A smaller number of studies show “modest improvements” in “social-emotional and self-regulatory development.”

– Evidence about “the longer-term impacts of scaled-up pre-k programs on academic outcomes and school progress is sparse,” so broad conclusions cannot be made. Existing evidence does show that “pre-k-induced improvements in learning are detectable during elementary school, but studies also reveal null or negative longer-term impacts for some programs.”

– States have done well at “designing and implementing their pre-k programs,” however they need ongoing “innovation and evaluation… to ensure continued improvement in creating and sustaining children’s learning gains.” One way to achieve this goal is by setting up research-practice partnerships to “generate more complete and reliable evidence on effectiveness factors in pre-k and elementary school that generate long-run impacts.”

In other words, we know a lot about pre-K but we need to learn more.

The report concludes that pre-K programs provide laboratories “in which we can observe children learning and refine our practices and programs for future generations.”

The hard work of “improving these programs so that they can fully support the intellectual and social skills the nation will need in the future has just begun.”

What’s needed now is the “implementation of scaled-up pre-k programs” accompanied by “rigorous evaluation of impact.”

For Massachusetts and other states, the message is clear: to prepare children for bright futures, continue investing in high-quality pre-K programs — and keep studying how and why these programs succeed.