Benefits of Early Childhood Brain Stimulation and why it should be Implemented in every African American Community

Over the last four decades, there has been areceived intervention.
myriad of studies on early childhood brainForty-seven percent of the intervention children
development.  All of these studies have producedwere more likely to have a skilled job versus only
astonishing results in regards to how children learn,twenty-seven of the children who did not receive
how their brains develop from infancy.  Theseintervention.
studies also revealed the negative impact onOther notable benefits of early intervention are
children not receiving adequate childhood brainthat these children were less likely to smoke
stimulation.cigarettes and less likely to smoke marijuana than
One of the studies that had really caught mythose children who did not receive treatment
attention is the Carolina Abecedarian Project. through the intervention program.
The Carolina Abecedarian Project is an intensiveThe Cost of the program versus the Benefits of
early childhood intervention program.  Thethe Program:
Abecedarian Project focuses on low-income,The project cost approximately $10,000 per child,
at-risk children between the ages of six weeksper year.  The project was financed using
and five years.federal, state, and local public education dollars.
The Abecedarian Project came about as a resultThe children that participated were evaluated
of a small group of scientist in 1966, at theperiodically through age 21 for cognitive, academic,
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, whoand social effects of early childhood education. 
were committed to improving the lives of childrenThese children received early childhood education
and their families through research, teaching andfor five days a week, year round.
other social services.  The Abecedarian ProjectThe following is the surprising results of this
initially started with a group of preschoolers.  Thecomprehensive study:
program enrolled 111 infants between 1972 and- A conservative estimate of $100,000 in savings
1977.  Fifty-Seven of these infants wereto society can be produced per child by an
randomly assigned to receive center-based earlyinvestment of $10,000 per year per child. Savings
educational intervention.  The remaining Fifty-Fouraccrue through reduced spending on special
infants were placed in a control group.education, welfare, and juvenile crime.
The curriculum entailed educational- Special education services for those in the
“games” that emphasized developmentprogram were half as much as those in a
skills in cognition and language. For example, infantcomparison group at age fifteen (24 percent
games were age appropriate adult-childversus 48 percent).
interactions that included talking to the child,- Children who participated earned significantly
showing pictures or toys, and offering infants ahigher scores in both reading and math.
chance to react to their environment. ActivitiesThe age-21 follow-up found that young adults who
were individualized for each child. As children aged,received the early educational child care
the “games” became more conceptualconsistently scored higher on tests of cognitive
and skill-based, but the program alwaysdevelopment, fared better on reading and
emphasized individual development. Children alsomathematics achievement tests, and were more
received their healthcare on site from a stafflikely to attend college.
pediatrician.- Forty percent were still in school, compared with
The Astonishing Results of the Abecedarian20 percent of the control group, and 65 percent
Project:were employed, compared with 50 percent of
The infants that participated in the programthe control group.
received treatment until the age of 8 years old. - Thirty-five percent had graduated from college
In order to properly assess the program’sor were enrolled in college, compared with 14
benefits the children were monitored and receivedpercent of the others.
follow-up assessments at age 12, 15.  At all three- Members of the study group were an average
ages (8, 12, 15) the children who received theof 19 years old when their first child was born,
treatment from birth to age five had higher I.Q.compared with 17 for the control group.
scores.  These children also scored higher onThe projected cost-benefit ratio was 2.5:1.  This
achievement test in math and reading duringratio states that this project doesn’t cost the
elementary and middle school years.  They alsotaxpayers anything.  In fact, it actually saves
had lower levels of grade retention andtaxpayers money.  The projected ratio means
placements in special education classes.that for every dollar spent on the program,
Additionally, the children who received thetaxpayers save approximately $2.50.  This is
intervention scored 1.8 grades years higher insavings is realized through fact that there would
reading and math as young adults.be less of a need for educational and government
Thirty-six percent of these children were moreservices, and reduced health care costs.
likely to attend a four-year college, compared toI plan on doing much more research on the topic
only 14 percent of the children who did notof early childhood development.   If the results
receive intervention.are as promising as they seem, then the African
Twenty-six percent of the children who receivedAmerican community must make a serious effort
intervention were less likely to have had their firstto have early childhood development programs
child at age 18 or younger, compared toimplemented in their respective communities; not
forty-five percent of the children who didn’tonly for a few children, but for all children.