| Over the last four decades, there has been a | | | | - Forty-seven percent of the intervention children |
| myriad of studies on early childhood brain | | | | were more likely to have a skilled job versus only |
| development. All of these studies have produced | | | | twenty-seven of the children who did not receive |
| astonishing results in regards to how children learn, | | | | intervention. |
| how their brains develop from infancy. These | | | | Other notable benefits of early intervention are |
| studies also revealed the negative impact on | | | | that these children were less likely to smoke |
| children not receiving adequate childhood brain | | | | cigarettes and less likely to smoke marijuana than |
| stimulation. | | | | those children who did not receive treatment |
| One of the studies that had really caught my | | | | through the intervention program. |
| attention is the Carolina Abecedarian Project. The | | | | The Cost of the program versus the Benefits of |
| Carolina Abecedarian Project is an intensive early | | | | the Program: |
| childhood intervention program. The Abecedarian | | | | The project cost approximately $10,000 per child, |
| Project focuses on low-income, at-risk children | | | | per year. The project was financed using federal, |
| between the ages of six weeks and five years. | | | | state, and local public education dollars. The |
| The Abecedarian Project came about as a result | | | | children that participated were evaluated |
| of a small group of scientist in 1966, at the | | | | periodically through age 21 for cognitive, academic, |
| University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who | | | | and social effects of early childhood education. |
| were committed to improving the lives of children | | | | These children received early childhood education |
| and their families through research, teaching and | | | | for five days a week, year round. |
| other social services. The Abecedarian Project | | | | The following is the surprising results of this |
| initially started with a group of preschoolers. The | | | | comprehensive study: |
| program enrolled 111 infants between 1972 and | | | | * A conservative estimate of $100,000 in savings |
| 1977. Fifty-Seven of these infants were randomly | | | | to society can be produced per child by an |
| assigned to receive center-based early educational | | | | investment of $10,000 per year per child. Savings |
| intervention. The remaining Fifty-Four infants were | | | | accrue through reduced spending on special |
| placed in a control group. | | | | education, welfare, and juvenile crime. |
| The curriculum entailed educational "games" that | | | | - Special education services for those in the |
| emphasized development skills in cognition and | | | | program were half as much as those in a |
| language. For example, infant games were age | | | | comparison group at age fifteen (24 percent |
| appropriate adult-child interactions that included | | | | versus 48 percent). |
| talking to the child, showing pictures or toys, and | | | | - Children who participated earned significantly |
| offering infants a chance to react to their | | | | higher scores in both reading and math. |
| environment. Activities were individualized for each | | | | - The age-21 follow-up found that young adults |
| child. As children aged, the "games" became more | | | | who received the early educational child care |
| conceptual and skill-based, but the program | | | | consistently scored higher on tests of cognitive |
| always emphasized individual development. Children | | | | development, fared better on reading and |
| also received their healthcare on site from a staff | | | | mathematics achievement tests, and were more |
| pediatrician. | | | | likely to attend college. |
| The Astonishing Results of the Abecedarian | | | | - Forty percent were still in school, compared with |
| Project: | | | | 20 percent of the control group, and 65 percent |
| The infants that participated in the program | | | | were employed, compared with 50 percent of |
| received treatment until the age of 8 years old. In | | | | the control group. |
| order to properly assess the program's benefits, | | | | - Thirty-five percent had graduated from college |
| the children were monitored and received | | | | or were enrolled in college, compared with 14 |
| follow-up assessments at age 12, 15. At all three | | | | percent of the others. |
| ages (8, 12, 15) the children who received the | | | | - Members of the study group were an average |
| treatment from birth to age five had higher I.Q. | | | | of 19 years old when their first child was born, |
| scores. These children also scored higher on | | | | compared with 17 for the control group. |
| achievement test in math and reading during | | | | The projected cost-benefit ratio was 2.5:1. This |
| elementary and middle school years. They also | | | | ratio states that this project doesn't cost the |
| had lower levels of grade retention and | | | | taxpayers anything. In fact, it actually saves |
| placements in special education classes. | | | | taxpayers money. The projected ratio means |
| Additionally, the children who received the | | | | that for every dollar spent on the program, |
| intervention scored 1.8 grades years higher in | | | | taxpayers save approximately $2.50. This is |
| reading and math as young adults. | | | | savings is realized through fact that there would |
| - Thirty-six percent of these children were more | | | | be less of a need for educational and government |
| likely to attend a four-year college, compared to | | | | services, and reduced health care costs. |
| only 14 percent of the children who did not | | | | I plan on doing much more research on the topic |
| receive intervention. | | | | of early childhood development. If the results are |
| - Twenty-six percent of the children who | | | | as promising as they seem, then the African |
| received intervention were less likely to have had | | | | American community must make a serious effort |
| their first child at age 18 or younger, compared to | | | | to have early childhood development programs |
| forty-five percent of the children who didn't | | | | implemented in their respective communities; not |
| received intervention. | | | | only for a few children, but for all children. |