Para nuestros niños
Expanding and Improving Early Education for Hispanics
Executive Report

March 2007

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics
La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Staff
L. Scott Miller
Executive Director
Amara Scott Andrews
Director of Strategic Communications
Delis Cuéllar
Research Associate
Bryant Jensen
Research Associate

Consultants
Margie K. Shields
EditorPauline A. Hall
Graphic Designer

SupportFunded by a grant from theFoundation for Child Development

Supported in part by theA. L. Mailman Family Foundation
Marguerite Casey Foundation
Peppercorn Foundation
Winthrop Rockefeller Foundation

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

Para nuestros niños
National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics
La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana“If our American way of life
fails the child, it fails us all.”Pearl S. Buck

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Summary
Raising Hispanic achievement is one of the most important educational priorities for the nation. To
maintain a strong economy and be competitive internationally, we need all our nation’s children to
be prepared to participate fully in today’s technology-based society. Yet, despite some progress,
academic outcomes for Hispanic children remain low. We can—and must—do more to accelerate
the rate of their educational progress in the years and decades ahead. Thus, the National Task
Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics was established in 2004 to study the challenges
to academic achievement for Hispanic children and to develop recommendations to expand andimprove their educational opportunities during the period from birth through age eight.
Low academic achievement patterns of Hispanic students are well established by the end of the
primary grades. As part of its work, the Task Force commissioned a study to analyze data from alarge national sample of children from kindergarten through fifth grade. The study found that,
despite extensive efforts since the mid-1980s to raise their academic achievement, Hispanic students continue to achieve at much lower levels than Whites across the K-5 years. Principal findings of the study include the following:• Hispanic children started kindergarten well behind White youngsters on
measures of reading and math skills;• Although they gained some ground over the K-5 years, Hispanic children were still
well behind in reading and math at the end of the fifth grade; and• Achievement differences between Hispanics and Whites across the K-5 years wereclosely associated with differences in social class.
The most promising opportunities for raising Hispanic achievement are in the early childhood
years. Research indicates that programs at the infant/toddler, prekindergarten, and early elementary levels can help reduce the academic achievement gap between Hispanic and White children.
But much more must be done to ensure that the most disadvantaged Hispanic children haveaccess to these programs, and that the programs are designed and staffed in ways best-suited tomeeting their needs.
Actions by the public and private sectors are needed to bring about change. The Task Force makes
several recommendations to state governments and the federal government, as well as private
foundations, Hispanic organizations, and education researchers, outlining the actions needed to
expand and improve educational opportunities for young Hispanic children. Recommendations
focus on:• Increasing Hispanic children’s access to infant/toddler programs, prekindergarten programs, and summer programs during the early elementary years, giving high priority
to Hispanic children from low socioeconomic circumstances, especially those who are
English language learners in immigrant families;• Increasing the number of Spanish-speaking teachers and language acquisition specialists; and• Increasing efforts to design, test, and evaluate infant/toddler, prekindergarten, andearly elementary school language and literacy development strategies for low socioeconomic Hispanics from Spanish-speaking homes.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

1Introduction
The mission of the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics is straightforward: to develop recommendations for expanding and improving early education for Hispanic children. This mission is important for several reasons. The Hispanic population is large and growing
rapidly. Closing the “achievement gap” between Hispanic and White children is essential for thefull participation of Hispanics in all sectors of our technology-based society. Also, closing this gap
is crucial for the long-term economic health of the nation. Moreover, some of the most promising
approaches to raising achievement are in the early childhood years, during the period from birththrough age eight. A final reason, though less frequently cited, is also worth emphasizing: Oursociety not only has an enormous opportunity to make meaningful progress in improving academic outcomes for Hispanic children, it is also simply the right thing to do. There has been some
progress, but far too many Hispanic youngsters still are not getting off to a good start and, as aresult, their life chances are being truncated unnecessarily. We can—and must—do more toaccelerate the rate of their educational progress in the years and decades ahead.
Although beyond the scope of its mission, the Task Force recognizes that improving academic outcomes for many Hispanic and other children will require much more effective responses to a widearray of societal issues in addition to expanding and improving their educational opportunities. For
example, extreme family poverty is a source of family duress, family instability, family mobility andhealth problems that can undermine learning, even when children attend high quality preschools
and elementary schools.1 The movement for schools to provide social services in areas such as
health and child care reflects the importance of these matters.

Hispanic Children Are an Important Asset for Our Nation’s Future
Economically, politically, and socially, Hispanic children will play an increasingly important role inour nation’s future. Just in terms of sheer numbers, their impact will be significant. An analysis
commissioned by the Task Force of the demographics of children in 2000 found that, among the33.4 million children in the United States in the 0-8 age group, 6.8 million were Hispanic—20%of the total.2 It is projected that Hispanics will be more than a quarter of this age segment as earlyas 2030 (see Figure 1). Consistent with this projection, 23% of the babies born in the UnitedStates in 2004 had Hispanic mothers, up from 21% in 2000.3 This rapid growth of the number ofyoung Hispanic children is being driven by the high, sustained level of immigration; the large
number of young adults who are in their family formation years; and the relatively high total
fertility rate among Hispanic women (mainly among those who are immigrants).42

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Figure 1: Percentage of U.S. Children Ages 0-8 in Specified Racial/Ethnic Groups
1980 - 2050

100

80

60

40

20

0

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

2040

2050

Source: Hernandez, D. (2006). Young Hispanic Children in the U.S.: A Demographic Portrait Based on Census 2000.
Report to the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.

Moreover, Hispanics are becoming an increasing presence across the country. Historically, Hispanics
have been concentrated in a few states, and that is still the case. In 2000, about four-fifths ofyoung Hispanic children—over 5.3 million youngsters—lived in just nine states: California, Texas,
New York, Florida, Illinois, Arizona, New Jersey, Colorado, and New Mexico. Half were living in justtwo states: California and Texas. However, the growing numbers of young Hispanic children inother states was becoming evident as well. In 24 states, at least one in eight of the children in the
0-8 age group was Hispanic.5 The growth has been very rapid in several states that had small
Hispanic populations as recently as 15 years ago. For example, in both Georgia and North Carolina,
the share of the babies born to Hispanic mothers grew from 2% in 1990 to 14% in 2004.6
As Hispanics account for a growing proportion of our population, Hispanic children are becoming
an increasingly important asset economically. Over the next few decades, the number of workers
versus non-workers is projected to decline significantly. In 2000, there were 106 workers for every

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

3

100 non-workers. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that by 2050, there will be only 90
workers for every 100 non-workers.7 To maintain a strong economy and be competitive internationally, it is critical for all our nation’s children, including Hispanic children, to receive the preparation they need today to become our nation’s productive workforce tomorrow.
In addition, Hispanic children are an increasingly important asset for our nation politically andsocially. Most young Hispanics were born in the United States and thus are U.S. citizens(see Figure 2). As a growing proportion of the future electorate, it is important for them tobecome informed, engaged citizens and to participate fully in society. Moreover, Hispanic families
have many strengths that can contribute to our social fabric. Efforts to build on these strengths
and promote greater social equity will be essential to creating a society characterized by social
cohesion rather than divisiveness.
Figure 2: Percentage of Hispanic Children Who Are Immigrants versus Born in the United Statesa For second generation children, one or both parents may be immigrants.
b For third generation children, the category includes not only children who have two U.S-born parents, but also those who may
have U.S.-born grandparents, great grandparents, and so forth. (That is, the category includes children who are technically third
generation as well as those who are technically, perhaps, fourth or ninth generation.)

Source: Hernandez, D. (2006). Young Hispanic Children in the U.S.: A Demographic Portrait Based on Census 2000.
Report to the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.

4

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Hispanic Families Face Challenges, But Also Bring Strengths
Many Hispanic families face significant challenges in supporting their children’s efforts to succeedin school. A number of demographic characteristics of the Hispanic population—such as low
parental education, poverty, and lack of English skills—tend to be correlated with children’s lower
academic achievement in comparison with White children.8

Challenges faced by Hispanic families:
Many Hispanic parents have low education levels.
Throughout the industrialized world, children from families in which the parents have relatively little formal schooling are markedly overrepresented among low academic achievers in school; and,those from families in which the parents have a great deal of higher education are heavily overrepresented among students who excel academically.9 Given that pattern, probably the single
most important demographic aspect of the young Hispanic population is that, on average, they
have parents with relatively little formal education. In 2000, almost 44% of the Hispanic children
nationally had mothers who had not graduated from high school compared to only 9% of theWhites.10 Less than 10% of the Hispanic children had a mother with a bachelor’s degree or more,while 30% of the Whites had a mother who was a college graduate.11

Many Hispanic children live in poverty.
A much larger percentage of young Hispanic children than Whites live in poverty. Among children
in the 0-8 age segment in 2000, about 26% of the Hispanics were below the poverty line compared to only 9% of Whites. The gap also was very large for children in low-income families (withlow-income defined as below twice the official poverty line). About 58% of all young Hispanic
children were from low-income families, while this was the case for 27% of Whites.12 These highpoverty and low-income rates were not primarily a function of high unemployment rates—about
93% of the young Hispanic children in 2000 had fathers who were employed full- or part-time.
Rather, they were mainly due to low wage rates and relatively high levels of part-time employment, which were related to the low average educational attainment levels of the Hispanic fathers
and mothers.

Many Hispanic children are English language learners.
Many young Hispanic children are from families in which Spanish is the sole or primary language
spoken in the home. As a result, many of these children start school with little or no knowledgeof English. For example, in a large national sample of children who started kindergarten in 1998,
about 30% of the Hispanic youngsters were not proficient enough in oral English to be given an
English language reading readiness assessment at the beginning of kindergarten.13 For most ofthese children, lack of English skills was an educational “risk” factor in addition to those associated with being from families with low socioeconomic (SES) circumstances. Nearly three-quarters
were from families with low incomes and/or with parents with relatively little formal schooling.14
Despite the challenges, Hispanic families and communities are often typified by enormous
strengths that contribute to society and serve as a resource for Hispanic youngsters. One of the

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

5most important of these strengths is familismo, a conception of the family in which family ties
are very strong and family members are fully committed to the support of each other. For Hispanic
children, this means that their parents and other family members are usually deeply and actively
concerned about their educational, emotional, and material well-being.15

Strengths of Hispanic families and communities:
Most Hispanic families are strongly committed to education.
Similar to other groups in the United States, Hispanic parents have consistently demonstrated avery strong commitment to their children’s education. Hispanic parents who are immigrants withlittle formal education are especially aware of the need for their children to succeed in school.16
This commitment to education includes not only school academics, but also moral
and social development.17 The latter, of course, are essential components of education in a
democracy—components that are often given too little attention as our society works to raise
academic achievement.18

Many Hispanic families provide for strong emotional well-being.
Two parents are present in most Hispanic immigrant families. Moreover, there is evidence thatyoung children in Mexican immigrant families—with their strong structures—enjoy high levels of
mental health. Apart from its inherent benefits, emotional well-being is valuable educationally,
allowing the children to enter school able to work well in the classroom with their teachersand peers.19

Most Hispanic families have fathers who are employed.
Even though many of the fathers in Hispanic families have little formal education, the overwhelming majority is employed and striving to provide for the material needs of their children.
These characteristics are very important indicators of Hispanic parents’ capacities to support thehealthy development of their children. They also mean that, as our society works to expand andimprove the quality of early childhood education available to Hispanic children, equivalently strong
efforts will continue to be made on the family side, even though many of the families do not havesome of the resources typically available to middle class and high SES families.

Hispanic Achievement Lags Behind Whites through Elementary School
and Beyond
Extensive efforts to improve minority educational outcomes have been undertaken at all levels of
the education system since the mid-1980s. The federal government’s No Child Left Behind Act of2001 is one of the most visible recent legislative initiatives with a heavy emphasis on raisingkindergarten through twelfth grade (K-12) achievement of Hispanic and other minority students.
Nevertheless, large achievement gaps persist. Hispanic students have had much lower levels of
academic achievement than Whites since national achievement data first became available byrace/ethnicity in the mid-1960s.20 Data from the federal government’s National Assessment for

6

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Educational Progress reading and mathematics assessments on the elementary and secondary
levels indicate that the achievement gaps are about the same size now as they were in 1990.21 On
measures of reading readiness, math concepts, and general knowledge, Hispanic youngsters are
already behind their White peers when they start kindergarten, and continue to lag behind Whites
at the end of the primary grades.22 Hispanics are overrepresented among students with such low
achievement that they are at-risk of eventually not graduating from high school, and they are
underrepresented among those
who are academically well prepared to attend college.23
Moreover, not only is Hispanic students’ academic achievement low
compared to that of Whites andsome other groups in the UnitedStates, results from international
assessments make it clear that,compared with other nations,
Hispanics are achieving far below
industrial society norms. While
U.S. White students have generally
had average or above averagescores on these international
assessments, U.S. Hispanic (and African American) students have had well below average scores.24
Given Hispanics’ large and growing share of the U.S. population, the nation’s competitive statusinternationally will increasingly depend on bringing Hispanics fully into the mainstream of industrial society academic achievement patterns.
To better understand the underlying factors contributing to this achievement gap among Hispanic
children, the Task Force commissioned a study of kindergarten through fifth grade (K-5) reading
and mathematics achievement using data from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study,
Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K). This study provides a much more detailed picture thanhas been available to date of how Hispanic academic achievement compares to the achievementof Whites in the early years of school.
Overall, the study found that Hispanic children started kindergarten well behind White youngsters
on measures of reading and math skills, and that they were still well behind in both subjects at
the end of the fifth grade, but the gaps were somewhat smaller, as illustrated by the reading data
presented in Figure 3. (The data on students’ math skills are similar.) Even with 30% excluded that
did not have oral English skills strong enough for them to take the English-language reading
readiness assessment at the start of kindergarten, the data show that Hispanic children lagged
well behind third generation Whites in all skill areas both at the start of kindergarten and at theend of fifth grade.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

7Figure 3: Reading Skills at the Start of Kindergarten and at the End of Fifth Grade

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 6

Level 7

Level 8

Level 9

Key: Percent scoring at or above each of the following ECLS-K reading proficiency levels for K-5 years cLevel 1: Recognition of letters

Level 6: Literal inference from words in text

Level 2: Understanding beginning sounds of words

Level 7: Extrapolating from text to derive meaning

Level 3: Understanding ending sounds of words

Level 8: Evaluating and interpreting beyond text

Level 4: Sight recognition of words

Level 9: Evaluating nonfiction

Level 5: Comprehension of words in context

a The Hispanic data do not include the 30% of the Hispanic children in the ECLS-K sample that did not have oral English skills strong enoughfor them to take the English-language reading readiness assessment as they entered kindergarten.
b The White students in the study were limited to those who were third generation Americans, because they represent the “baseline” groupwithin the White population.
c Levels defined in Princiotta, D., and Flanagan, K. (2006). Findings from the Fifth-Grade Follow-up of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study,
Kindergarten Class of 1998-99. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Source: Reardon, S.F., and Galindo, C. (2006). Patterns of Hispanic Students’ Math and English Literacy Test Scores. Report to
the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.

8

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

The study also looked at the achievement patterns of Hispanics for a number of subpopulations,
including: 1) low, middle, and high SES Hispanics; 2) several Hispanic national origin groups, suchas those of Mexican and Central American descent; and 3) first, second, and third generation
Mexican Americans. Key findings from the analysis of ECLS-K data for these subpopulations
include the following:

The achievement differences across the K-5 years were closely associated with social
class differences.
For both Hispanics and Whites, children from low SES circumstances had much lower reading andmath achievement than children from high SES circumstances. But, while only 8% of Whites werefrom families in the lowest SES quintile, 36% of the Hispanics were. In contrast, 30% of theWhite children were in the highest SES quintile compared to 9% of the Hispanics. Despite the critical importance of these differences in social class, the analysis also found that modest-sized gaps
existed between Hispanics and Whites in all social class segments at the start of kindergarten, butthat a mixed picture emerged by the end of the fifth grade.25 In the higher SES segments,
Hispanics continued to lag behind Whites somewhat, but in the lower SES segments, fifth grade
Hispanics fared about the same as their White counterparts. However, if the scores of the 30%
excluded at the start of kindergarten due to limited English skills were included in the analysis,
gaps would have emerged among the fifth grade lower SES segments as well.26 Such findings are
consistent with another recent national study of high school reading skills that found fairly large
within-class achievement gaps between Hispanic and White sophomores at all SES levels.27

Mexican American children had the lowest reading and math achievement levels
among Hispanic children from the various Hispanic national origin groups.
In terms of their heritage, about two-thirds of Hispanic children are of Mexican descent (65%).
The other third is quite diverse, including children of Puerto Rican (9%), Central American (7%),
South American (6%), Dominican (3%), and Cuban (2%) origins.28 Reading and math achievement varies considerably among these groups. For example, the study found that those of
Mexican and Central American heritage lagged well behind Whites in reading. In contrast, thereading skill patterns for those of South American heritage were virtually identical to those of
Whites. Those of Cuban and Puerto Rican descent were close to the White pattern as well. These
achievement differences among Hispanic groups were related to SES differences. Children ofSouth American and Cuban origins had parent education levels that were generally similar to
those of Whites, while the other Hispanic groups had much lower parent education levels.

Third generation Mexican Americans had higher reading and math achievement
than first and second generation Mexican Americans at the start of kindergarten
and across the elementary years.
These better outcomes for third generation Mexican American children were related to the factthat they had stronger family SES profiles than first and second generation Mexican Americans.
For instance, more of the third generation children were from families in the top two SES

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

9groups.29 Other studies have also found evidence of intergenerational progress. For example,
between 1970 and 2000, the percentage of native-born 25 to 29-year-old Hispanics with highschool degrees grew from 48% to 79%, and those with college degrees grew from less than 5%
to about 16%. In contrast, there was essentially no change in these statistics for their foreignborn counterparts.30
Group advancement has historically been an intergenerational process, related to improvements infamily SES profiles across generations. This is true for Hispanics, just as it has been for othergroups throughout history: The data indicate that the outcomes for Hispanic children are improving with each generation. However, unlike in the past, today’s technological economy demands ahighly-educated workforce, and we must do what we can to accelerate the educational
advancement of Hispanic children as much as possible to enable their full participation in all
sectors of society.

Early Childhood Programs Offer Opportunities for Raising
Hispanic Achievement
Since the mid-1980s, there has been a great deal of effort to develop education strategies that
can help raise student achievement. At the elementary and secondary levels, these efforts havebeen focused heavily, albeit not exclusively, on raising the achievement of at-risk low SES students.
In addition, over the past decade, there have been enormous efforts to expand and improveprekindergarten (pre-K) opportunities for low SES children, especially those from minority groups.
Such efforts have added appreciably to the knowledge base on which educators can draw toimprove school readiness and to raise academic achievement for many Hispanic children who aredisproportionately represented among the low SES groups. However, much remains to be learned
about how to improve infant/toddler programs, pre-K, and early elementary school for these children, particularly English language learners from low SES families.

Infant/Toddler Programs
School readiness and school achievement patterns have much of their foundations in the period
from birth to three, a time when the home and family typically play the dominant role in thedevelopment of children. One of the most important ways in which families can promote school
readiness is by providing language and literacy development opportunities. The more parents talkand read to their children, for example, the larger the children’s vocabularies are at age three. Inturn, the size of children’s vocabularies at age three is a good predictor not only of their reading
skills at the end of the first grade, but also of their reading comprehension skills on through highschool.31 Moreover, research has established that, in general, parents with college and graduate
degrees provide many more of these language and literacy development opportunities totheir children than parents with high school degrees or less. Children with well-educated parents
start school with larger vocabularies and stronger prereading skills than children with lesswell-educated parents.32
As noted earlier, compared with White mothers, a much higher percentage of Hispanic mothers
has not completed high school and a much lower percentage has a college degree. In addition,
research has found that Hispanic mothers generally talk and read less to their children than White

10

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

mothers, beginning in the infant/toddler period, and that there tend to be fewer literacy-relatedmaterials, such as children’s books, available in Hispanic homes than in White homes.33 Some
researchers have estimated that these and related parenting differences account for between onequarter and one-half of racial/ethnic readiness gaps at the start of kindergarten.34 Clearly, these areconsequential differences for Hispanic children.
Infant/toddler programs can provide a strategy to supplement the language and literacy development opportunities in the home, expanding access to this very important factor in school readiness.
However, only a relatively small number of children is served by infant/toddler programs explicitly
designed, at least in part, to promote school readiness. The largest federal government programwith a substantial education component for infants and toddlers is Early Head Start (see Box 1).
Early Head Start has recently been evaluated through a randomized trial involving 17 programs inwhich Hispanics were well represented. The evaluation found promising language and cognitive
development benefits for the children by age three,35 which suggests that well designed programsfor infants and toddlers have the potential to help improve the school readiness of many low SES
children, including Hispanics (see Box 1).

Box 1
A Promising Program for Infants and Toddlers: Early Head Start
Early Head Start serves mothers as well as their children. The program was established in the mid-1990s to promote healthy prenatal outcomes for pregnant women,enhance the development of very young children, and promote healthy family
functioning. Early Head Start is operating in more than 700 locations across thecountry and currently enrolls about 62,000 families with infants and toddlers. There
are three basic types of Eary Head Start programs—those that are home-based(with services delivered exclusively in the home), those that are center-based, andthose that offer both home-based and center-based services. Similar to Head Start,
Early Head Start programs offer comprehensive services, including parent education,
health care, and childcare.
Program evaluation findings: Language and cognitive development benefits
by age three.
For more information, see the Early Head Start web site at:
http://www.headstartinfo.org/infocenter/ehs_tkit3.htm

Prekindergarten Programs
Over the past two decades, there has been growing evidence that high quality pre-K programs canmake meaningful improvements in the school readiness of low SES children and help them achieve
better long-term educational outcomes in school.36 More recently, the proliferation and expansion ofstate-funded pre-K programs has proven invaluable to the study of these programs, as their structure and design vary considerably and many are being rigorously evaluated.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

11For example, there are full- and half-day programs as well as programs that serve children for one
year and for two years. There are different mixes of programs in terms of the extent that they
operate through schools and through other center-based entities. There are variations amongstate programs in teacher-child ratios and in teacher education requirements. Different curricularand instructional approaches are being tested. The per-student investments being made by thestates also vary considerably. Some programs are serving only low SES children, while others
include non-poor children as well. Of great importance to Hispanics, experience is being gainedwith both English-only and dual-language (English and Spanish) strategies for pre-K programs thatserve Hispanic children.

The early results of evaluations of some state programs are already available. Among the mostimportant early findings are from an evaluation of Oklahoma’s universal pre-K program (see Box2). The evaluation looked at the pre-K programs in the Tulsa public schools, which serve a raciallyand ethnically diverse group of children, including many Hispanics. Also, because it is a universal
program, there is information on the benefits for both poor and non-poor youngsters.37
Significantly, the evaluation has documented benefits for children from all racial/ethnic groups,
including Hispanics, and for both poor and non-poor children. Substantial cognitive gains were
found on assessments of prereading, prewriting, and math reasoning skills. In “age-equivalent”
terms, the participants had scores equal to those usually registered by children four to eightmonths older, depending on the skill area. Overall, the gains were not quite as large as the bestmodel programs, but they were bigger than the average gains documented in evaluations ofsome other state programs.38 Over the next 5 to 10 years, more will be learned about the extent
to which there are long-term gains.

12

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Box 2
A Promising Pre-K Program: Oklahoma’s UPK
Oklahoma is one of the few states that offer a universal pre-K (UPK) program as avoluntary part of its public education system. A larger share of four-year-olds
attends either a state- or federally-funded pre-K program in Oklahoma than in any
other state. Moreover, Oklahoma established high standards for its pre-K program.
Key quality program standards include:•

early childhood certified teachers who hold at least a bachelor’s degree, pass an
Early Childhood subject area competency test, and are paid on the same salaryschedule as other K-12 teachers;•

low class size (20) and an adult-child ratio of 1:10;•

encouragement of family involvement;•age- and developmentally-appropriate curriculum standards that align with state
K-12 standards; and•professional development (continuing education) required for all certified personnel and also provided by school districts for teacher assistants.

Program evaluation findings: Substantial gains in reading and math, including for
Hispanic children.
For more information, see the Oklahoma web site at:
http://www.sde.state.ok.us/pro/prek

For quality pre-K programs to benefit Hispanic youngsters, however, it will also be important tounderstand and address the barriers to access. Both poor and non-poor Hispanics have long been
underrepresented among children who attend some form of center-based child care and pre-K
programs.39 Although the reasons for the relatively low attendance of Hispanics have not been
firmly established, one factor appears to be lack of capacity. In an analysis commissioned by the
Task Force of the pre-K supply-demand situation for Hispanics in two large urban areas (LosAngeles and Chicago), researchers found an overall shortage of center-based pre-K slots in
Hispanic neighborhoods.40 Other factors that were cited in another recent survey include parents’lack of knowledge about the programs available in their communities and the inability to afford
the cost.41

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

13Early Elementary Programs
Over the past twenty years, many elementary school strategies for raising student achievement
have been designed and tested. Much of this work has focused on improving outcomes for disadvantaged children, including Hispanics and other minorities. Recognizing the difficulty of making
substantive changes in schools, many of these strategies have attempted to improve a number of
aspects of elementary schools at the same time, including: curriculum and instruction in key areas
such as reading and math; student assessment; school leadership and management; staff development; and parent involvement.42
A study commissioned by the Task Force on a number of these strategies found that several arecontributing to higher achievement among Hispanics in the primary grades. Overall, the gains
tend to be modest in size.43 Nevertheless, the study found that the most promising strategies had
a strong literacy focus that can be culturally and linguistically tailored to the needs of Hispanic students.44 One of the strategies with the most extensive evidence of effectiveness, Success for All,
has a Spanish-English bilingual version of its program. These findings are consistent with growing
evidence that Hispanic children who begin school as English language learners generally learn
more if instruction takes place in both English and their primary language, Spanish (see Box 3).45

Box 3
A Promising K-3 Strategy: English-plus-Spanish
English-plus-Spanish (EPS) refers to the wide range of formal and informal
approaches to using both English and Spanish in the classroom. An example of an
informal approach would be classrooms in which instruction is mainly in English,
but teachers routinely use Spanish extensively to clarify points or ask questions
when the students’ knowledge of English is too limited for the exchange. Students
also would use varying amounts of both English and Spanish in their own conversations in the classroom. Transitional bilingual education is an example of a common formal approach to EPS education. With it, Hispanic English language learners
are taught most subjects (math, science, etc.) in Spanish for two or three years
while they are learning English.
Research findings: EPS approaches produce higher achievement, on average, thanEnglish-only immersion strategies.
For more information, see García, E., and Jensen. B. (2007). Language
Development and Early Education of Young Hispanic Children in the United States:
A Research Synthesis. Tempe, AZ: National Task Force on Early Childhood
Education for Hispanics at: http: //www.ecehispanic.org.

14

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

A major challenge for schools in their efforts to reduce achievement gaps between disadvantaged
students and their middle class counterparts is that disadvantaged children tend to lose ground inreading and math relative to middle class youngsters during the summer months when school is
not in session.46 The educational community has recently increased its efforts to address this issue.
In its review of research in this area, the Task Force found some evidence that multi-year summer
programs—those that students attend for two or three successive summers—can help raise theachievement of many disadvantaged children during the primary grades.47 This is an approach thatneeds to be tested more extensively, including with Hispanic children.

Recommendations for Action
The Task Force’s mission has been to develop recommendations for expanding and improving earlychildhood education for Hispanics. If the educational advancement of Hispanics is to be accelerated, young Hispanic children need both more and better opportunities to learn during their earlychildhood years. To accomplish this, improvements are needed in three main areas: increasing
Hispanic children’s access to programs; increasing the number of Spanish-speaking teachers andlanguage acquisition specialists; and increasing efforts to design, test, and evaluate language andliteracy development strategies. In addition, widespread support—from both the public and private sectors—will be required. Thus, the Task Force’s recommendations are directed to five keygroups: state governments, the federal government, private foundations, Hispanic organizations,and education researchers.

Increasing Hispanic Access to Early Childhood Education Programs
Early childhood education opportunities need to be expanded for all Hispanic children throughgreater access to quality programs at all levels: infant/toddler programs, pre-K programs, and early
elementary school and summer programs. The Task Force strongly recommends giving high priority to expanding access for Hispanic children from low socioeconomic circumstances, especiallythose who are English language learners in immigrant families, as these are the Hispanic children
with the lowest achievement patterns in school. Nevertheless, the Task Force recommends thatearly childhood education opportunities be expanded for all Hispanics, because middle class
Hispanic children also achieve at somewhat lower levels than their White counterparts.

To increase Hispanic access to quality early childhood education programs, theTask Force recommends the following:
State governments should—•

Expand and increase infant/toddler programs in their states that areserving, or have the potential to serve, large numbers of Hispanic children
and their parents;•

Continue to expand their state-funded prekindergarten initiatives, with theobjective of creating voluntary universal pre-K systems in most states within thenext 10 to 20 years.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

15•

Support efforts to provide information to Hispanic parents on the availability of
pre-K programs in their communities; and•Provide school districts in their states with resources to fund multi-year summer
programs for their low SES students on a voluntary basis.

The federal government should—•

Undertake a substantial expansion of Early Head Start and Head Start that will
help ensure that the low SES Hispanic children have greater access to highquality infant/toddler and pre-K programs.

Increasing the Number of Spanish-speaking Teachers andLanguage Acquisition Specialists
The evidence indicates that increasing the number of teachers who are proficient in English andSpanish can increase the achievement of Hispanic children who are not proficient in English when
they start school. Because large numbers of Hispanic children are English language learners, there
is a pressing need for teachers who are proficient in English and Spanish. One approach might be
to attempt to recruit many more Hispanics who are bilingual into teaching. Since there is a limited
pool of potential Hispanic teachers who could meet this need,48 an additional approach might be
to develop programs to help monolingual English speakers become proficient in Spanish in order
to communicate more effectively with their Hispanic students and their parents. In circumstancesin which the students are linguistically very diverse or when only a small number speak Spanish,
the best course may be to make extensive use of teaching specialists who are experts in strategies
that can help students become proficient in a second language.49 For example, research is beginning to identify areas in which English language learners may require modifications and accommodations in instructional practices, if they are to maximize their progress.50 Having second language acquisition specialists available in school districts to provide ongoing training and advice tokindergarten through third grade (K-3) teachers would be one possible approach.

To increase the numbers of Spanish-speaking teachers and language acquisition
specialists, the Task Force recommends the following:
State governments should—

16•

Initiate programs to increase: 1) the number of pre-K and K-3 teachers in theirstates who are proficient in English and Spanish; and 2) the number of pre-K
and K-3 teaching specialists in second language acquisition; and•Support pay and benefit levels for pre-K teachers and administrators that are
equal to those of public school teachers and administrators as a means of providing the economic incentives to recruit and maintain a well-educated, reasonably stable group of prekindergarten professionals.

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Hispanic organizations should—•

Jointly develop detailed proposals for state governments for programs to increase
the number of English- and Spanish-proficient early childhood educators.

Education researchers should—•

Propose a set of tests on the use of second language acquisition specialists forschools and classrooms in which English-plus-Spanish strategies would not
typically be appropriate.

Increasing Efforts to Design,Test, and Evaluate Language and Literacy
Development Strategies
Better learning opportunities for Hispanic children also means providing infant/toddler programs,
pre-K programs, and early elementary school programs that do a better job of providing activities
and experiences that can help Hispanic youngsters to develop language, numeracy, and otherknowledge and skills that are similar to the activities and experiences of those youngsters fromfamilies in which the parents have a great deal of formal education as well substantial economic
and other resources that support learning.
More opportunities to learn also literally means providing more time for young Hispanic children
to acquire the knowledge and skills that provide the foundations for academic success. For somechildren, it may be necessary for them to have access to programs at all levels: infant/toddler programs, pre-K when they are three and four, and K-3 education that includes extended-day programs and/or multi-year summer programs.
Finally, for the many young Hispanic children from immigrant families who are English language
learners, better also means having learning environments that make more effective and respectful
use of their primary language and of the cultures of their families.
Thus, the Task Force recommends that large investments be made in efforts to design, test andevaluate infant/toddler, pre-K and K-3 language and literacy development strategies for low SES
Hispanics. These efforts should include extensive experimentation with the amount of time low
SES Hispanic and other youngsters spend in these programs. High priority should be given to
determining how best to build on the primary language of low SES Hispanic children from
Spanish-speaking homes. Although currently available strategies provide valuable benefits, there ismuch room for improvement. One of the consistent findings of evaluations of early childhood
education program strategies is that even the best ones produce modest developmental and academic achievement benefits. This should be expected. Although the Task Force believes much better approaches can be developed, the hard work of raising achievement will continue to be anincremental, cumulative process. Developmental advances for infants and toddlers can contributeto further gains in pre-K, which in turn can contribute to higher achievement at the K-3 level.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

17

To increase efforts to design, test, and evaluate language and literacy development
strategies, the Task Force recommends the following:
State governments should—•

Establish information systems that would be used by school districts and state
education departments to disaggregate their students into subpopulations
defined simultaneously in terms of race/ethnicity, parent education level, family
income, generational status (whether they are first, second, or third generation
children), and primary language spoken in the home.

The federal government should—•

Increase investments in efforts to design, test and evaluate infant/toddler, pre-K,
and K-3 language and literacy development strategies for low SES Hispanics;•

Underwrite tests of programs designed to produce large increases in thenumber of: 1) English and Spanish proficient and culturally knowledgeable
pre-K and K-3 teachers; and 2) pre-K and K-3 teaching specialists in second
language acquisition;•

Create assessments of Spanish language proficiency and development for
infants, toddlers, and preschool-age Hispanic children from immigrant families inwhich Spanish is the primary language of the home; and improve assessmentsof English proficiency for Hispanic English language learners at the pre-K and
K-3 levels;•

Expand investment in longitudinal studies of young children, such as the ECLSK, in a manner that allows for much more extensive analysis of Hispanics andother groups that are achieving below U.S. norms; and•Expand U.S. participation in international assessments of student achievement
in a manner that would allow much more detailed monitoring of how
different segments of the nation’s population compare to students in otherindustrialized nations.

Private foundations should—

18•

Fund long-term efforts to design, test and evaluate infant/toddler, pre-K, and K3 language and literacy development strategies for Hispanic children from all
SES levels and from immigrant/nonimmigrant families; and•Work to create some new foundations that would specialize in funding in theseareas, and thereby ensure that sustained investments in strategy development
would be made over the long-term.

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

Hispanic organizations should—•

Jointly develop a set of recommendations for specific new or substantially modified approaches to infant/toddler programs, pre-K programs, and K-3 programsfor Hispanics that should be tested with funding from the federal government
or private foundations; and•Become leaders in providing literacy development information, materials, andother support to Hispanic parents in all SES segments.

Education researchers should—•

Propose specific combinations of tests of infant/toddler, pre-K, and K-3
approaches to language development that would provide varying amounts andkinds of such opportunities for low SES children, including low SES Hispanics;•

Suggest a set of tests of English-plus-Spanish approaches for the infant/toddler,
preschool and K-3 years that would be designed to provide much better information on their effectiveness and their feasibility of use; and•Suggest a set of tests of promising strategies, which would be designed todetermine what kind of variations in outcomes should be expected with theiruse on a widespread basis over time.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

19

More Information on the Task Force’s Findings and Recommendations
Para Nuestros Niños: Expanding and Improving Early Education for Hispanics, Main Reportpresents the detailed analysis, findings, and recommendations on which the Para Nuestros Niños
Executive Report is based. The Main Report can be downloaded from the Task Force’s website at:
http:www.ecehispanic.org.
In addition, as referenced throughout the report, to better understand the context and issues surrounding the educational needs of young Hispanic children, the Task Force commissioned several
white papers, policy briefs, and studies on the following topics:

20•

A demographic portrait based on Census 2000;•

Characteristics and early predictors or indicators of Hispanic infant developement;•

Patterns of Hispanic students’ math and English reading test scores in early
elementary grades;•

The supply of child care centers across Hispanic communities;•

Comprehensive school reform for Latino elementary school students; and•Language development of young Hispanic children in the United States.

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

NOTES
1 Rothstein, R. (2004). Class and Schools: Using Social, Economic and Educational Reform to Close the Black-White
Achievement Gap. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute/Teachers College, Columbia University; Newman, L.,
and Buka, S. L. (1990). Every Child a Learner: Reducing Risks of Learning Impairment during Pregnancy and
Infancy. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
2 Hernández, D. (2006). Young Hispanic Children in the U.S.: A Demographic Portrait Based on Census 2000.
Report to the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State
University.
3 Martin, J.A., Hamilton, B.E., Sutton, P.E., Ventura, S.J., Menacker, F., and Munson, M.S. (2005). “Births: Final Data
for 2003.” National Vital Statistics Report, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease
Control and Prevention, 52, 2: 1-114; Hamilton, B.E., Martin, J.S., Ventura, M.A., Sutton, P.D., and Menacker, F.
(2005). “Births: Preliminary Data for 2004,” National Vital Statistics Reports, 54, 8: 1-18.
4 The median age of Hispanics in mid-2005 was 27.2 years. Ibid; the average age of Hispanics in 2005 was 27.2
compared to 36.2 for the nation as a whole. U.S. Census Bureau, “Nation’s Population One-Third Minority;” in
2001, the total fertility rate for Hispanic women was 2.75, compared to 1.84 for non-Hispanic Whites, 2.10 for
non-Hispanic Blacks, 1.84 for Asians/Pacific Islanders; and 1.75 for American Indians. Martin, J.A., Hamilton, B.E.,
Sutton, P.E., Ventura, S.J., Menacker, F., and Munson, M.S. (2005). “Births: Final Data for 2003.” National Vital
Statistics Report, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 52,
2: 1-114; foreign born Hispanic women have a 3.5 total fertility rate, while native-born Hispanic women have a
2.2 rate (which is similar to the rate for African American woman). Bean, F., Lee, J., Batalova, J. and Leach, M.
(2004). ‘Immigration and the Fading Color Lines in America,’ in Carnevele,E., Kent, M. and Tarmann, A. (Eds.),
The American People. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
5 Hernández, D. (2006).
6 Hamilton et al (2005); and Sutton, P.D., and Mathews, T.J. (2004). “Trends in Characteristics of Births by State:
United States, 1990, 1995, and 2000-2002,” National Vital Statistics Reports, U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, 52, 18: 1-152
7 See Toossi, Mitra. “A century of change: The U.S. labor force, 1950–2050.” Monthly Labor Review (May 2002),
pp. 15-28.
8 In this study, “White” refers to the U.S. Census category “non-Hispanic White.”
9 Lemke, M., Sen, A., Pahlke, E., Partelow, L. Miller, D., Williams, T., Kastberg, D., Jocelyn, L. (2004). International
Outcomes of Learning in Mathematics Literacy and Problem Solving: PISA 2003 Results from the U.S. Perspective.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; Lemke, M., Sen, A.,
Johnston, J. S., Pahlke, E., Williams, T., Kastberg, D., Jocelyn, L. (2005). Characteristics of U.S. 15-Year-Old Low
Achievers in an International Context: Findings from PISA 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education,
National Center for Education Statistics; Hampden-Thompson, G., Johnston, J.S. (2006). Variation in the
Relationship Between Nonschool Factors and Student Achievement on International Assessments. Statistics in
Brief. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
10 The paternal education patterns for each group tend to be similar to their maternal patterns.
11 Hernández, D. (2006). In general, Hispanic children in immigrant families have mothers with even less formal
education. Among Mexican American children in immigrant families, only 4% had a mother with a bachelor’s
degree or more, while 64% had a mother who had not completed high school.
12 Hernández, D. (2006).
13 Ibid.
14 Reardon, S. F., and Galindo, C. (2006).Patterns of Hispanic Students’ Math and English Literacy Test Scores in the
Early Elementary Grades. Report to the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics. Tempe,
AZ: Arizona State University.
15 Halgunseth, L. C., Ispa, J. M., Duane, R. (2006). “Parental Control in Latino Families: An Integrated Review of the
Literature.” Child Development, 77(5), 1282-1287; Landale, N. S., Oropesa, R. S., Bradatan, C. (2006). “Hispanic
Families in the United States: Family Structure and Process in and Era of Family Change,” in Tienda, M. and
Mitchell, F. (Eds.), Hispanics and the Future of America. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, National
Research Council, Panel on Hispanics in the United States.
16 Johnson, J., Arumi, A. M., Ott, A. (2006). Reality Check 2006: How Black and Hispanic Families Rate Their
Schools. New York: Public Agenda.
17 Halgunseth, Ipsa, and Duane (2006).
18 Goodlad, J. I., Mantle-Bromley, C., and Goodlad, S. J. (2004). Education for Everyone: Agenda for Education in a
Democracy. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

2119 Crosnoe, R. (2006). Mexican Roots, American Schools: Helping Mexican Immigrant Children Succeed. Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
20 Coleman, J., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfeld, F.D., and York, R. (1966). Equality of
Educational Opportunity. Washington, DC: Department of Health, Education and Welfare. This has been the caseat all levels of the education system in virtually all subject areas—reading, mathematics, science, history, etc.
Miller, L.S. (2003). Working More Productively to Produce Similar Patterns of Educational Performance among
Racial/Ethnic Groups in the United States. New York: Teachers College, ERIC Clearinghouse on Urban Education,
Institute for Urban and Minority Education.
21 Perie, M., Grigg, W., and Donahue, P. (2005). The Nation’s Report Card: Reading 2005 (NCES 2006-451). U.S.
Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office; Perie, M., Grigg, W., and Dion, G. (2005). The Nation’s Report Card: Mathematics 2005 (NCES 2006-453).
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
22 For example, numerous National Assessment for Educational Progress reports over the 3-4 decades in reading,math, science, and writing provide extensive evidence for the elementary and secondary levels.
23 Miller (2003).
24 For example of Hispanic and African American overrepresentation among low scorers on an international assessment, see Lemke, M., Sen, A., Johnston, J.S., Pahlke, E., Williams, T., Kastberg, D., and Jocelyn, L. (2005).
Characteristics of U.S. 15-Year-Old Low Achievers in an International Context: Findings from PISA 2000.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
25 Social class in the ECLS-K is a composite of family income, educational attainment levels of mothers and fathers,
and the occupations of the mothers and fathers.
26 Most of the 30% were Hispanic children from families in the lowest two SES groups, and the reading scores of
the 30% were far below those of Whites at the end of the fifth grade—over a full standard deviation in statisticalterms. Reardon and Galindo (2006).
27 Ingels, S.J., Burns, L.J., Chen, X., Cataldi, E.F., and Charleston, S. (2005). Initial Results from the Base Yearof the Education Longitudinal Study of 2002. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center
for Education Statistics.
28 Hernández, D. (2006).
29 Ibid.
30 Vernez, G. and Mizell, L. (2002). Monitoring the Education Progress of Hispanics. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
31 Senechal, M., and Cornell, E.H. (1993). “Vocabulary Acquisition through Shared Reading Experiences,” Reading
Research Quarterly. 28, 360-374; Cunningham, A.E., and Stanovich, K.E. (1998). “What Reading Does for the
Mind.” American Educator, 22(1-2), 8-15.
32 Hart, B., and Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experiences of Young American Children.
Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
33 Yarosz, D.J., and Barnett, W.S. (2001). “Who Reads to Young Children?” Reading Psychology, 22, 67-81; Raikes,
H., Pan, B.A., Luze, G., Tamis-LeMonda, C.S., Brooks-Bunn, J., Constantine, J., Tarullo, L.B., Raikes, H.A.,
Rodriguez, E.T. (2006). “Mother-Child Bookreading in Low-Income Families: Correlates and Outcomes During theFirst Three Years of Life,” Child Development, 77(4), 924-953.
34 Brooks-Gunn and Markman (2005).
35 Love, J.M., Kisker, E.E., Ross, C., Raikes, H., Constantine, J., Boller, K., et al (2005). “The Effectiveness of Early
Head Start for 3-Year-Old Children and Their Parents: Lessons for Policy and Programs,” Developmental
Psychology. 41(6), 885-901.
36 Three of the most influential programs over this period include the Carolina Abecedarian Project (Ramey and
Ramey, 2006), the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program (Campbell, et al, 2002), and the Chicago Child-Parent
Center (CPC) Program (Reynolds, et al, 2002).
37 About 90% of the four-year-olds in Oklahoma are attending either a state- or federally-funded preschool program. The second ranking state is Georgia, with 67%. See National Institute for Early Childhood Education
Research (2006).
38 Gormley, W.T. Jr., Gayer, T., Phillips, D., and Dawson, B. (2005). “The Effects of Universal Pre-K on Cognitive
Development.” Developmental Psychology, 41(6), 872-884.

22

National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics

TASK FORCE MEMBERS
Eugene E. Garcia, Chair
Vice President for University-School Partnerships
Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona

Kay Barnes

Fernando Guerra, MD

Nancy Daly Riordan

Mayor, Kansas City, Missouri

Director of Health
San Antonio Metro Health District
City of San Antonio, Texas

Children's Rights Activist
Los Angeles, California

Kim Henry

Chairman of the Board,
President & CEO
Scholastic, New York, New York

Jeff Bingaman
U.S. Senator, New Mexico

Susan Castillo
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Department of Education
State of Oregon

Bill Cosby
Actor, Comedian, Philanthropist

First Lady, State of Oklahoma

Antonia Hernández
President & CEO
California Community Foundation
Los Angeles, California

Rubén Hinojosa

Ivelisse Estrada
Senior Vice President
Corporate & Community Relations
Univision, Los Angeles, California

Elizabeth "Betty" Flores

United States Congressman
15th Congressional District of Texas

Patrick McCrory
Mayor, Charlotte, North Carolina

Mayor, Laredo, Texas

Janet Murguia

Sonia Green

President & CEO
National Council of La Raza
Washington, D.C.

Director, Hispanic Marketing
General Motors
Detroit, Michigan

Assistant Vice President
Latin Affairs
Coca Cola Company
Atlanta, Georgia

Patrick Ryan, Jr.
CEO and Co-FounderFirst Look, Chicago, Illinois
Chairman, President, & CEO
Orange Worldwide
London, England

Edward Zigler, Ph.D.

Janet Napolitano, J.D.

National Institute for
Early Education Research
Advisory Board Chair
Sterling Professor of Psychology
Director, The Bush Center inChild Development & Social Policy
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut

Richard Riley, J.D.

Managing Editor
The Miami Herald
Miami, Florida

Frank Ros

Solomon Trujillo

Governor, State of Arizona

Liza Gross

Richard Robinson

U.S. Secretary of Education
1993–2001

TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Dina C. Castro
Researcher
FPG Child Development Institute
The University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Linda M. Espinosa
Associate Professor
University of Missouri-Columbia
Columbia, Missouri
Bruce Fuller
Professor of Education &Public Policy
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, California
Cynthia García-Coll
Charles Pitts Robinson &John Palmer Barstow
Professor of Education,
Psychology & Pediatrics
Brown University
Providence, Rhode Island

Donald J. Hernandez
Professor of Sociology
Center for Social &Demographic Analysis
University at Albany
State University of New York
Albany, New York

Robert Rueda
Professor
Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California
Joseph Tobin
Nadine Basha Professorof Early Childhood Education
Arizona State University
Mary Lou Fulton, College of Education
Tempe, Arizona

Karen Hill-Scott
Child Development Expert
President
Karen Hill-Scott & Company
Los Angeles, California
Michael L. López
Executive Director
National Center for Latino Child& Family Research
Washington, D.C.

Marlene Zepeda
Professor & Chair
Department of Child & Family Studies
California State University
Los Angeles, California

c /o Mary Lou Fulton College of Education Arizona State University PO Box 870211 Tempe, AZ 85287-0211
voice: 480-965-1315

fax: 480-965-9144

www.ecehispanic.org

39 For example, while 59% of White and 66% of Black children ages 3-5 attended some form of center-basedchildcare or preschool program in 2005, only 43% of Hispanics did so. These percentages had changed little overthe previous 15 years. See National Center for Education Statistics (2006). The Condition of Education 2006.
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
40 Bridges, M., Livas, A., and Fuller, B. (2006). The Supply of Child Care Centers across Latino Communities.
Presentation at session of the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics at the American
Educational Research Association national meeting. San Francisco, CA, April; Bridges, M., and Livas, A.
Unpublished data provided to the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics.
41 In a recent survey, Hispanic adults’ were asked what they think accounts for the low enrollment rates of Hispanic
children in prekindergarten programs. The two most cited reasons were: 1) Hispanic parents’ inadequate knowledge about program availability in their communities (one-third of the respondents held this view); and 2) theinability of Hispanic parents to afford to pay for preschool for their children (one-fifth gave this reason). See
Valencia, Pérez , and Eschevista Public Relations and Tomás Rivera Policy Institute (2006). Latino Public Opinion
Survey of Prekindergarten Programs: Knowledge, Preferences and Public Support. Survey conducted for Pre-K
Now. Los Angeles: Authors.
42 Berends, M., Bodilly, S.J. and Kirby, S.M., (Eds.) (2002). Facing the Challenges of Whole School Reform: New
American Schools After A Decade. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
43 Borman, G.D., Hewes, G.M., Reilly, M., and Alvarado, S. (2006). Comprehensive School Reform for Latino
Elementary-School Students. Report to the National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics.
44 Borman, et al (2006).
45 Green, J.P. (1998). A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Bilingual Education. Claremont, CA: Tomás Rivera
Policy Institute; Slavin, R.E., and Cheung, A. (2005). “A Synthesis of Research on Language of Reading Instruction
for English Language Learners,” Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 247-284; Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., andGlass, G. V. (2005). “The Big Picture: A Meta-Analysis of Program Effectiveness Research on English Language
Learners,” Educational Policy, 19(4), 572-594; August, D., and Shanahan, T. (2006). Developing Literacy inSecond-Language Learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language-Minority Children and Youth.
Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46 Heyns, B. (1978). Summer Learning and the Effects of Schooling. New York: Academic Press; Entwisle, D.R., andAlexander, K.L. (1982). “Summer Setback: Race, Poverty, School Composition, and Mathematics Achievement in
the First Two Years of School,” American Sociological Review 57(1), 72-84; Entwisle, D.R., Alexander, K.L., andOlson, L. S. (1997). Children, Schools, and Inequality. Boulder, CO: Westview Press; Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton,
K., Lindsay, J. and Greathouse, S. (1996). “The Effects of Summer Vacation on Achievement Test Scores: A
Narrative and Meta-Analysis Review,” Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 227-268.
47 Borman, G.D., Dowling, N.M., Fairchild, R., Boulay, M., and Kaplan, J. (2005). The Longitudinal Achievement
Effects of Multi-Year Summer School: Evidence from the Teach Baltimore Randomized Field Trial. Madison, WI:
University of Wisconsin-Madison.
48 Hispanics continue to be underrepresented among bachelor’s degree recipients, and a higher percentage of
Hispanics than Whites already go into teaching immediately after graduating from college. See National Center
for Education Statistics (2005). Digest of Education Statistics, 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education; and National Center for Education Statistics (2006). The Condition of Education 2006. Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education.
49 García, E. E. and Jensen , B. (2007). Language Development and Early Education of Young Hispanic Children in
the United States: A Research Synthesis, “Working Paper of the National Task Force on Early Childhood Educationfor Hispanics. Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University.”

La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana • www.ecehispanic.org

23

Para nuestros niños
National Task Force on Early Childhood Education for Hispanics
La Comisión Nacional para la Educación de la Niñez Hispana

National Task Forceon Early Childhood
Education for Hispanics

c /o Mary Lou Fulton
College of Education
Arizona State University
PO Box 870211
Tempe, AZ
85287-0211

480.965.1315 v
480.965.9144 f

www.ecehispanic.org

Expanding and Improving
Early Education for Hispanics
Executive Report