Category Archives: evidence-based policy

Education Reform in Maryland: Early Childhood Education Advocacy and the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future

During the 2020 legislative session in Maryland, education advocates worked together in support of the Kirwan Commission recommendations for education reform at the early childhood, primary, and secondary levels.

The Maryland Association for the Education of Young Children (MDAEYC), in partnership with many education organizations throughout the state, advocated for adopting the Kirwan Commission recommendations as part of the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, the education reform legislation.  This Blueprint legislation was introduced and passed in the Maryland House and Senate, and is pending final passage.

As part of the Coalition for the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, MDAEYC leaders Christina Lopez and Stephanie Schaefer coordinated with coalition partners and participated in a successful advocacy day and Pep Rally in Annapolis in support of the Blueprint legislation.  On February 17, 2020, the day the bill was introduced, over 400 hundred educators, families, and advocates attended the pep rally , flooding the hearing room and filling two overflow rooms to watch the hearing remotely.  In the morning before the Joint Legislative Hearing, Brit Kirwan and others spoke to the advocates.

Stephanie is proud to have played a role in the advocacy efforts of MDAEYC.  In consultation with MDAEYC’s public policy leadership, Stephanie drafted a bill analysis and summary of the Kirwan/Blueprint recommendations, included in MDAEYC’s position statement in support of this landmark education legislation. The position statement filled a need in the early childhood education community by providing a detailed, item-by-item summary of the Kirwan Commission recommendations, making the several-hundred page recommendations more accessible and offering recommendations for its adoption.

The Kirwan Commission (formally titled Maryland Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education) was established by the Governor and the General Assembly to review and make recommendations for Maryland’s education system. The Kirwan Commission began meeting in 2016, and issued several reports summarizing its recommendations. The most recent report from the Kirwan Commission is the January 2019 Interim Report.

The Commission’s report makes recommendations in five policy areas:

  1. Early Childhood Education;
  2. High-quality and Diverse Teachers and Leaders;
  3. College and Career Readiness Pathways;
  4. More Resources to Ensure All Students Are Successful; and
  5. Governance and Accountability.

The key early childhood education recommendations of the Kirwan Commission were included in the Blueprint bill.  They are:

  • Expand full-day pre-K;
  • Support capacity-building for new and current programs;
  • Implement a school readiness assessment for all students entering kindergarten; and
  • Expand Judy Centers, Family Support Centers, and the Maryland Infants and Toddlers Program.

The provision of Universal pre-K is a critical component of the legislation that will enhance educational equity and access to high-quality early learning for all children in Maryland.  MDAEYC supports the Universal pre-K provisions; however, it remains a source of contention for some within the early childhood education community, due to the financial challenges it may create for child care programs, who face a potential loss of many 4-year-olds from their programs. Community-based programs, including child care centers, can apply to provide pre-K, and the funding formula for pre-K expansion requires that by year three, 50% of the pre-K funding is slated to go to community-based providers.

The Blueprint coalition partners look forward to enactment of the Blueprint legislation, and the opportunity to work with colleagues and policymakers to help implement the provisions of this landmark bill.

Leave a comment

Filed under child policy, early childhood education, education, evidence-based policy, Maryland, state policy

Understanding Research: Top Ten Tips

This is a #TBT post, sharing a research guide I wrote in 2001 for the National Association of Child Advocates, which became Voices for America’s Children. As the push for evidence-based policy grows, these points remain relevant today. The original four-page brief (PDF) is also available here.

data chart imageResearch allows us to assess the effectiveness of policies and programs affecting the lives of children and families. Having research evidence to recommend or refute specific policy choices is especially relevant in this era of increased demand for accountability in human services and government.

But how can you tell if a given research study is one you can trust? Below are tips to evaluate the research you encounter.

  1. Consider the source. Evaluate the credibility of the individual(s) and the organization that produced the research. Research produced by respected researchers and institutions is more likely to be trustworthy. Also, research produced or funded by groups with a strong political or commercial agenda is less trustworthy, since these groups have a vested interest in the study’s findings supporting their viewpoint.
  2. Media is also a source to be evaluated. Media coverage may not fully or accurately summarize the original research. Because research can be technical and complex, and because media coverage often seeks to be attention grabbing and succinct, media reporting of research sometimes oversimplifies the research, leading to misinterpretation.
  3. Has the research been published, and where? Research published in peer-reviewed research journals is more trustworthy because it has been scrutinized by other researchers before being published. Unpublished research, or research published in publications that don’t critically evaluate it, has not gone through such scrutiny. However, even good research starts out unpublished, so just because a study is unpublished does not mean that it is poor quality.
  4. Research results are really about the topic as measured, not as we may think of it. Look closely at how the topic in a study was measured. Since a research topic, such as aggression, could mean different things to different people, researchers always come up with a more specific definition of the topic they are studying. The results from a study are really about the precise definition, rather than the larger topic.
  5. Different types of research have different strengths. Another indicator of the quality of a research study, and the claims that can be made based on it, is the study’s research design. Experimental design studies offer the strongest evidence about the impact of a program. Quasi-experimental studies are especially useful for studying complex systems as they exist naturally in the community. Qualitative studies often provide descriptive, story-like accounts of people’s experiences in a program or in a community.
  6. Sampling is more important than sample size. While a study’s sample size is important, even more important is the way the sample was collected. Quantitative research is based on the assumption that the findings for a sample of people can be generalized to the larger population. If the procedures to select the study’s sample are not done well, then we cannot assume that the findings for the sample generalize to the population, and the study’s findings would not be valid.
  7. Statistical significance explained. One of the things advocates value most about research is getting “hard data,” i.e., numbers, about the effects of a policy on children. A study reports a statistically significant difference between those who received a program and those that did not. But what does statistical significance mean, and what can we conclude from it? A statistically significant result is one that is unlikely to be due to chance. Researchers use statistics to test whether the results they found are likely to be due to the effect of the program being studied and not to other unrelated factors. Statistical significance is different than the substantive significance, or meaningfulness, of a finding. A result may be statistically significant but unimportant. Conversely, a result may not be statistically significant, but it may be meaningful.
  8. Research findings are about groups. Research results are usually based on comparisons between groups of people. This makes research findings particularly relevant for policy decisions since policies affect groups of people, but less relevant for individual case decisions.
  9. All research is not created equal. When comparing the results from different studies with conflicting findings, higher-quality studies should be given more weight. Better studies can refute poorer studies; there is not a one-to-one comparison.
  10. Any one study is not the whole story. Although we usually come across research one study at a time, research is most valuable when many specific studies are taken together to tell the whole story of what we know on a given topic. Any single study, no matter how good, needs to be viewed in the context of other research on the topic.

 These research tips were also presented in my 2002 Evaluation Exchange article published by the Harvard Family Research Project.  That issue was devoted to public education campaigns and evaluation, and provides additonal good resources and examples.  

Image: Shutterstock, via leungchopan.

1 Comment

Filed under child policy, evaluation, evidence-based policy, research, research for policy, statistics