Web Resource- Advocates for EC

This week I continued to study the NAEYC website; this time looking at resources about the impacts and inclusion of economists, neuroscientists, or politicians within the early childhood field. The first article I found was about inviting and including a wide variety of people to collaborate and support early childhood education (Dosremedios, 2016). It was an interesting read, providing several successful examples from Massachusetts. The point I took most to heart, is that if we engage all sorts of community members in wanting to help the children of the community in small ways, they will also be there to support us in large ways, all to the benefit of the children. For example, if a small book sharing program between police officers and children (an example from the article) builds a relationship between families and local officers, the officers become even more invested in seeing those children succeed, thus becoming advocates for early childhood education improvement through policy and funding. Imagine how much support programs could gather by building partnerships with local businesses, banks, universities, and more. This is an excellent point.

A second article I reviewed on the NAEYC site is about the economics of the early childhood field (Allvin, 2017). As I read the article I realized it was familiar because I have seen it before during this program. It begins with a summary of important facts regarding the field, such as,

“The field of early childhood education employs roughly 2.2 million people”  (Allvin, 2017).

“The median wage for early childhood educators working in centerbased programs is $10.60 per hour. While those with bachelor’s degrees or higher earn comparatively more—a median of $14.70” (Allvin, 2017).

“46 percent of early childhood educators are part of families enrolled in at least one public safety net program” (Allvin, 2017).

“in 2009 early childhood education contributed 1.1 percent to the gross domestic product (GDP), equivalent to $163 billion. Compare this with agriculture, oil and gas extraction, and computer and electronics product manufacturing; those sectors contributed 1.0 percent, 1.1 percent, and 1.5 percent, respectively” (Allvin, 2017).

These are astounding facts, even reading them for the fourth time. Further, considering the information I gathered about poverty rates in my area, it is frustrating to consider how many EC professionals likely fall under the poverty or low-income range. I left public school teaching to operate my own home child care; however, at one point I interviewed for a center, where I quickly realized that even with a bachelors I would not make enough money to buy gas for driving to work, enroll my two children in child care, and buy groceries (which is my only task in supporting our family). I cannot imagine if I were expected to keep a roof over our heads with such income levels. Additionally, it is easy to see why EC professionals get burnt out and grumpy in this field, working so hard for so little.

This might be my favorite point regarding EC that I have seen yet…

“Early childhood educators can’t be outsourced or automated. They are developing the capacity and curiosity of our future workforce—and they are a linchpin to the strength and vitality of the workforce and economy of today.” (Allvin, 2017).

References:

Allvin, R.E. (2017). Making Connections. Early Childhood Educators and the American Economy: An American Story. Young Children. Retrieved from: https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/nov2017/making-connections

Dosremedios, T. (2016). Building a More Inclusive Sandbox: Inviting New Collaborators to Support Children, Families, and Early Learning. Young Children. Retrieved from: https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/nov2016/inclusive-sandbox