Full-Day Kindergarten

Over the past several decades, the popularity of kindergarten education has increased significantly among parents and educators. Today, the majority of US children are enrolled in a kindergarten program. Yet, not all kindergarten programs are similar. In the past, half-day programs outnumbered full-day programs; cultural and socio-economic factors have propelled the growth of the number of full-day kindergarten programs. Furthermore, legislative requirements, which often differ from state to state, play a significant role in the full-day kindergarten (FDK) versus half-day kindergarten (HDK) debate

Keywords Academic Achievement; Child-Centered Education; Early Childhood Education; Full-Day Kindergarten (FDK); Froebelian School; Half-Day Kindergarten (HDK); Pestalozzi Method

Overview

Since 1977, the number of children attending kindergarten in the United States has steadily grown, and according to the US Census Bureau in 2011, there were 4 million children, age three and over, enrolled in kindergarten, which was up from 3.3 million in 1967. Although the number of enrolled kindergarteners was relatively unchanged from 1986 through 2005, the figure was up from 2005. Yet, despite widespread agreement on the benefits of kindergarten, disagreement persists over the form this type of early childhood education should take. Some parents and educators believe that children learn better in half-day kindergarten programs (HDK), while others hold that full-day kindergarten programs (FDK) provide the greatest academic and social benefits for young students. Contributing variables which often indicate parental preference can range from socio-economic factors to geographical and ethnic dynamics. Furthermore, legislative requirements, which often differ from state to state, play a significant role in the FDK versus HDK debate.

History

European Roots

Kindergarten attendance as a common practice in the United States is a relatively new phenomenon. While public education in one form or another has been present in America since the colonial era, kindergarten did not appear on the American educational landscape until just before the Civil War in 1857. Imported to the US from Germany, kindergarten grew out of European Enlightenment philosophy espoused by such thinkers as Swiss philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau. Swiss educator Johann Pestalozzi built upon Rousseau's theories and developed them into a more formal manner of childhood education. The Pestalozzi Method earned Pestalozzi recognition as a father of modern early educational pedagogy. Not until German educationist Friedrich Froebel coined the word in 1840, however, was the term "kindergarten" used to describe this method of early childhood education. Meaning "children's garden," Froebel's kindergarten was a place where children between the ages of approximately two and six could develop their sense of individuality and self through less formal, often self-directed activities such as crafts, physical activity, music, and interaction with other children and adults. As Fromberg (2006) notes, Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and Froebel all built their educational models based on the four general conclusions regarding children:

• Children learn differently from adults

• Children require sensory experiences in learning

• Children benefit developmentally from studying the world around them

• Children are able to make choices

• Children benefit from playful activities

American Kindergartens in the nineteenth & Early Twentieth Centuries

This philosophy as a method of teaching crossed the ocean in 1856 with Margarethe Schurz's opening of the first Froebelian school in Wisconsin. Schurz, who herself was a product of Froebel's German kindergarten, established the private school in her home for her children and the children of friends and family. True to its European predecessor, Schurz's classes were conducted in German. Shortly after the establishment of the Wisconsin model, Elizabeth Peabody started the first English-speaking kindergarten in the United States. Like Schurz's school, Ms. Peabody's Boston-based kindergarten followed Froebel's model and philosophy of child-based learning.

Whereas Shurz's and Peabody's schools remained private, kindergarten soon made its foray into American public education with the establishment of the first English-speaking public kindergarten in 1873 in St. Louis, Missouri. Begun by the St. Louis Public School District, the kindergarten was for students aged five years and, although public in name, charged a fee for attendance. These early American kindergarten classes served middle-class children with school hours that lasted half a day.

According to Lee, Burkam, Ready, Honigman, and Meisels (2006), with the establishment of public kindergartens in the United States, the pedagogical focus began to shift away from Froebel's naturalistic ideals and toward purposes more in line with the goals of American public education: training children according to cultural and societal norms in order to develop them into contributing citizens of society. Nevertheless, although the overarching focus changed, the Froebelian methodology of education remained the prevailing means of achieving the end goal.

Through the turn of the nineteenth century, the popularity of self-directed learning through kindergarten education grew in America among both educators and the general public alike. As the agrarian way of life gave way to the Industrial Revolution, changing social philosophies regarding the place of children in society began to affect the provision of early childhood education. Social conscience movements that decried the prevalence of child labor in the workforce contributed to the increase in the number of kindergarten classrooms as private and religious organizations began to provide kindergarten at no charge to the children of working families. Fromberg notes that in this social atmosphere, educators and individuals such as John Dewey and Jane Addams left their mark in the form of their progressive educational philosophies. For Dewey, for example, "formal" education occurred best in "natural" environments in which children could interact with the world around them (Fromberg, 2006, p. 69).

As progressivism grew, so, too, did the emphasis on child-centered education. Rather than focus primarily upon instructional methods, child-centered education sought to help children develop through play, sensory experiences, and individual initiative such as the opportunity to make choices for themselves. Moreover, Fromberg notes that the federal government's involvement in kindergarten education also grew during the first half of the twentieth century. This was due to such initiatives and activities as the Works Projects Administration of the 1930s and the 1940s Lanham Act, which aided parents assisting in the war effort and marked the federal government's first entrance into the child care arena. Following World War II, half-day kindergarten classes remained in practice.

Application

The Growth of Full-Day Kindergarten

Several factors have contributed to the growth of full-day kindergarten. Lee (2006) cites the three foremost among these as the increase in the number of working mothers with children under six years of age; the expanding popularity of day care and/or pre-kindergarten programs; and the significant increase in technological and economic demands of society which have raised the pursuit of academic achievement to new levels. The US Department of Education reported that a significant reversal in kindergarten program attendance occurred between 1977 and 2001. In 1977, 73 percent of kindergarten children attended half-day programs, while 27 percent attended full-day programs. By 2001, these percentages had changed drastically, with only 40 percent attending HDK and a full 60 percent enrolled in FDK (US Dept. of Education, 2004). By 2011, the US Census Bureau reported that 77 percent of US children attended full-day kindergarten (US Census, 2011).

Demographic, Socio-Economic, & Ethnic Differences

Yet, FDK attendance is not constant across demographic, socio-economic, and ethnic lines, nor are the ratios the same for public and private schools. Fromberg (2006) indicates that rural areas of the country, for example, have a higher FDK population than do urban and suburban areas, with 65 percent of children attending full-day public kindergarten in rural, small town areas. Contrasted with this, 59 percent of children in urban and middle-sized cities and 45 percent in suburban areas and large towns attend full-day public kindergarten. Similarly, ethnic factors play a role in FDK versus HDK attendance. With an 80 percent FDK attendance rate, African-American children lead in this area, while the percentages for White, Latino, Asian, and multi-ethnic students stand at 52 percent, 49 percent, 46 percent, and 46 percent, respectively. Moreover, full-day kindergarten is much more widespread in the South, with 82 percent of programs falling into this category, compared with only 48 percent in the Northeast, 47 percent in the Midwest, and 31 percent in the West. While among all schools, attendance at full-day programs leads by a 61–47 percentage rate, among public schools this lead narrows to 56–44, while among private non-Catholic schools it grows to 63–40. The greatest leap of all is among Catholic schools, where full-day programs outrank half-day programs by a 78–29 percentage rate (Fromberg, 2006, p. 74).

Family income and language backgrounds also mark identifiable trends in FDK. While 63 percent of children living below the poverty line attend public full-day kindergarten, that number drops to 55 percent for those living at or above the poverty level. Furthermore, for children who come from English-speaking homes, the public FDK enrollment percentage stands at 57 percent. For children from non-English-speaking homes, this number falls to 48 percent (Fromberg, 2006, p. 75). These numbers seem to indicate that not just academic factors play a role in kindergarten program selection, and lead to the questions, then, of what determines whether schools provide full-day or half-day programs and, when a choice does exist, what guides parents' decisions on where to send their children?

State Kindergarten Policies

According to the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), fifteen states mandate kindergarten attendance for children, and two of these states require that this attendance be full-day (NAEYC, 2007). Forty-three states require that school districts within the state provide half-day kindergarten programs, and nine states require that full-day programs be offered. ECS reports that, in broaching the subject of full-day kindergarten, states often face several obstacles, including that they:

• Lack a clear policy on the definition of full-day kindergarten

• Lack a solid policy to provide universal access to full-day kindergarten programs

• Lack policies to provide sufficient funding for full-day programs

• Lack adequate polices to ensure the quality of full-day kindergarten programs (Kauerz, 2005, p. v).

District Kindergarten Policies

In addition, many districts within states have, of their own accord, begun offering full-day programs even when their state does not require it. In doing so, school boards seeking to determine whether to implement FDK programs must answer several questions. Fromberg cites these as follows:

• "How will the community finance twice the number of classrooms [going from half-day to full-day], expendable resources, and teachers, and find the additional space?

• "Will the additional cost influence voters within the school district to vote against the school budget? …

• "How can lunch and bus service be organized?

• "Do specialist teachers, such as those in art, music, and physical education, work with kindergarten children? [and]

• "What is the best way to use the additional time during the day?" (Fromberg, 2006, p. 75).

Advantages & Limitations of Full-Day Kindergarten

Those who support FDK over HDK argue that a full-day program better positions children for academic success later. According to Lee (2006), several advantages that FDK proponents present are as follows:

• "[I]t allows teachers more opportunity to assess children's educational needs and individualize instruction,

• "it makes small-group learning experiences more feasible,

• "it engages children in a broader range of learning experiences,

• "it provides opportunities for in-depth exploration of curriculum,

• "it provides opportunities for closer teacher-parent relationships, and

• "it benefits working parents who may need a longer school day" (Lee, 2006, p. 169).

Despite these cited advantages, however, consensus is not universal regarding the benefits FDK students reap in comparison to their HDK counterparts. Some educators argue that FDK children are more likely to suffer from fatigue caused by extended school hours, while others believe that starting children off in full-day programs will increase the expectations placed upon them to a level that may prove beyond their naturally developed capabilities.

In the area of academic performance, research indicates that FDK students do, indeed, show greater academic progress than their HDK peers by the end of their kindergarten year. Demographically, FDK students are often from rural or urban communities, which are more often poorer than their suburban counterparts, or from minority groups. Viadero (2005) points out that, upon entering kindergarten, these students tend to score lower on reading and math tests than HDK students from more affluent communities. Therefore, rather than giving FDK students an end-of-year advantage over HDK students, academic gains made during FDK programs serve to help students "catch up" to their HDK counterparts. Viadero writes that by the spring of their kindergarten year, full-day students and half-day students perform at approximately the same level on reading and math tests.

Despite short-term gains, however, additional studies raise questions regarding the long-term benefits reaped by children in full-day kindergarten programs. Some studies indicate that by the end of first grade, while gains are still evident they are measurably less than at the end of kindergarten, and by start of second grade, the academic benefits of FDK as measured by testing in reading and mathematics are no longer statistically significant (Wolgemuth, Cobb, Winokur, Leech, & Ellerby, 2006, p. 265). Several teachers interviewed for Wolgemuth's study presented various explanations for the advantages' fading over time. In brief, these explanations were differentiation in instruction in the years subsequent to kindergarten, natural student development in first grade and beyond, and the unique academic and familial attributes of each individual student. For the benefits of FDK to continue throughout elementary and high school years and beyond, factors falling into these three categories would need to remain relatively equal among all students (Wolgemuth, et al, 2006, p. 267).

Choosing Between Full-Day & Half-Day Programs

As most kindergarten programs offer the option of either full-day or half-day programs, parents must ultimately select the program they believe will be best for their child. In "Full- or Half-Day Kindergarten: What Parents Pick—and Why," educator Diana Brannon sought to uncover the reasons that parents choose one type of program over the other. Brannon writes that she began her research with the expectation that convenience would rank high among parents who sent their children to FDK programs, while most who opted for HDK would be "stay-at-home" mothers. Her research, however, led her to a different conclusion. Whether a parent worked full-time outside the home or not was not a significant issue in the choice between FDK and HDK. Rather, Brannon cites three factors that motivated parents' decisions:

• Their child's preschool experience

• The parents' belief in their ability to work with their child and teach him/her at home

• The parents' estimation of their child's maturity level (Brannon, 2005).

Upon entering kindergarten, many children already have the experience of one, two, or even three years of preschool. Parents of these children often believe that this prior schooling experience positions their children to require a longer day of kindergarten, as a half-day would not be enough. Thus, these parents are more likely to select FDK for their children.

The likelihood that parents will opt for FDK also increases in inverse proportion to their belief in their own ability to teach and work with their children at home. Brannon cites one parent as explaining, "I don't think we, as parents, have the same terminology or really understand exactly what they are doing at school. They are not going to learn it if you think that you are going to continue it at home." Another parent echoed this sentiment: 'I found out real quick, being room mom for several years at different grades, [that] teachers have a totally different way of speaking to kids and giving instructions than I would [use]….I would never think of doing it … [the same] way, but the teacher is trained to do things the way it is supposed to be done" (Brannon, 2005, p. 2). Yet another stated that FDK helps improve a child's self-esteem. For these parents, sending their children to full-day kindergarten programs is equivalent to providing them a better education than they might otherwise receive at home.

Contrast these parents with those who send their children to half-day programs, and the latter convey a higher degree of confidence in their ability to teach and interact with their children. Among the chief benefits these parents cite in sending their children to half-day programs is the ability to work with them academically at home, providing individual, one-on-one attention without interruptions and with few distractions. Moreover, these parents highlight that half-day programs allow time for them to take their children to places such as museums and zoos. Brannon notes that, among the main advantages half-day kindergarten parents list are:

• Time to work at home with their child

• Ability to help their child transition into first grade

• Ability to spend more "quality time" with their child (Brannon, 2005, pp. 2–3).

Notwithstanding the different reasons behind parents' opting for full-day kindergarten over half-day, or vice-versa, Brannon found that parents as a whole agreed that developing children's academic attitudes during kindergarten was of tantamount importance as these attitudes affect scholastic achievement and performance for years to come. At the same time, parents across the board agreed that full-day kindergarten is not for everyone and that some children may not be prepared for it while others are.

As future studies are performed, research may one day draw consensus from educators and parents alike. For the present, however, conclusive evidence in support of the long-term benefits of full-day kindergarten programs remains elusive. Until that time that such evidence becomes available, or until additional states implement requirements regarding full-day kindergarten attendance, parents facing the choice between FDK and HDK will continue to base their decisions both on their beliefs regarding their child's academic and emotional maturity levels and their own capabilities for teaching within the home.

Terms & Concepts

Academic Achievement: Relative measurement of academic progress based upon standardized testing in reading and mathematics.

Child-Centered Education: Education that focuses on helping children learn through play, sensory experiences, interaction with others, and the ability to make choices.

Early Childhood Education: Education outside the public schools focusing on the preparation of very young children, infant–five yrs, for entry into formal school.

Full-Day Kindergarten (FDK): While the definition varies from state to state, on average, full-day kindergarten may range from four to six hours in length.

Froebelian School: A kindergarten school modeled after the teaching and philosophy of German educator Friedrich Froebel who first penned the term "kindergarten."

Half-Day Kindergarten (HDK): While the definition varies from state to state, on average, half-day kindergarten is approximately three hours in length.

Pestalozzi Method: The philosophy of teaching of Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, which emphasized group learning and focused on participatory activities, such as art, physical exercise, and music.

Bibliography

Association for Childhood Education International. (2002). ACEI: A brief look at our history. Retrieved March 12, 2007, from http://www.acei.org/history.htm

Brannon, D. (2005). Fall- or half-day kindergarten: What parents pick--and why. Education Digest, 70 , 57-62. Retrieved March 8, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=16782721&site=ehost-live

Claessens, A. (2012). Kindergarten child care experiences and child achievement and socioemotional skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27, 365–375. Retrieved December 13, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=78032508

Fromberg, D. (2006). Kindergarten education and early childhood teacher education in the United States: Status at the start of the 21st century. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 27 , 65-85. Retrieved March 8, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20338647&site=ehost-live

Kauerz, K. (2005). Full-day kindergarten: A study of state policies in the United States. Retrieved March 13, 2007, from http://www.ecs.org/clearinghouse/62/41/6241.pdf

Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi. (2006). The Columbia Encyclopedia (6th ed.). Retrieved March 12, 2007, from http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Pestaloz.html

Laurent, C. (2012). Bring on full-day kindergarten. Independent School, 72, 12. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=82154862

Lee, V., Burkam, D., Ready, D., Honigman, J., & Meisels, S. (2006). Full-day versus half-day kindergarten: In which program do children learn more? American Journal of Education, 112 , 163-208. Retrieved March 8, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21192093&site=ehost-live

Lim, E. (2012). Patterns of kindergarten children's social interaction with peers in the computer area. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 7, 399–421. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=78641308

NAEYC. (2007). Critical facts about programs for young children. Retrieved December 21, 2013, from http://www.naeyc.org/policy/advocacy/programfacts#Kindergarten

US Census Bureau. (2011). School enrollment in the United States: 2011. Retrieved December 21, 2013, from http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-571.pdf

US Department of Education, National Center for Statistics. (2004). Participation in education: Elementary and secondary education. In The Condition of Education. Retrieved March 12, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2004/section1/indicator03.asp

Viadero, D. (2005, Oct 19). Full-day kindergarten produces more learning gains, study says. Education Week, 25 , 1-16. Retrieved March 8, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=18703444&site=ehost-live

Wolgemuth, J., Cobb, R., Winokur, M., Leech, N., & Ellerby, D. (2006). Comparing longitudinal academic achievement of full-day and half-day kindergarten students. Journal of Educational Research, 99 , 260-269. Retrieved March 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=21135219&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Baskett, R., Bryant, K., White, W., & Rhoads, K. (2005). Half-day to full-day kindergarten: An analysis of educational change scores and demonstration of an educational research collaboration. Early Child Development & Care, 175 , 419-430. Retrieved March 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=16970126&site=ehost-live

Bornfreund, L. A. (2012). The half-day kindergarten/common-core mismatch. Education Week, 32, 33–35. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=84349783

Harris, R., & Barnett, S. (2011). The kindergarten challenge. (cover story). Catalyst Chicago, 22, 3–9. Retrieved December 20, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=62662112

Jacobson, L. (2005). Study urges work on kindergarten policy. Education Week, 24 , 26-30. Retrieved March 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=17940186&site=ehost-live

Ladner, M. (2007). Putting Arizona education reform to the test: School choice and early education expansion. Retrieved March 13, 2007 from The Goldwater Institute http://www.goldwaterinstitute.org/Common/Files/Multimedia/EarlyEdvSchoolChoice.pdf

Toppo, G. (2005, Aug 25). Constant kindergartners. USA Today.