1.4 The History of Early Childhood Education
Holly Lanoue, M.Ed.
Many of our current ideas in educational philosophy are built on ideas and theories of the past. The roots of early childhood education go as far back as Plato (428-348 B.C.E.) who was a Greek philosopher who believed that the teacher’s role was to direct children through play towards “their final aim in life” (360 B.C.E., Book I).
Dr. David Elkind (2010) believes that the field of early childhood education is “the most holistic and least differentiated of any level of education” (para. 2) due to the solid grounding in philosophy, theory, and research. According to may theorists, early childhood education is unique because it starts with the child, and not with the subject matter.
The Origins of Early Childhood Education
The philosophical foundations of early education include the early work of may individuals including Czech philosopher John Amos Comenius (1592-1670), British philosopher John Locke (1632-1704), and Swiss philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). Many other influential European and American philosophers will be discussed in Chapter 3. Along with these philosophical applications, the field is grounded in research through education figures such as Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget (1896-1980), German American psychologist Erik Erikson (1902-1994), and German educator Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852) as well as European theorists and educators all of whom have contributed to Western approaches to early learning.
It wasn’t until after World War II that early childhood education was seen as an important foundation of every child’s educational pathway. The roots of this are based in humanism. Humanistic philosophy as an influence on early childhood education includes the concern for appropriate practice, a concept discussed in Chapter 2.
The infographic in Figure 1.3 illustrates the progression of thought from some notable theorists that have contributed to the field of early childhood education from Ancient Greece to the first kindergarten funded in the United States. As you look at the timeline, think about how the philosophies of each time period influenced current thinking.
The Origins of Childcare in the United States
In the United States, most women with young children are employed outside the home. The necessity (or choice) to work outside the home has created a need for care for young children during working hours. The term day care was used historically to refer to the working hours teachers were in classrooms. Today, professionals prefer the term childcare as it is more inclusive and reflects the important work of nurturing the child.
The early origins of childcare can be traced to New York in 1893 with the National Federation of Day Nurseries, the first nationwide organization devoted to childcare. The care at the time was hardly labeled as quality, and so a set of progressive women began the U.S. Children’s Bureau in 1912 to set policy for quality childcare (Michel, 2011).
In the 1930s, the Great Depression had an impact on childcare as unemployment rose. During Roosevelt’s New Deal, a program of Emergency Nursery Schools (ENS) grew but was open only part of the day. By the end of the 1930s, high staff turnover rates forced the closure of many of the ENS. With the approach of World War II, the unemployment crisis dropped, and many women went to work for the government to support war efforts. However, it was not until 1943 that government support allocated $6 million dollars to reopen ENS. In 1944 only 3,000 childcare centers were operating, yet the capacity for 130,000 children was needed. This lack of care during the day began the spread of the latchkey child where children were alone at home until their parents returned from work. Some children were found sleeping in locked cars in company parking lots while mothers worked (Michel, 2011).
In 1954 the childcare tax deduction allowed low-to-moderate income families to deduct expenses for childcare from their income taxes. In addition, a program entitled New York Women (led by Elinor Guggenheimer) helped to establish a licensing system for childcare in that city that eventually grew across the United States. In the 1960s, federal support for childcare was tied to “policies designed to encourage poor and low-income women to enter training programs” and the workforce until a group of “labor leaders, civil rights leaders and early childhood advocates worked with Congress to legislate universal childcare policy” (Michel, 2011, para. 19). These efforts failed under President Nixon, and as a result, direct federal support for childcare was limited to low-income families.
In the 1980s, President Reagan passed the Social Services Block Grant Act (part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981), which allocated funds to support individual states for childcare and development. However, even though there were increased funds for childcare, there were problems with supply and quality for lower income families, and middle-income families faced childcare centers with high turnover rates of childcare employees due to low pay and poor benefits.
In the 1990s, funding through welfare reform initiatives such as the Family and Medical Leave Act (1993) provided some childcare relief dollars for families, but existing federal childcare policies have gone largely unchanged since the 1950s and do not meet the needs of the working families of today.
There are hundreds of private advocacy groups in the United States that are interested in early childhood education and the policies that support quality and equity for all families, but most research concludes that the system of childcare is a fragmented system. In the next section, we will explore how the government has supported early learning.
Attributions
- Figure 1.8: Notable Historical Thoughts About Early Childhood Education by Gayle Julian, for WA Open ProfTech, © SBCTC, CC BY 4.0
- Figure 1.9: WELFARE- Day care nursery under the aid for dependent children program by Thomas J. O’Halloran in the Public Domain; There are no known restrictions on the publication of this image.
Any system or mode of thought or action in which human interests, values, and dignity predominate.