{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014657383657017223, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.484560570071259, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Unpacking Standards in Early Childhood Education

Background/Content Policy-makers at the federal and state levels have increased their efforts to implement standards-based accountability reform in early childhood education (ECE) to improve the academic readiness of children for elementary school. As these policies have taken on more prominence within ECE reform, national organizations such as the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the National Association of Early Childhood Specialist in State Departments of Education and the National Institute for Early Education Research have produced guidelines and suggestions for formulating standards. Early childhood researchers have investigated and questioned the purpose, goals, and policy process of early learning standards. These works examine a range of issues such as capacity and capital, curriculum and assessment, and readiness and retention. Focus of Study In this article, I examine how early childhood stakeholders in the state of Wisconsin responded to the current Bush Administration's Good Start, Grow Smart (GSGS) initiative by creating a double-voiced document that answered requirements of the GSGS initiative while at the same time attempting to pique the interest and support of the state's loosely coupled field of ECE to a voluntary set of standards. Examining these stakeholders’ response highlights the tensions that exist in attempting to reform ECE and how simple policy solutions such as the GSGS initiative fail to address the complexity that exists within the field of ECE. Research Design This research project is a qualitative instrumental case study that examines the formulation and implementation of Wisconsin's Model Early Learning Standards. Conclusions Even though the Early Learning Standards Steering Committee created a double-voiced document that responded to policy-makers’ demands for early learning standards while attempting to attract and unite early childhood programs and practitioners around a collective understanding of the goals of ECE, the future of the field is uncertain. The second-class status of ECE in the realm of policy and the investment of capital that is required to alter the field cause one to question whether systemic reform could ever occur in ECE. Nevertheless, policy-makers’ demands for improved student performance will not die down simply because states are implementing early learning standards. Thus, the field of ECE is at a critical point within the history of education reform, and stakeholders must continue to promote a vision of ECE that goes beyond simply protecting current practices and demand structural changes that foster the growth and development of all children.