For decades, he said, Washington politicians gave young people 鈥渘othing but debt,鈥� he said.

鈥淭he government is finally giving money back to our children,鈥� he told the crowd at Wheeler High School in Cobb County, inviting families who have opened accounts to join him on stage with their children.

The event brought together several cabinet members who joined the president in urging families to open Trump Accounts. Before Trump took the stage in the school鈥檚 large gymnasium, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Treasurer Brandon Beach, Education Secretary Linda McMahon and Kelly Loeffler, a former Georgia senator who now serves as head of the Small Business Administration, all described the child savings policy as transformational.

McMahon called it 鈥渙ne of the largest generational investments in upward mobility that our country has ever made.鈥�

Under the savings initiative, which went live July 4, the administration will give $1,000 deposits to children born during the president鈥檚 term if their parents open a Trump Account. Over seven million children are already enrolled in the program, Bessent told the crowd.听

The child savings account program was included in last year鈥檚 One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Parents and others can contribute to the tax-deferred account until the child turns 18 and converts it into a traditional individual retirement account. 

Philanthropists Michael and Susan Dell expanded on the government鈥檚 contribution last year when they to provide an extra $250 for 25 million children 10 and under living in ZIP codes with median incomes below $150,000. Other donors have since made contributions, some for specific states. 

Chris Woods, a financial adviser and Cobb district parent, told 社区黑料 that he thinks the policy is a wise move.

鈥淭here are a lot of ways to save for children鈥檚 college and their future,鈥� he said. 鈥淭he difference is you鈥檙e getting funds from the government.鈥�

But Eli Speer, a recent high school graduate and Trump supporter, said the program isn鈥檛 鈥渇iscally conservative.鈥�

鈥淲e have to prioritize shaving down the debt, cutting red tape,鈥� he said.

The agreed, calling Trump Accounts a 鈥済overnment welfare program鈥� that further complicates the tax system and might not be a better investment opportunity than existing options. Others question whether the families who would benefit the most from the program are even aware of it. An showed that higher-earning adults and those who already have at least $5,000 in savings were more likely to know about the program.

Bessent, however, pushed back on criticisms that the policy will favor wealthier families. Of the families who have already opened accounts for their kids, he said 86% earn household incomes of $200,000 or less.

鈥淭rump Accounts are reaching the very people they were designed to serve,鈥� he said. 鈥淧resident Trump is creating assets for the American people, not more debt and broken promises.鈥�

Despite the strong turnout Wednesday, Cobb County is not actually 鈥淭rump country,鈥� as several speakers called it. Trump lost Cobb all three times he ran for president. The district, however, is led by a majority Republican board. 

鈥淭he school board is the last bastion of Republican control that Cobb County has,鈥� said Heather Tolley-Bauer, a co-founder of Watching the Funds-Cobb, a watchdog group that this week about whether district resources were being used to support what was in part a political rally. District staff handled several logistics for the event, organizing refreshments and helping with security.

鈥淚t clearly wasn鈥檛 to advocate for public education, our students or to share all that鈥檚 great about our schools,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t was to serve the Republican Party.鈥�

Several students also gathered in a Kroger parking lot a few miles away to protest the president coming to one of their high schools.

Some of Trump鈥檚 policies haven鈥檛 been popular at the school, where the majority of students are Black and Hispanic. In late January, Wheeler students were among the hundreds across Cobb County schools who walked out to protest immigration enforcement activities nationwide.

鈥淚 don鈥檛 love the fact that we are using a public school to promote a partisan political agenda,鈥� said Edward Kim, a Wheeler graduate.

Multiple candidates running for statewide office had a chance to make campaign pitches Wednesday.

State Sen. Brian Strickland, candidate for attorney general, said families are relocating to Georgia to leave blue states that supported former President Biden鈥檚 agenda.

鈥淚n November, we have a big decision to make,鈥� he said. 鈥淲e have to get this right.鈥� 

Trump also told the attendees to vote for Rep. Mike Collins, who didn鈥檛 attend because of votes in Congress. Collins will face Democratic Sen. John Ossoff in November. Ossoff, he said, will 鈥渂ankrupt your families.鈥�

Rick Jackson, GOP candidate for governor also greeted the crowd and joined Trump on the platform. While he touted his expertise as a businessman as the solution to Democrats鈥� 鈥渁ffordability crisis,鈥� he also spoke at length about Trump Accounts.

As someone who grew up in foster care, he applauded first lady Melania Trump鈥檚 initiative, in which states can open accounts for children in foster care.

鈥淭his is more than just an account. It鈥檚 a message,鈥� he said about Trump Accounts. 鈥淵ou are seen, and you are valued.鈥� 

Many attendees said they just wanted a chance to see a sitting president in person. Melissa Moeller, who has two children in Cobb schools, learned about it because her 10^th grader鈥檚 marching band practice was relocated from Wheeler because of the event. 

It didn鈥檛 bother her, however, that the school鈥檚 landscaping was spruced up for the official visit.

鈥淭hey鈥檙e doing that anyway. With the president coming anywhere, I鈥檓 ok with a little pomp and circumstance,鈥� she said. 鈥淲ill it ever happen again? I don鈥檛 know.鈥�

But while screen time limits are one solution, they still treat the screen itself as the problem, when a screen is simply another opportunity for communication and exploration, just like a book, game or toy. With this in mind, what if the real question isn鈥檛, 鈥淗ow much screen time is okay for kids?鈥� but, 鈥淗ow can we make children鈥檚 screen time more meaningful?鈥�

At Pittsburgh鈥檚 PBS station WQED, we believe literacy starts long before a child can decode words on a page. It starts with conversation, curiosity, stories, songs, play and trusted characters who help children make meaning of the world. Instead of asking whether screens are good or bad, we should be asking: What kind of on-screen media are children engaging with, and how is that shaping their relationship with reading? 

When content is intentionally designed to build literacy skills through storytelling, vocabulary exposure and narrative comprehension, it can complement and encourage reading behaviors. from The Ohio State University found that first graders who engaged more frequently with educational media not only spent more time reading but also spent less overall time on screens. This emerging research complicates the long-held assumption that all screen time displaces reading and may even help shift the narrative toward seeing meaningful screen use as a gateway to developing healthy reading habits.

Educational media can also introduce children to characters, story arcs, vocabulary and language structures that mirror the foundations of books. in the American Educational Research Journal that reviewed evaluations involving more than 24,000 children, educational media developed through the Ready to Learn initiative was found to have positive effects on early literacy skills, including comprehension, vocabulary and phonological awareness.

The point is not that all screen time is equal; it is that trusted, intentionally designed media can help open the door to reading.

The interactivity and engagement of screen time can also be beneficial. One of the most consistent findings across early childhood research When used thoughtfully, highly engaging and interactive educational media can help caregivers and educators create everyday literacy moments, especially in communities where access to books, time, and resources can vary.听

That鈥檚 why, in Pittsburgh, WQED has joined the 鈥溾�� campaign 鈥� a collaborative effort among libraries, literacy organizations, and The Grable Foundation to not only put more books in young people鈥檚 hands, but also to support the region鈥檚 adults as allies in children鈥檚 literacy.

Parents and early childhood educators can further support this approach by asking children open-ended questions, connecting media to children鈥檚 own experiences and turning screen time into a shared literacy experience. I鈥檝e personally watched a child become absorbed in an episode of Daniel Tiger鈥檚 Neighborhood, then walk across the room to find a similar idea waiting in a book. That moment of recognition 鈥� that connection 鈥� is how a love of reading starts to blossom. And when children move from consuming stories to creating them through drawing and writing, it further strengthens their confidence and their identity as readers and storytellers.

We are raising children in a media-rich world. The answer is not to pretend screens will disappear or to leave families to navigate them alone. The answer is to surround children with meaningful stories 鈥� on the page, on the screen, in classrooms, in libraries and at home 鈥� and help caring adults turn those stories into conversation, curiosity and confidence. If we want to raise a generation of readers, we should see the educational media that children engage with on screens not being in competition with books but as another pathway to discover the joy of reading.

Peter Rosario has spent years watching his teachers help Spanish-speaking preschoolers sound out English words at La Casa de Don Pedro, a Newark-based nonprofit organization that offers support for immigrant families and contracts with Newark Public Schools to provide state-funded preschool.

But Rosario says the state鈥檚 investment in programs like his hasn鈥檛 turned into clear and consistent support for the city鈥檚 youngest English learners.

鈥淲e have to beef up the infrastructure to support them,鈥� Rosario said.

For young students learning English, the early years matter more than any other. that young multilingual learners who start preschool without having learned English can lose months of learning before they catch up unless classes are designed to teach in multiple languages at once. But while state laws mandate that New Jersey districts provide language support services to students, those services are implemented differently from district to district, with no real way to track their impact on preschool-aged multilingual learners.

Experts say that鈥檚 a problem requiring a more targeted approach to boost the quality of instruction, fund programs, and determine what students actually need to learn English.

Gov. Mikie Sherrill proposed a this budget cycle, which would add more than 1,440 additional seats to the state鈥檚 preschool program. But it wasn鈥檛 until 2023 that its codes to include preschoolers as multilingual learners. Before that, identification and language support policies primarily focused on K-12 students.

State leaders say they鈥檙e working to boost preschool offerings for young multilingual learners. Michael Yaple, spokesperson for the education department, said the state is revising the Preschool Teaching and Learning Standards to better align with the revised New Jersey Student Learning Standards for English Language Arts. Yaple did not provide specifics about what those changes would do but said in an email that the proposed revisions will 鈥減rovide stronger, more intentional support for preschool multilingual learners by integrating evidence-based literacy practices with language development.鈥�

But as the number of so does the demand for more services. In New Jersey, 282,000, or 47%, of young children ages 0 to 5, are multilingual learners, according to . In the 2025-26 school year, more than 11,300 students enrolled in preschool were identified as multilingual learners, according to state enrollment data. Across the state, multilingual learners made up more than 152,000 pre-K through 12th grade students enrolled in New Jersey鈥檚 public schools in the same year.

New Jersey is among the states with the strongest preschool policies for multilingual learners, earning eight out of 10 benchmarks measuring things like bilingual instruction, teacher qualifications, and family engagement, according to a from the National Institute for Early Education Research, or NIEER.

But the state isn鈥檛 tracking support for its youngest English learners, according to NIEER experts. While the 2023 state preschool update required districts to identify preschool-aged multilingual learners, the state has no way to verify whether that support is reaching students.

That鈥檚 a concern Alexandra Figueras-Daniel, a bilingual early childhood education senior policy specialist at the NIEER, raised during a June 10 conversation about the state of bilingual education in New Jersey, hosted by the Rutgers University Newark Joseph C. Cornwall Center.

According to Figueras-Daniel and other researchers, knowing how many multilingual children are enrolled in preschool and what type of support they are actually receiving is critical to closing language gaps before they become reading gaps and ensuring students are getting what they need before moving to kindergarten.

The state needs better data on programs that provide bilingual preschool programs to immigrant families through contracts with the local school district, such as Rosario鈥檚, to understand where support for multilingual learners is reaching classrooms and where it isn鈥檛, Figueras-Daniel said.

鈥淚 think we need ways to identify where implementation is strong, where gaps exist, and then where we can really put targeted supports in places,鈥� Figueras-Daniel said.

The gap between policy and data shows up in classrooms too, said Vanessa Colon, a bilingual intervention teacher and community support advocate for multilingual learners who also spoke on the panel.

鈥淪ometimes there鈥檚 a lot of disagreement between what we say and what we do in a district,鈥� said Colon during the panel discussion. 鈥淲e鈥檒l say we support bilingualism, we support biliteracy, but then in the classroom, we make other choices.鈥�

Those choices aren鈥檛 for a lack of standards, Figueras-Daniel said, but for a lack of consistency in how districts apply them.

鈥淚t could be that every district is calling their program or implementing it slightly differently,鈥� she added.

Programs labeled 鈥渂ilingual鈥� are what researchers call transitional bilingual, which uses a student鈥檚 native language as a bridge into English, Figueras-Daniel said. She described one district where multilingual learners receive 30 or 40 minutes of English as a second language instruction a day, but students are having trouble exiting the multilingual status. That model is different from full-immersion programs that teach subjects like social studies and math in both languages throughout the school day.

A true language immersion program is built around a roughly even split between native English speakers and native speakers of other languages, but in heavily immigrant communities like Passaic, Figueras-Daniel said, there often aren鈥檛 enough native English-speaking students to make that balance possible.

Betiana Caprioli, a Morristown High School teacher who also participated on the Rutgers panel, said El Primer Paso, a similar organization with a bilingual preschool program in Dover, helped her own children learn English. That model is the 鈥済old standard鈥� that allows multilingual learners not to lose instructional time while they鈥檙e still figuring out English, Figueras-Daniel said.

鈥淎ccess to high-quality preschool is one of the strongest predictors of positive outcomes for children learning multiple languages,鈥� she said. That鈥檚 why it鈥檚 鈥渃ritical that we continually recognize early childhood programs as part of this system.鈥�

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools. This story was originally published by Chalkbeat. Sign up for their newsletters at .听

The first step to solving a reading delay is knowing it exists.

Decades of research have found that all children learn to read by developing the same core skills. This applies to children with dyslexia, English language learners and those reading well beyond grade level. Per the science of reading, some kids just need more targeted and explicit instruction 鈥� more time building whichever specific reading skill (and there are several) isn鈥檛 growing as fast.

But to do that, teachers need to figure out which skill is lacking. It takes a particular kind of training and the right tools 鈥� and until recently, many Connecticut schools lacked both.

That started to change with the 2023 Right to Read law, which compels districts to use K-3 literacy curricula aligned with the science of reading. Some are already seeing improvements in their ability to detect and address reading delays.

At the same time, a growing number of parents are seeking to screen their kids for such delays themselves.

The Southport School 鈥� a private school that has used science of reading-based instruction since long before Right to Read 鈥� has for years offered free reading screenings to Connecticut parents through its outreach arm, The Southport CoLAB. This spring, CoLAB partnered with Sacred Heart University to expand capacity for the screenings amid skyrocketing demand.

鈥淚t鈥檚 twice as many as last year,鈥� said Southport Executive Director and CoLAB founder Benjamin Powers.

Powers said it鈥檚 all too common to see kids with reading delays pass undetected through school until fourth or fifth grade. By that point, he said, it鈥檚 much harder for them to catch up to their peers. To make matters worse, fourth grade is typically when kids start 鈥渞eading to learn鈥� 鈥� meaning if they can鈥檛 read, their other learning will suffer, too.

鈥淔rom a developmental standpoint, we are much better off 鈥� exponentially better 鈥� by flagging these kids early,鈥� Powers said.

That鈥檚 where reading screeners come in.

How to screen for a reading delay

Powers said the screener Southport uses lasts between 20 to 30 minutes, depending on the age of the child. It takes place on a tablet and runs kids through activities that gather data on different cognitive processes 鈥� things like 鈥渞apid automatized naming,鈥� which tests how quickly a child can retrieve the names of a variety of familiar objects from their memory.

At the end, the program produces a 鈥渢eacher and parent-friendly report鈥� identifying whether the child in question is at risk for something like dyslexia. Powers said it doesn鈥檛 diagnose the condition itself; rather, it 鈥済ives us an early marker so that we can just be proactive with the child, the teacher and the family.鈥�

Being proactive, he explained, is largely a question of dosage.

鈥淪ome kids just need a lot more exposure and practice,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd we do need to be targeted 鈥� So, if it鈥檚 a child who鈥檚 really struggling with certain letter patterns or sound symbol relationships, we want to make sure we鈥檙e targeting those specific attributes.鈥�

鈥淏ut,鈥� he emphasized, 鈥渆very child really needs the same kind of scope and sequence to build the reading brain.鈥� Some may have to work at it a bit longer than others, but overall, 鈥渢he vast majority 鈥� vast majority 鈥� of kids can learn to read.鈥�

Through Right to Read, that same principle is now being disseminated throughout Connecticut鈥檚 public schools. Although the screeners they use may be shorter 鈥� the popular DIBELS assessment, which many districts employ, takes under 10 minutes 鈥� the strategy is the same: Guide each child through a series of prompts, use the data to flag specific skills they may be struggling to develop, then respond with targeted intervention.

Stratford Assistant Superintendent for PreK-6 Diana DiIorio explained how the DIBELS screener works.

鈥淭he teacher sits one-on-one with the child. It is on a Chromebook. 鈥� It’s very self-explanatory. They hit a button that starts, they have prompts of what to ask the child and the child responds on the Chromebook according to what they feel the answer is. A lot of it is timed,鈥� DiIorio said.

Before Right to Read, DiIorio said, Stratford鈥檚 screening regimen was much more focused on comprehension.

鈥淲hat we were missing was the really systematic and explicit teaching of all of those phonemic awareness and phonics skills, which is the basis and the foundation鈥� of more advanced reading, she said.

Consequently, DiIorio said, they would miss students who arrived in kindergarten already reading but who lacked the building blocks for multisyllabic words 鈥� a deficiency that wouldn鈥檛 become apparent until the students suddenly hit a wall in fourth grade.

New Haven Supervisor of Elementary Reading and Language Arts Jennifer Novelli gave an example of how a teacher might test younger children for 鈥減honeme segmentation fluency,鈥� a skill they develop before they actually learn to read. Phoneme segmentation means breaking down the individual sounds within words kids hear.

鈥淪o, if I say 鈥榤op,鈥� the child would be expected to take that word and segment it鈥� into its discrete sounds, Novelli said 鈥� those being the 鈥渕m鈥� sound, the short 鈥渙鈥� and the 鈥減.鈥�

In this case, 鈥渢hey鈥檙e not looking at letters. We鈥檙e just testing to make sure they understand and know how to break words apart,鈥� Novelli said.

Phoneme segmentation, Novelli explained, falls under the umbrella of phonological awareness, which she described as 鈥渁 precursor skill to reading.鈥�

The schools CT Mirror spoke with all said they screen three times per year, with some employing other forms of progress monitoring in between. Initial results from two very different districts suggest it鈥檚 having an impact.

In relatively affluent Fairfield 鈥� predominantly white, with under one-fifth of students receiving free or reduced price meals 鈥� 74% of kindergarteners in the 2023-24 school year were already proficient in reading. There were concerns that the district鈥檚 new science of reading-aligned curriculum and screening regimen (done through Acadience, not DIBELS) would cause a dip as teachers and administrators got acclimated to the new material, but the opposite happened: By the time those same students left first grade the following year, the number had nudged upward to 78%.

鈥淵ou do expect implementation dips. We did not see them,鈥� said Janine Goss, executive director of PK-12 literacy at Fairfield. That applied to every cohort receiving the new Right to Read instruction.

The story is much different in New Haven 鈥� predominantly Black and Latino, with roughly three quarters of students receiving free or reduced price meals. There, the vast majority of students already have substantial reading delays by the time they start school. In 2024, for example, 61% of first graders were “well below” grade level, according to Novelli.

But the science of reading-aligned programming she helped institute has still had a notable impact: By second grade, only about 51% were still testing “well below,” and the percentage of students in that cohort reading at or above grade level increased.

Novelli said the dreaded 鈥渟ummer slide,鈥� a decline in reading ability that typically occurs over the long vacation, has also diminished.

Nevertheless, the results still leave about half of New Haven鈥檚 second grade class seriously behind in reading. This despite the fact that, per Powers, the vast majority of them can learn.

Much room for improvement

Novelli said one of the reasons many kids in New Haven are still behind in reading is a shortage of pre-kindergarten education.

鈥淥ur students that go to our preschools in the city are definitely better equipped and more ready with the literacy skills,鈥� Novelli said. 鈥淚f we were able to open more classrooms and have more seats 鈥� it would be better.鈥�

She added that New Haven鈥檚 director of early childhood, who joined the district three years ago, has implemented 鈥渁 very strong phonemic awareness and phonics program鈥� for 3- and 4-year-olds.

The kids who don鈥檛 get that early education 鈥� those who begin school in kindergarten and haven鈥檛 built (English) reading skills at home 鈥� are more likely to start at a disadvantage. In theory, they can still catch up, but that requires having enough teachers with the right training and the time to administer the needed interventions.

Therein lies another problem.

Although Connecticut has firmly embraced the science of reading, at least for K-3, few new teachers graduate from college with the skills to interpret and act on the results of a screener. It often falls to individual districts to train these new hires 鈥� not to mention all the existing teachers who were never taught these skills when they started.

Stratford鈥檚 DiIorio said this is where much of the real work of converting a district to the science of reading takes place.

鈥淲e spent all last year looking at the data [from the reading screenings],鈥� DiIorio said. 鈥淗ow to analyze the data, and then what to do with it. And then it was a whole ‘nother module of planning lessons based on what data was in front of you.鈥�

DiIorio said Stratford was in one of the first cohorts to attend state training on the science of reading, meeting about once a month, 鈥渇ive or six times out of the year.鈥� Since then, the district has partnered with HILL for Literacy for online training, in-person coaching and data analysis.

The challenge, DiIorio said, is 鈥渂ringing that knowledge to the entire district.鈥�

鈥淭here鈥檚 eight schools. We only had a handful [of staff] that went to that first cohort,鈥� DiIorio said.

Goss said many of her efforts in Fairfield have also gone toward teacher training. Under her leadership, Fairfield created district and building-level literacy teams across its elementary and middle schools.

With 200 classroom teachers at the elementary level alone, 鈥渢here was no way I, one person, was going to be able to get to each and every teacher,鈥� Goss explained.

She also praised her staff for taking new staff members 鈥渦nder their wings.鈥�

鈥淲e feel really good about knowing that even though they may not have the experience they need coming straight from college, they’re going to get that support when they come into our schools,鈥� Goss said.

DiIorio said getting new teachers into shape is a challenge that extends well beyond the science of reading.

鈥淚 went through it myself,鈥� DiIorio said. 鈥淚 have a teaching degree. Nobody shows you how to handle management of students, the behaviors of the students, the social emotional skills. You learn about it. You learn that there’s trauma in children. 鈥� But the training is not there.鈥�

There is an implicit issue of equity here. Because of , those located in wealthier towns typically have far more resources than those in cities like New Haven or Hartford, where the local tax base is stretched thin (Gov. Ned Lamont initiated a Blue-Ribbon Commission this year to find ways to ). More resources can mean more robust training for new hires.

DiIorio said she experienced this firsthand, too.

鈥淚 started in a very affluent school district, a couple miles away. My training as a new teacher was so different from when I came to Stratford as a principal. It was so eye-opening 鈥� the difference in new teacher training and what they get,鈥� DiIorio said.

Novelli said New Haven has literacy coaches in each building to provide professional development on the science of reading to teachers but would benefit from having more dedicated reading interventionists. A reading interventionist, she explained, spends all day in targeted small group instruction.

鈥淟ast year, we did lose two positions 鈥� and we don’t have enough people as it is,鈥� Novelli said. 鈥淚f we could have a certified reading interventionist at each school, it would be so helpful.鈥�

There鈥檚 a shortage of these certified specialists. That issue came up at of the General Assembly鈥檚 BERGIN Commission, where University of Connecticut literacy professor Rachael Gabriel shared data showing so-called Tier 2 interventions (which includes targeted group instruction) can actually create worse outcomes for kids if done poorly.

鈥淭here was a shortage in this area [of literacy specialists] when I moved to Connecticut 16 years ago, and the programs [to train them] have shrunk, not grown,鈥� Gabriel said.

She told the commission members the program she oversees at UConn has only 11 students, prompting an exclamation of shock from one of the listeners.

鈥淸This kind of training] is largely inaccessible. Our program is 鈥� over 18 months, and it is 21 credits, like the state requires. And so, that鈥檚 almost a master鈥檚 degree,鈥� Gabriel said. 鈥淭hat is super expensive. So, for a practicing teacher to say, 鈥業鈥檓 gonna take my evenings and my weekends and do this for two years and pay $30-$40,000 for it,鈥� is a really significant ask.鈥�

Powers, meanwhile, has his own concerns.

鈥淚f you would ask me 10 years ago, I would have been bullish on the science of reading movement, because it is, you know, it is an important movement,鈥� Powers said. But 鈥渨hen I look at the reading scores, we’re really not moving the needle.鈥�

He said something else now keeps him up at night: a steep decline in students鈥� executive function over the last 10 years or so.

鈥淭en years ago, somebody could focus on the screen for about two and a half minutes before they got distracted. Today, that’s down to about 40 seconds,鈥� Power said. 鈥淲e have kids who can pay less attention, are less focused, you know, just aren’t able to have that same uptake.鈥�

And executive function, Powers said, is directly tied to reading outcomes.

鈥淲hen I go in, especially now, like K-5 schools, what I hear from them is alarming,鈥� Powers said.

As to why kids鈥� executive function is declining, Powers said he has a few ideas.

鈥淨ualitatively speaking, you see, going to the grocery store, parents are just giving kids their phones to keep them occupied. Or even on the playground, you’ll see parents pushing kids on the swing set, and they’re looking at their phone,鈥� Powers said. 鈥淜ids just don’t have the same reading exposure they used to.鈥�

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

Every year, parents 鈥� usually mothers 鈥� toil months in advance of the summer break to sign kids up for camps, book nannies, fly grandparents out to help or sort out a medley of arrangements and schedules. Planning can start as far as a year in advance.听

After signing her kids up for all their assorted activities, one mom said she then . 

The summer months for school-aged kids are probably one of the best examples of America鈥檚 you-figure-it-out attitude toward most things related to caregiving.

Unlike in other countries, the United States summer programming experience is fragmented: You could book a private camp or one through your local YMCA, school district or church 鈥� all with different registration dates, waitlists and signup policies. Demand is often much higher than supply. And many of the options don鈥檛 run with the actual workday, which leaves parents responsible for brokering time with their employers. 

Cost has increasingly become a barrier for families looking to put their kids in summer activities, which now run about per summer per kid on average. Only about half of children whose parents want them to have a structured summer experience are actually enrolled in summer camps or day camps, according to by the nonprofit Afterschool Alliance that surveyed 30,000 American families. For 38 percent of the families that are unable to enroll their kids, cost is the top factor. The other barriers are transportation challenges, not being able to find a program, not having programs available in their community, program hours that don鈥檛 meet parents鈥� needs and not enough spaces in the programs that are available. 

What all of this looks like in practice is a summer camp rat race that often begins at the start of the year. 

鈥淪ummer camp, similar to other childcare and education systems, has not kept up with the reality of most children being in families where all the parents are working, whether that’s a single parent working full time or whether it’s two parents working full time,鈥� said Inimai Chettiar, the president of A Better Balance, a nonprofit that promotes workplace balance for women and caregivers. 鈥淭his is a system from the previous generations where a lot of moms were staying home.鈥� 

The result is that summer camp falls into the bucket of things Chettiar calls 鈥渉ome admin work.鈥� 

鈥淭his is part of the invisible work that women do: not only having to figure out what camps to go to, what schools for the kids to go to, doing the research, going to the tours, comparing the different schools, figuring that out, figuring out the drop off, if you need to hire someone, or taking time out of work to go do it 鈥� all of this is falling on women,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he administration of this has exploded in terms of the burden on mothers.鈥� 

Ahead of the summer break, The 19th spoke to five moms across the country about how they鈥檙e piecing together their kids summer plans 鈥� and critically, how they鈥檙e paying for them. 

Amanda Hambrick

• New York City
• Minister
• Number of kids: 4
• Summer cost: $14,250

During the last week of the summer, when most camps are closed and parents are left scrambling, Amanda Hambrick helps put on a focused on social justice for kids entering kindergarten to 8th grade. Their 50 spots are almost gone. 

For the rest of the time, she has a mix of activities to keep her four kids 鈥� 12-year-old twins, a 10-year-old and a 3-year-old 鈥� entertained during the eight weeks of New York City summer. 

Here鈥檚 the breakdown: 

• She and her ex-husband will each take two weeks off of work, staggering their time: 10 days out of the PTO bucket each
• One week of sleepaway camp for the twins and 10-year-old: $2,000
• Four weeks of day camp for the twins at about $800 a week: $6,400
• Two weeks of acting camp for her 10-year-old: $1,400
• Two weeks of gymnastics camp for her 10-year-old: $1,750
• Four weeks of part-time daycare for her 3-year-old: $1,200
• Four weeks of a nanny to help with pickups: $1,500

The total: $14,250

By New York standards, that鈥檚 pretty affordable. Hambrick is also cutting costs by volunteering her time as a camp counselor at the sleepaway camp, and she鈥檚 going to be bringing her toddler with her to work some days a week. 

Hambrick said she鈥檚 always had to 鈥渇igure out the summer Jenga,鈥� a job that has often involved tapping into networks of moms to find the best camps and secure slots. Her recent divorce has made the labor of it that much more challenging. Schedules need to be ironed out even earlier in the year now. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 part of that invisible labor of actually getting it done and piecing it together, and a big part of that also is relationship building,鈥� she said. 鈥淢oms just understand that you’re going to find out about affordable camps and fun camps and good camps through conversations and relationships that you have with people and with the community, and so that’s the way that I’ve been able to make our summers work so far throughout all my kids’ lives.鈥�

Maddy Novich 

• New York City
• Associate professor of criminal justice
• Number of kids: 3
• Summer cost: $24,370

Years ago, when Maddy Novich was on a two-week trip to the Netherlands, a lightbulb went off for her and her husband. 

If they were back home in New York City, their 4-year-old would be in summer camp and they鈥檇 be having to navigate one of the most chaotic systems in the country. But what if they put him in a camp for a week while they were abroad? That way, she and her husband could have some time to do all the things their son didn鈥檛 want to do, like art museums. They looked it up on a whim and soon realized there were a lot of camp options. So they tried it 鈥� and he loved it. They tried it again the next year, then the next, then the next, each time extending the duration of their trips abroad and building summer camp into the experience no matter where they went. 

In Europe, where they usually go for the summer, signing up and finding summer camp 鈥渋s much less crazy, it’s much less competitive, from my experience and the places that I’ve been to,鈥� Novich said. It鈥檚 also typically more affordable compared to camps in New York, which easily run . 

Novich vets the camps ahead of time by looking at reviews and ensuring they have English-speaking staff. Over time, she鈥檚 built relationships in places they鈥檝e visited multiple times, like Amsterdam. 

Here鈥檚 how the cost broke down last year for nine weeks overseas with three kids, ages 12, 8 and 5: 

• Two weeks of summer camp in Scotland for the two eldest: $2,000
• One week of summer camp in Amsterdam for the youngest: Free because it was covered for them (cost is otherwise $350 a week)
• A nanny to help for part of the summer: $3,000
• Flights: $5,700
• Other travel (trains, buses and rideshares): $3,500
• Hotel stays: $750
• Groceries (about comparable to what she spends in New York): $5,600
• Eating out: $2,000
• A trip to the emergency room when her daughter dislocated a toe: $107
• Other miscellaneous costs: $893
• Other kids鈥� activities (museums, aquariums, bounce houses): $820

The total: $24,370

What really unlocked this summer option for Novich was securing largely free housing through a platform called Home Exchange. An annual membership costs $235 and it allows them to swap homes at no cost with other families who want to come stay in New York. (Novich doesn鈥檛 pay the fee because she works with the company). Another plus: She swaps with families that also have kids, so they don鈥檛 have to worry about schlepping all the kid stuff they need 鈥� beds, cribs, high chairs, toys 鈥� overseas. Novich estimates they saved about $35,000 last year on housing alone. 

Of course, there are caveats, Novich said. Her frame of reference is New York, one of the most expensive summer camp markets in the country. And, because she has the summers off  through her work and her husband has a flexible tech job, they are able to go abroad. They travel extensively, so some of the costs are part of their summer budget. The family usually starts mapping their trips out a year in advance, and they share their journey . 

鈥淭he response has overwhelmingly been very positive because it’s just encouraging people to think outside the box a little bit, and saying the way that the U.S. does it isn’t the only way,鈥� Novich said. 

This summer will be their most ambitious yet: four different camps in Spain, Switzerland and Greece, and her two oldest kids are doing sleepaway camp in Switzerland for the first time. The entire family will be gone 11 weeks. 

LaQuitta Brown

• Detroit
• Certified nursing assistant 
• Number of kids: 5, 2 school-age
• Summer cost: $1,000

Summer camp options are already difficult enough to find 鈥� and when your child has a disability, the challenges compound. Last summer, LaQuitta Brown got lucky. 

She was able to enroll her 8-year-old son, who has autism, ADHD and an avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder, in a Detroit program that caters to children with disabilities. Her son, Kermari, was able to participate in Spanish-language immersion, dancing and cooking. 

This year, he鈥檒l be back. The program starts in July and runs for five weeks, costing her about $700. (The family doesn鈥檛 qualify for subsidies to lower costs.) 

That means costs this year will include: 

• Five weeks of summer camp: $700 
• Extra hours with a caretaker in June before summer camp starts: $300

Her husband is already stretched as thin as possible 鈥� he works every day at an engine manufacturer鈥� and her other school-age son, who is 14, will be working this summer for the first time (the rest of her children are in their 20s). So it鈥檚 up to her to bridge the time between now and the start of camp. Brown, a certified nursing assistant, had already stepped back from full-time work to take on only on-call shifts so that her schedule could be more responsive to her son鈥檚 needs. But she still plans to take on two to three more shifts a week to cover the cost of camp. She鈥檚 also attending a few free activities available around the city throughout the summer, plus upping his direct care services with a caretaker. Before Kermari got into summer camp, this is how she bridged the entire summer. 

All things considered, she said, it鈥檚 still a win because at least there is an option on the horizon that works for her family. When he first did the summer camp program last year, Kermari had an incredible experience. So Brown kept an eye on whether it was returning this year and signed up in April 鈥� as soon as she could. 

鈥淲hen you have children that are socially and emotionally incapable of certain things, but you see them happy, you want to continue that at whatever cost it is and sacrifice whatever you need to sacrifice to make sure that you can bring that happiness back to them when they鈥檙e out in the world,鈥� Brown said. 

Claire de Leon

• Long Beach, California
• Communications strategist
• Number of kids: 2
• Summer cost: $8,892

Claire de Leon started thinking about summer camp for her 5-year-old early this year. Pretty soon, there was a spreadsheet of math, reading and STEM and other camps they were considering. She was already too late for many of them. 

The slots filled up quickly and some of the more affordable options had dubious reviews online, with parents flagging safety concerns. So she started thinking more expansively about how to fill the summer months. That鈥檚 when she thought of Belgium. Her longtime best friend moved there with her family a couple of years ago, and de Leon promised to visit her every year. What if they made that trip in the summer? Their housing would be covered and the kids could play together.

So that鈥檚 the plan: Three-and-a-half weeks in Brussels, where de Leon will work remotely while her husband takes two weeks off. Then, when they鈥檙e back stateside, she and her friend will swap. Her friend鈥檚 family will come to California to stay with them for a month, and de Leon鈥檚 5-year-old will go to five weeks of half-day camp in Long Beach, from 9 a.m to noon.  The family will also spend a week and a half in Seattle later in the summer with grandparents who will help take on some of the care while de Leon works. 

Here鈥檚 how it will shake out: 

• Flights to Brussels: $2,120
• An overnight train from Austria to Brussels: $400
• Half-day camp in Long Beach for five weeks: $500
• Full-time daycare for her 2-year-old: $1,770 a month, $5,310 for the whole summer
• Flights to Seattle: $562 

All combined, it鈥檚 $8,892.

For her, easing the stress of summer planning meant getting really creative about what was possible within her family鈥檚 means and leveraging the relationships they had 鈥� both in the United States and out of it. 

鈥淭he more that I can approach it from not from a place of scarcity, but from a place of: What could be possible? What could we do? It really felt like it opened up these doors,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t sounds so odd to say, but thinking about going to Europe as a relatively affordable option for our very, very particular situation of having friends there was like, 鈥榃e can do that?鈥� It just sounds to me like something someone else would do.鈥� 

Meghan Hullinger

• Marlinton, West Virginia
• Outreach and community engagement
• Number of kids: 4
• Summer cost: $2,100鈥�$2,550

In the pocket of rural West Virginia where Meghan Hullinger lives with her four kids, there is just one childcare center for the entire county. There are camps, but few of the families in this lower-income area can afford to put their kids in them. A two-week camp could run her $8,000. 鈥淚 make $25,000 a year, so that鈥檚 not possible.鈥�

In rural areas with few options, single moms like Hullinger are banding together to make it work. 

This summer, her 6-year-old will spend about a month in Florida with the girl鈥檚 father and grandmother. Her teenage daughters, ages 13 and 16, will spend the summer at home. And her 8-year-old will go to a free camp his school puts on from 8 a.m. to noon every weekday for six weeks. A friend will help her with pick-ups on Mondays and Tuesdays, and she鈥檒l try to leave work early on Wednesdays and Thursdays, plus her 16-year-old can pitch in with childcare or she can put her son a couple weeks in the local daycare, which also takes older kids, for a couple of weeks. But that鈥檚 an extra $450 a month that she just doesn鈥檛 have right now.

Though her community of mom friends help each other, she sometimes has as many as eight kids in her house to feed 鈥� plus the extra gas to even get to the store at a time when . The nearest Walmart is an hour and 15 minutes away by car.

The costs add up:

• Extra groceries in the summer months: $900
• Drive to Florida and back to drop her daughter off: $700
• Flight to bring her daughter home: $500
• Six weeks of summer camp for her 8-year-old: Free
• Extra daycare if needed: $450

Together, that鈥檚 about $2,100 if she doesn鈥檛 do daycare, or $2,550 with it. 

It frustrates her, she said, that it takes this much stitching together to get through three months out of the year. Families 鈥� read: mothers 鈥� are just expected to make it work. 

鈥淲e’re still back in that late 40s, early 50s supposition that women are at home all day with nothing better to do,鈥�  she said. 鈥淲e are still running our nation and our policies based upon the presumption of unpaid labor, and that’s just not a reality. It has not been a reality for so very long, and I don’t understand why we’re ignoring that as a nation.鈥�

was originally reported by Chabeli Carrazana of . .

Ohio lawmakers have passed a bill that would require schools to teach students to graduate high school, get a job, and get married 鈥� in that order 鈥� before having a baby. They call this order of events the success sequence.

聽passed 58-36 during Wednesday鈥檚 House session and the Ohio Senate concurred with the changes made to the bill later that night before going on summer break.

Ohio Republican state Reps. Haraz Ghanbari, Gayle Manning, and Jason Stephens joined Ohio House Democrats in voting against the bill.

State Sen. Kristina Roegner, R-Hudson, introduced the bill, which originally began as legislation that would allow Ohio to join the Interstate Compact for School Psychologists, which allows licensed professionals to provide services across state lines.

The bill passed the Ohio Senate unanimously in November.

The Ohio House Education Committee made changes to the bill, including adding the success sequence.

鈥淵oung people are statistically far less likely to live in poverty when they complete high school, work full time, and marry before having children,鈥� said Ohio Rep. Sarah Fowler-Arthur, R-Ashtabula.

鈥淭his gives young people tools to make informed decisions about education, work, family, and their future stability.鈥�

The Heritage Foundation 鈥� the right-wing think tank that published 鈥� provides model legislation for the success sequence.

The bill requires the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce to have a curriculum list for the success sequence for grades 6-12 and this would be a graduation requirement.

Following these sequences of events means people are 鈥渙verwhelmingly less likely to live in poverty in adulthood,鈥� the says.

However, a found those who finish high school, work full time, and get married are less likely to experience poverty, but the order did not matter much.

鈥淚 feel like some of us must have missed the basic statistical lesson that correlation is not causation,鈥� said state Rep. Beryl Brown Piccolantonio, D-Gahanna.

鈥淚t completely misses the fact that there are so many other explanations for why so many people struggle in life so much. 鈥� Teaching that graduation, then work, then marriage, and then kids equals success also leaves out all of the unique ways that people live in our state.鈥�

, a standalone success sequence bill,

State Rep. Sean Brennan, D-Parma, shared the story of his mom who graduated high school, got a job, got married, and eventually gave up her job to raise her two children.

鈥淗er path did not follow a fairytale outcome,鈥� Brennan said. 鈥淪he suffered horrible abuse from her husband, lost everything when he left. She鈥檚 forced to work two low-paid, non-union jobs, supplemented by public assistance to keep clothes on her kids鈥� backs, food on the table.鈥�

She later died of breast cancer.

鈥淭he so-called success sequence did not save my mother,鈥� Brennan said. 鈥淚t didn鈥檛 shield her from poverty or systemic societal problems. 鈥� Just because some individuals who follow a certain pathway avoid poverty, it doesn鈥檛 mean those steps cause success for everyone.鈥�

Brennan also said teaching the success sequence is one more burden on teachers.

鈥淭hey鈥檙e already stretched thin, and this part of this bill adds another requirement,鈥� he said.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.

Thousands of Ohioans were in line to get a break on their massive childcare costs. Then the Trump administration .

has gone final and is expected to take effect July 13. Some Ohio families will the be hardest hit in the United States.

In the midst of an already-existing affordability crisis, the government on Tuesday reported that inflation had . The spike has been driven 鈥� and before that by .

At the same time that Trump last summer , he . Trump and Republicans in Congress also allowed healthcare subsidies to expire, which is .

In the midst of all that, the administration moved in January to scrap a 2024 attempt by the Biden administration to cap the cost of childcare for families making $77,000 or less a year. The Trump administration did that by proposing a rule that goes beyond the 7% cap.

鈥淭he rule rescinds the requirement to cap childcare copayments at 7% of household income, rolls back the use of grants and contracts for care that the market doesn鈥檛 readily provide for (like care for infants, toddlers, and kids with disabilities), rescinds prospective payments to providers and also enrollment-based pay, which risks destabilizing provider payment schedules, since they rely on predictable, reliable payments to cover fixed operating costs,鈥� Hailey Gibbs of the Center for American Progress said in an email.

by her organization showed that some Ohio families will be hardest hit by the loss of the benefit. The researchers estimated that without the 7% cap, some eligible Ohio families are paying as much as 27% of their income on daycare.

For the maximum-earning family of three, that鈥檚 $1,700 a month. Under the Biden cap it would have been $452.

In other words, some Ohio families will now have to pay nearly $15,000 more for childcare than they otherwise would have. That鈥檚 nearly $4,000 more than the next-closest state, Vermont, the analysis said.

An extra bill of that size would plunge a huge number of Ohioans into poverty.

of government data earlier this year found that a $15,000 surprise expense would swamp the resources of single-earner, median income household of four in the Buckeye State.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Ohio Capital Journal maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor David Dewitt for questions: info@ohiocapitaljournal.com.

A of four urban districts confirms these research-based early literacy pedagogies are indeed widely implemented in these school systems. Educators are doing many things right: They are consistently delivering explicit phonics instruction that includes a clear purpose using high-quality foundational skills curricula.听

Across the four districts, between 88% and 94% of over 200 surveyed teachers reported using their foundational skills curriculum daily or almost daily. Classroom observations of 112 foundational skills lessons confirmed that instruction was focused, aligned, and explicit鈥攈allmarks of effective early literacy teaching.

But something critical was often absent from those same lessons: the opportunity to

connect sounds and words to meaning. In a previous report, we explored how meaning is often missing in the tasks that upper elementary students are assigned 鈥� for instance, finding literal and nonliteral language in a reading passage but not what the author was trying to convey. In our latest publication, we look specifically at the foundational reading skills taught in the earlier grades.

Moreover, we found that many students meet literacy benchmarks for foundational skills on early literacy screening assessments. But by third grade 鈥� when they are expected to make meaning from more complex texts on state literacy assessments 鈥� far fewer demonstrate proficiency. 

In other words, early success with word reading does not always translate into later success with comprehension. 

This mirrors national trends: relying on early literacy assessments indicates that 56% of K鈥�2 students nationally are 鈥渙n track鈥� for learning to read, but only 31% of fourth graders performed at or above the proficient level on the 2024 NAEP reading assessment, a test that requires students to comprehend with greater depth.

What we found in our research, which included hours of classroom observation, was that only about one in five lessons gave students the chance to apply their phonics knowledge beyond single words to connected text: sentences, passages or stories that build reading fluency. And in more than half of lessons, teachers addressed word meaning just once or not at all.

In other words, students are learning how to blend sounds together to read words but not consistently how to make sense of them. We鈥檝e made real progress on decoding, but the connections between decoding and meaning are often missing.

That stems, in part, from how early literacy instruction is structured and supported. Decoding and language comprehension are often taught in distinct lessons with different curricula, and teachers receive separate professional learning for each.

While this structure can support focused instruction, it can also give the false impression that meaning making does not belong in phonics lessons. At the same time, K鈥�2 literacy data systems 鈥� including screeners and progress monitoring 鈥� tend to emphasize phonemic awareness and phonics, reinforcing the idea that those are the outcomes that matter.

The findings from this study point to an area for growth in foundational skills instruction that may help: bridging processes. These processes are the mechanisms that connect word recognition and language comprehension and should be incorporated into word recognition or phonics instruction, supporting students to build more meaning as they learn to decode. Two key bridging processes are vocabulary knowledge, which is understanding the meanings of words, and reading fluency or the ability to read connected text accurately and smoothly.

Without these bridging processes, decoding single words can be devoid of meaning.

Students may be able to sound out words yet still struggle to understand what they read. Importantly, bridging processes must be built into phonics instruction early on, and students should work on them throughout their early years of schooling, not just after they have successfully learned to decode words.

The encouraging news is that incorporating bridging processes does not require an overhaul of instruction or instructional systems. In many cases, bridging processes can be embedded into existing lessons in small but powerful ways.

Consider a phonics lesson on the two common sounds for double o, as in mood and look. A teacher might briefly define a target word 鈥� such as, 鈥渁 brook is a small stream鈥� 鈥� and show a picture of a brook before students practice reading it. Then she might instruct students to turn to a partner and share a sentence with the word brook.

This can take less than a minute but can anchor decoding in meaning, which is important for all students, especially for emergent multilingual students to expand their vocabulary as they are learning English. 

Similarly, building fluency doesn鈥檛 require a pivot away from explicit phonics instruction.

It requires ensuring that students regularly read sentences, passages and texts that incorporate the phonics patterns they are learning.听

For example, after decoding a list of words like book, cook, hood, soon, tool, and boot, students might read a simple sentence like, 鈥淲e went to fish in the brook,鈥� applying their phonics knowledge to connected text. Then they might read a short story about animals at a brook with several other double o words.

Our study found that such opportunities to build fluency were surprisingly rare and did not meaningfully increase from kindergarten through second grade. 

This is a missed opportunity. 

Stories and passages that use targeted phonics skills are often provided in early literacy curricula but are sometimes skipped due to pacing or a lack of understanding their importance. 

Fluency develops through practice with connected text; without it, students struggle to transition from decoding single words to understanding longer texts.

Bridging processes are critical for students to connect word recognition and language comprehension. Adequately addressing them requires more than individual teacher effort. District leaders must clearly assert that these processes are fundamental to foundational skills instruction and reflect this priority in curricula, professional learning and classroom observation tools.

District and school leaders should expand the data they use to capture a broader view of reading development, aligning tools with bridging processes and incorporating information beyond word recognition.

School leaders and instructional coaches should provide professional learning opportunities around bridging processes, leveraging existing structures like professional learning communities to teach educators how to embed vocabulary and fluency practice into phonics lessons without sacrificing instructional focus. 

This can be done through watching exemplar videos, conducting peer observations, lesson rehearsal and engaging in coaching conversations.

The promise of early literacy reform has always been that strong foundations would lead to strong readers. But developing students鈥� decoding skills alone is not enough.

If we continue to teach decoding and language comprehension as separate endeavors, the result will be the same: early gains that fade when students are asked to read and comprehend longer texts. But if we build the bridges through vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency practice and intentional meaning making in phonics instruction, we can change that trajectory.

SRI Education and 社区黑料 both receive financial support from the Charles and Lynn Schusterman Family Philanthropies.

In response, the national conversation has kicked into high gear. More than a dozen states have rewritten literacy laws, banning discredited instructional methods and mandating phonics-based curricula. Districts are overhauling materials. Parents are being urged to act in a multitude of ways: reading more at home, hiring a tutor, trying multiple apps.

I’ve spent decades as a classroom teacher, literacy coach, researcher, and now training future educators. I’ve worked with children who thrive and children who need extra support with reading. And I’ve seen how often parents are sent searching for complicated solutions while underestimating the impact of what happens in ordinary moments at home. That鈥檚 overlooking something both simpler and more immediate: Families already have powerful, evidence-based tools at their fingertips, and they don’t cost anything.

This isn’t a critique of schools. The evidence of what’s possible when schools commit fully is compelling: Louisiana became the only state to fully rebound in reading post-pandemic. Mississippi climbed from near the bottom of national rankings to the top ten in fourth-grade reading. Systematic, structured literacy instruction works when it’s implemented well. 

However, the best outcomes happen when classrooms and homes work together. The current reading crisis has exposed how much everyday language, attention and early habits have been neglected in shaping literacy, long before a child is ever formally tested.

Start with something deceptively simple: conversation. Reading is not just about decoding words on a page; it’s built on language. When parents narrate what they’re doing, ask questions and engage children in back-and-forth talk, they are building vocabulary and comprehension in real time. This isn’t enrichment. It’s the foundation strong readers stand on, and it happens in the car, at the kitchen table and at the checkout line.

Then there’s the way reading itself gets treated. Too often, it becomes something children think only “counts” as reading if it鈥檚 from a book. But literacy lives in the real world. A grocery list. A recipe. Street signs. Instructions. When children see that print carries meaning in daily life, they begin to understand why reading matters at all. 

And yet, in a culture saturated with screens and subscriptions, one of the most effective tools is analog: the public library. It’s easy to overlook because it’s free. But access to physical books 鈥� and the sustained attention they encourage 鈥� offers something many digital experiences do not. At a time when families are told to download more, the better advice may be to step into a quieter space and let a child linger with a book.

Honesty about the basics matters too. Letters and sounds are not outdated or trivial; they are essential. Helping children learn the alphabet, recognize letters in the environment or spell their own name is not busywork. It is preparation for the moment formal instruction begins and a base for whether that instruction sticks.

Perhaps most urgently, parents should stop being told to “wait and see” or 鈥渢hey鈥檒l grow out of it.鈥� These may sound reassuring, but in reading, it can be costly. Unlike spoken language, reading does not develop naturally without direct teaching. When a child consistently avoids reading, guesses at words, or becomes visibly frustrated, those are not quirks to outgrow. They are early warning signs. 

The earlier parents and educators respond, the easier the path forward, and the window for intervention narrows quickly. What looks like a behavioral problem in fourth grade often traces back to a foundational gap that could have been caught in kindergarten.

None of this will single-handedly reverse national test scores. But that’s not the point. The point is that in a moment when the literacy conversation is dominated by policy, programs and products, the most immediate and equitable intervention available risks being overlooked entirely: what families do every day.

The NAEP data tells a story of stratification: scores rising for high-performing students while struggling students fall further behind. That divide is not about capacity. It is, in part, about access to the kinds of early language experiences that wire children for reading before they ever enter a classroom. Debates about curriculum mandates and state laws are worth having. But while those debates unfold, children are sitting at kitchen tables tonight.

Parents are not a backup plan for struggling schools. They are a child’s first and most consistent teachers. The reading crisis is real. But so is the quiet, largely untapped power sitting in ordinary moments.

If better outcomes are the goal, the question shouldn’t stop at what schools will do differently next year. It should also demand answers about what’s already possible today 鈥� and why anyone has been told it isn’t enough.

What gets discussed far less often is that this pattern rarely begins in third or fifth grade, when participation gaps become easier to see. It begins in children鈥檚 first classroom experiences, where they learn whether speaking feels safe, whether mistakes are survivable and whether the classroom has room for the way they enter language.

The problem is not simply that some children talk more than others. It is that schools often mistake fast, public participation for understanding and then build opportunity around that mistake. A child who speaks quickly and often is usually read as engaged, confident and capable. A child who hesitates, watches or offers little is more likely to be read as uncertain, underprepared or less able.

Yet speaking in front of others is not a simple measure of understanding. It requires children to process a question, organize language quickly, tolerate public attention and respond while everyone is listening. For multilingual learners, it may also mean searching across languages while monitoring pronunciation and trying not to make a visible mistake.

What can look like 鈥渏ust talking鈥� is often thinking under pressure.

When schools confuse reduced public response with reduced competence, they begin shaping a trajectory. That trajectory is rarely built through cruelty or obvious exclusion. More often, it emerges through small instructional decisions that seem reasonable on the surface. When participation in whole-group discussion decreases, teachers鈥攐ften out of care鈥攎ay call on certain students less, simplify questions or stop asking for elaboration. Meanwhile, other students are invited to explain, justify, extend and defend their thinking.

Each decision appears minor, but over time they accumulate. Opportunities to demonstrate complexity expand for some students and quietly contract for others. This is how underestimation takes root in schools 鈥� not through overt exclusion, but through a subtle redistribution of opportunity.

The problem deepens when educators collapse many different experiences into the single category of 鈥渜uiet.鈥� From the outside, quiet students can look similar, but the reasons beneath the silence are not. Some are fluent and expressive in low-pressure settings but constricted in public ones. Others understand directions in two languages and still shut down the moment speaking becomes public.

In everyday classroom moments 鈥� during snack, in play, or beside one trusted peer 鈥� these same children often become animated and engaged. Expression can expand quickly when pressure is lowered, home language is welcomed, or an adult creates space for response.

In one kindergarten classroom, a child who rarely spoke during group instruction began, almost invisibly, by moving his chair a few inches closer to the circle each day. The teacher noticed and named the shift without demanding more than he was ready to offer. 鈥淵ou came closer today,鈥� she told him, and later, 鈥淚 see you鈥檙e staying with us.鈥�

Within days, he began whispering answers to a partner, and within weeks he was participating in small-group discussion. His language had not suddenly changed. The environment had. That is the point schools too often miss: Participation begins before speech.

In early classrooms, many children participate long before they do so in polished verbal form. They move closer to the group, track the teacher鈥檚 face, point instead of answering, imitate actions, sort materials, whisper to peers or respond through gesture and gaze. These are not lesser forms of participation. They are participation in its earliest form.

Yet schools often reward only the most visible and verbally fluent version of engagement, while everything that comes before it is treated as secondary. For multilingual learners and other cautious children, this creates a profound mismatch: their bodies are already engaged while the classroom waits for a kind of public speech they are not yet ready to produce.

If schools want to turn this around, they do not need an expensive new program. They need to stop treating the fastest and most exposed form of response as the clearest proof of understanding.

That shift begins with classroom routines. Before asking for a public answer, teachers can build in real 鈥渢hink time鈥� 鈥�10 or 15 seconds that give students a chance to process before the quickest voices take over. They can let students rehearse with a partner before whole-group discussion, so the first public response is not also the first act of language formation.

They can ask students to point to evidence, sketch an idea, jot a sentence or sort materials before speaking aloud. They can return to a child after another voice has entered the conversation, instead of treating one missed moment as closure. And they can widen what counts as participation so that gesture, writing, peer explanation, and home-language processing are recognized as evidence of thought.

Teachers can also lower the social risk built into participation by slowing the pace when questions become more demanding, avoiding rapid-fire questioning that rewards only the quickest responders, and making hesitation less punishing. 鈥淭ake a second and think鈥� invites participation differently than 鈥淐ome on, you know this.鈥� 鈥淪how me first鈥� opens a door that 鈥淯se your words鈥� can close.

Just as important, teachers can look for patterns instead of drawing conclusions from isolated moments. A student who is silent in whole-group discussion but expressive in play, writing, small groups or in another language is not showing an absence of understanding. That variability is information: It shows that expression is conditional, not fixed, and that classroom conditions shape what becomes visible.

These moves do not lower rigor 鈥� they make it more accurate. Rigor is not how fast a child can speak in front of others. It is whether a classroom can recognize thought before it arrives in its most polished, public form.

When silence is misinterpreted early, the consequences extend far beyond one discussion. Expectations drift downward. Opportunities narrow. Referrals increase. Children acquire identities they did not choose: hesitant, low, disengaged, behind. What begins as a participation gap becomes an opportunity gap, and over time the system names what it helped create.

The student who lowers her hand is not always unsure, unmotivated or disengaged. She may be calculating whether the room is safe enough for the way she speaks, whether there is time to find language without being rushed, and whether what she is about to say will be met with patience or correction. If schools want more students to participate, they should stop treating voice as something children either have or do not.

Participation is not a trait 鈥� it is a condition. Quiet students do not need louder prompts. They need safer entry points. If schools understood that earlier, they might stop asking why some students do not raise their hands and start asking the more important question: What have we taught them participation will cost?

The ruling came about nine months after the American Academy of Pediatrics and other groups filed a lawsuit against longtime vaccine skeptic, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr.,  and the department he leads, which includes the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.  In it, the plaintiffs argued that Kennedy Jr.鈥檚 advisory committee appointments 鈥� and the panel鈥檚 subsequent votes to roll back childhood vaccine recommendations 鈥� were unlawful.

David Hill, a pediatrician who has been practicing for over 30 years, serves as a spokesperson for the AAP. He recently told 社区黑料 that while he and his colleagues are 鈥渧ery happy鈥� with this latest development, 鈥渨e’re also all still holding our breaths.鈥�

鈥淭his is one moment in a lengthy process,鈥� he added. 鈥淚t is an encouraging moment, but I don’t think any of us are under the impression that this is over yet.鈥�

Most of Hill鈥檚 work centers around hospitalized children and newborn care, which means he is often the first pediatrician a family meets and the one parents talk to about vaccinating their kids. He recently started practicing in Seattle after spending years working in North Carolina, where he served a widely diverse group of patients.

The families he works with, he said, have 鈥渧astly different socioeconomic backgrounds and value systems and understandings of health,鈥� which has given him a unique perspective into on-the-ground impacts of shifting vaccine policies.

While not new to public discourse, vaccine skepticism has significantly swelled and gained greater footing since Kennedy Jr. took the helm of the nation鈥檚 health care system last February. Following his appointment, he swiftly fired all 17 members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, also known as ACIP, replacing them with hastily hand-picked advisors who largely shared his views on vaccines. 

The committee has since voted to overturn a recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine; change policies surrounding the measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (chickenpox) combination vaccine; and roll back recommendations around 2025鈥檚 COVID- 19 booster. Then, this January, officials announced a plan to overhaul the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule, significantly reducing the number of shots routinely recommended for all kids 鈥� all amid already falling vaccine rates, measles outbreaks and The AAP and other groups were also cut off from their long-standing liaison roles. 

It was in response to all of these decisions that the AAP, a trusted source of information for pediatricians and families for nearly a century, began boycotting ACIP meetings, released a competing vaccination schedule, filed their lawsuit and effectively severed ties with the committee.

March鈥檚 preliminary injunction halts the changes to the pediatric immunization schedule, and stays Kennedy Jr. ‘s 13 appointments to the committee, essentially rendering it unable to meet. All votes made by the now-stayed ACIP appointments are also overturned 鈥� at least temporarily. 

When asked to comment, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon said this week that the department looked forward to the judge’s decision being overturned, but would not say whether it had filed an appeal.

社区黑料鈥檚 Amanda Geduld recently spoke with Hill about his organization鈥檚 lawsuit and how childhood vaccine sentiments have shifted over the past three decades. The impacts he鈥檚 seen in his own practice are particularly illuminating.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity. 

What is the most common question that parents ask you about vaccinating their newborns? Is there one vaccine they’re particularly concerned about?

I have the most experience in my current role with the first hepatitis B vaccine, but I think it is a fantastic model for the questions that we get about other vaccines. For example, I recently admitted a child at the hospital with an infection and breathing difficulty at age 2 who had not yet been vaccinated against Haemophilus influenza B (Hib) and pneumococcal pneumonia. 

And we had to think about this child very differently, because these are complications of viral illnesses that used to be absolutely horrendous 鈥� with meningitis, aggressive pneumonia, severe ear infections, infections of the bone around the ear or behind the ear. And really, because of the effectiveness of the vaccines against these illnesses, we have been lulled into not worrying about them very much anymore. And so we had to make sure that the team was aware that this was a possibility 鈥� these complications with this baby. 

But most often I’m talking about hepatitis B, and usually I’m the one who begins with the questions, and I say, 鈥淗ey, I noticed that your child has not had the hepatitis B vaccine we usually give. Do you mind sharing with me your thoughts about that?鈥�

How have those conversations shifted, if at all, over the past three decades that you鈥檝e been practicing medicine?

Well, they used to be vanishingly rare. And not a 鈥渘ever鈥� event, but a rare enough event that if it occurred, it was remarkable. It might be the first thing I would tell my wife when I came home that evening, or something I would comment to my colleagues about when I went into the office. 鈥淵ou’ll never believe this, but we had a patient turn down [the] hepatitis B vaccine today.鈥�

And that is because there was a widely shared understanding that this was an important intervention to keep children healthy for the rest of their lives, and that it was an extraordinarily low-risk intervention with a very high degree of reward. 

And it wasn’t a never event. It’s always been there, but it was remarkable. It was unusual, and the script has flipped to the extent now that when I’m first reviewing a newborn’s chart before I go into the room, I actually breathe a sigh of relief when I see that they have gotten their vaccine, because a really significant proportion of my patients 鈥� especially just in the last five or six months 鈥� have decided that they are going to delay it or maybe not get it at all.

How much of that do you attribute to this current administration and to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.鈥檚 leadership of HHS?

I think that there’s a very apropos chicken-and-egg question here. The wellness industry has put an enormous amount of money and effort into undermining confidence in traditional medicine, and that, of course, allows them to expand their market. It’s a market which is extraordinarily profitable. 

But if patients have trust in traditional medicine, then they’re less likely to purchase those products or to go to those providers. So there has been a decades-long effort 鈥� in terms of marketing, in terms of influence 鈥� that has been well funded and extraordinarily successful. 

It certainly did not start with the election of Donald J. Trump, either the first time or the second time. It definitely was accelerated by the success of a number of proponents of these efforts to achieve power within the United States government, to achieve federal power. 

And as much as people distrust the government, they really do listen to what the government says. So when the message coming from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or from the Department of Health and Human Services, are messages undermining confidence in traditional medicine 鈥� whether we like it or not 鈥� that really does have a bearing on the decisions that people make.

Last July, the AAP sued HHS and Kennedy Jr. over vaccine policies. Then, in March, a judge issued a stay, which essentially means that a lot of the votes that ACIP made are overturned 鈥� at least for now. One of those involves the Hep B vaccine birth dose. Can you talk a little bit about the initial decision that was made by ACIP to delay that birth dose, and how you saw that impacting patients on the ground?

I think the really good news for those of us in public health and those of us striving for child health is that the initial decisions made by the ACIP 鈥� the ones that were recently stayed by the court 鈥� had not yet come to affect what vaccines were available to children. And so the stay has also not changed that, because payers were still paying for the vaccines, suppliers were still supplying them, manufacturers were still making them, hospitals and offices were still stocking them. 

So I think it’s very good news that we had not yet seen our worst case scenario of some of these vaccines becoming unavailable or unaffordable. We, on the ground, are very happy to see a court agreeing with our professional opinion that there was no scientific basis for making these changes, and yet I think we’re also all still holding our breaths, because this is not done. There will be appeals. This is one moment in a lengthy process. It is an encouraging moment, but I don’t think any of us are under the impression that this is over yet.

You mentioned that the judge鈥檚 ruling luckily came before some of the worst case scenarios were able to play out. But are you aware of any pediatricians on the ground who had started shifting any of their practices based on ACIP votes?

I am not. I am quite involved in the American Academy of Pediatrics, and listen to a lot of lines of communication. And I think we were all trained to follow the best evidence. And the American Academy of Pediatrics, and scores of other medical organizations, endorsed an evidence-based vaccine schedule that was very similar to the prior vaccine schedule, and that is, as far as I know, what all of my colleagues were referring to.

If the judge had not issued this preliminary injunction, do you think providers on the ground ultimately would have shifted their practices to match the new ACIP guidelines? Or would they have stuck to the evidence-based practices regardless?

You know, I have great confidence that my colleagues would have continued to follow the evidence wherever it leads. I think the fear would have been that some other barriers to following that evidence might have arisen 鈥� in terms of reimbursement, manufacturing, liability 鈥� that would have made it more difficult for us to do what we know is right for children.

I would imagine that the majority of parents across the country are not keeping super close tabs on this lawsuit or tuning into ACIP meetings, but they are reading the headlines, and they’re seeing these rulings go back and forth and practices being implemented and then rolled back. I’m wondering what impact that back-and-forth messaging is having on parents. Is that leading to confusion?

Oh, I know that it is leading to massive confusion. When you look at a marketing campaign, as this has been, people don’t have to be convinced that a message like this is correct, they just have to have some doubt. And so the fact that these conflicting announcements or decisions are sowing doubt is really enough to dramatically change the landscape that we are looking at at this point in terms of communicating with parents, in terms of following the best practices for public health and in terms of protecting children.

So what is your big takeaway of the judge鈥檚 latest ruling then? What impact will this stay have for parents and providers on the ground?

I think the most important shift that I’ve seen 鈥� and as a professional medical communicator, it is a shift that I welcome 鈥� is that pediatricians and health care providers as a whole, and scientists and public health officials are coming to terms with a new understanding of how critical our communication is. And it is across the board revolutionizing the way that we communicate, both individually and in public.

Can you talk a little bit about how that communication is revolutionizing, specifically when you鈥檙e talking to patients and parents of patients?

Yeah, absolutely. My dad is still a practicing pediatrician at age 84, and throughout his career he could count on the fact that he was the doctor being enough for most people. He walks in the room in a white coat with years of experience and an absolutely spectacular education at the best institutions the country has to offer, and has a wall of diplomas behind him, and people will be like, 鈥淥K, you know a thing.鈥� It’s just like when I walk onto my airplane and I see the pilot with all the gold bars on his epaulet. I’m like, 鈥淥h, this guy probably knows how to fly an airplane. I’m going to take my seat.鈥�

The relationship between doctors and patients and doctors and the public has changed in a way that I don’t think is going to change back. No matter what happens, we can’t just sit down in the chair and say, 鈥淗ey, I’m the doctor. Here’s what you need to do. Trust me, I studied, I know some stuff.鈥� Patients are really demanding 鈥� and appropriately so 鈥� that we show first that we care and that we can listen and that their value system, their understanding, their goals for their child’s health are the most important thing in that room 鈥� that we are servants who can bring our knowledge to bear to further this family’s goals for their child. 鈥� 

My mentor for many years, Dr. Tom Blackstone in Wilmington, North Carolina, used to sit me down early in my career and say, 鈥淒avey, they don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.鈥� And those are the very wise words of someone who’s been doing this for a long time, and I think those are words we all have to live by.

I love that 鈥� that鈥檚 a beautiful sentiment. Well you talked about how there have been shifts in medicine you don鈥檛 necessarily foresee going back. I鈥檓 going to ask you to look into a crystal ball here, if you will, and tell me if you foresee this moment as a shift in policy moving forward. 

In other words, might this be a time the administration moves away from the attacks on vaccine policy and perhaps more towards other elements of the MAHA movement, like nutrition? Or is this stay merely a brief pause before the vaccine battle continues?

I would tend more toward the brief pause, and I would be thrilled if MAHA acted aggressively on some of their (other) priorities. There is more common ground between the stated priorities of the MAHA movement and the priorities of pediatricians. We would love to see kids get more fresh, healthy food in their diets. We would love to see aggressive measures taken to reduce pollutants in the water, in the air, in farming practices. We would love to see efforts toward increasing family activity and generating safe green spaces for exercise and play really put at the forefront of policy.听

I think, in a very sincere way, there are a ton of common goals that pediatricians and the MAHA movement share. I am disappointed that on many of these fronts, it appears that this administration is actually taking steps backwards rather than forwards. Taking steps to allow greater degrees of pollution that we know harm children; taking steps to allow greater use of chemicals in farming; taking steps to decrease the availability of fresh, healthy food in schools, for example. 

And people have done this 鈥� there are forums where pediatricians and MAHA advocates sit down and find that they agree on a lot. So I think we would love to see any of those priorities move to the forefront of the movement. 鈥� The attack on vaccines, unfortunately, is very much an attack on public health, and so I think we are still waiting to see what the next steps are going to be before we relax.

The AAP has always been a highly trusted organization and leading authority on children’s health, but I would imagine that role has been pretty seriously magnified over the past year or so with this shift in leadership. Can you talk a little bit about what that feels like from inside the organization and how that’s impacted some of your public-facing actions?

Past administrations have certainly cooperated in more concert with the American Academy of Pediatrics, regardless of whether the leadership was Republican or Democratic. We are a nonpartisan organization, and we have enjoyed close working relationships with pretty much every administration. I believe it is unprecedented since we began working with the ACIP to terminate that relationship. So that certainly would appear to be a flash point. 

However, as a pediatrician of a certain age, I also recall that this is very much in continuity with the American Academy of Pediatrics taking positions in favor of child health that were at times quite unpopular with the public. We were out there early talking about tobacco-free spaces and tobacco-free homes. Those of us who are old enough to remember when people smoked in restaurants and airports and pretty much anywhere they wanted to also recall that there was a tremendous backlash on that. 

When the American Academy of Pediatrics came out in favor of taking lead out of gasoline and paint that was dramatically unpopular. The fuel industry and the paint industry, the builders, really protested quite loudly against that. Even car seats, bike helmets, things that we all take for granted as public safety measures 鈥� like who would not have their baby in a car seat right now? 鈥� were incredibly controversial when they began, and the American Academy of Pediatrics always stood up for child health and safety first and understood that if children’s health was benefited, eventually the public would understand. 鈥�

So to some extent, we are just following in the footsteps of those who came before us, and I certainly hope that when I’m not working anymore, there will be another generation to continue in that path, because it’s the right path.

Is there anything I haven’t asked about 鈥� having to do with this current administration and vaccine policy 鈥� that you think is important for readers to understand, given the news of the past couple of weeks?

I think first of all, that the public is wise enough to see where these attacks on vaccines could lead, and to make good decisions regarding child health moving forward. I don’t think we’re going to be having the same conversation in 10 years, or even five years, because as we see measles sweep through certain states, we’re also seeing people in those states recognize what a danger it is. And part of what we’re seeing is parents asking if they can have their babies vaccinated against measles at six months of age, which they can, it just doesn’t keep them from needing the next two vaccines. 

I think that the public is really very intelligent, and that people are already waking up to what these changes mean for public health, and I think for the most part, they don’t like it. One truism that I’ve witnessed as a pediatrician throughout my career is that parents love their children. They want the best for their children. Everybody holds their baby, imagining what that little being is going to turn into, how they’re going to grow, what they’re going to accomplish, and knowing that, I know that societally, we are going to ultimately make good choices, because that’s what it means to love our children.

Two bill packages 鈥� one seeking to lower child care costs and expand options, especially in areas without significant child care options, and the other to clarify child neglect and abuse statutes 鈥� passed through the Senate Housing and Human Services committee on Tuesday morning. 

Only two of the bills in the first package, which would essentially codify the state鈥檚 and adjust reimbursements under that program, which child care benefits to families under a certain income threshold by splitting the cost of an employee鈥檚 child care between the employer, the employee and the State of Michigan, faced opposition from the Republican members of the committee, still passing on party lines. 

In a on the bills earlier in March, Sen. Rosemary Bayer (D-West Bloomfield), who sponsored one of the bills in the package, said that the child care system is 鈥渋n crisis,鈥� which is having a $2.9 billion annual economic impact on the state. 

鈥淭he system is shrinking. Families can鈥檛 afford or find accessible child care providers,鈥� Bayer said. 鈥淧roviders are losing employees, shrinking or even closing down, and families are struggling to pay for services if they can find one, with costs often over $1,100 a month.鈥�

鈥淭he astronomical cost of child care, coupled with the hoops and hurdles providers must jump through to stay open, continues to fuel a crisis that impacts our families, workforce, and broader state economy,鈥� said Sen. Sarah Anthony (D-Lansing), sponsor of , one of the bills which passed unanimously, in a press release following the vote. 鈥淏y cutting some of the costs and red tape facing providers, we can start to address the child care deserts that exist throughout the state, especially in our rural communities.鈥�

Prior to the vote, Sen. Sylvia Santana (D-Warrendale) emphasized that, though she supports the bills, she also hoped to see further conversations about the impacts of these bills on businesses offering child care programs 鈥� which Sen. Jonathan Lindsey (R-Coldwater) added could call into question the need for MiLEAP, the Michigan Department of Lifelong Education, Advancement, and Potential, more broadly. 

鈥淚f we鈥檙e serious and we鈥檙e dedicated to making sure that access to child care is available, definitely there needs to be more oversight in this area, and also maybe just a really a deep dive into how these rules in this book reflect when it comes to the actual common sense of child care and those provisions that we鈥檝e put in place,鈥� Santana said. 鈥淪o I鈥檓 dedicated to this package of bills. I don鈥檛 mind getting it out of committee, but I do want to have a broader conversation with stakeholders, as well as those business owners who are definitely feeling the pinch of some of the rules within this book that may not make common sense at this point for them to be able to really continue as business owners.鈥�

The other two bills in that package, which would establish a review and appeal process for certain violations of child care organization rules and set in place standards for investigations, passed unanimously.

Both bills in the second package on altering the child abuse and neglect statutes also passed unanimously. They would specify the definitions of child neglect and abuse, specifically excluding 鈥渋ndependent activities鈥� like walking or bicycling to school or playing outdoors from qualifying under child neglect and abuse statutes.

鈥淭he idea is to make sure that our childhood welfare laws are aligned with reasonable childhood independence and that parents child care providers, first responders, schools, day cares, everyone has the right information about what is neglect and abuse and what is not, so that we can reduce the number of false reports and unneeded investigations,鈥� said committee chair Sen. Jeff Irwin (D-Ann Arbor), who sponsored one of the bills, in an on the legislation. 

All of the bills will now be reported to the full Senate for a vote.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Michigan Advance maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jon King for questions: info@michiganadvance.com.

Just weeks after approving limits on screen time for preschoolers, Alabama lawmakers are mounting a last minute push to set screen time limits for all public school students. 

The House Education Policy Committee Thursday approved , sponsored by Rep. Jeana Ross, R-Guntersville and filed on March 5.  The bill is an extension of the signed by Gov. Kay Ivey earlier this month. 

鈥淲hat I鈥檓 hoping this will accomplish is that these two acts will work together to create a continuous research based framework for developmentally appropriate technology you see from from early childhood to 12th grade,鈥� Ross said in an interview Friday.

Among other features, 搁辞蝉蝉鈥� bill would limit total screen time instruction in schools to two hours a day and mandate regular vision breaks after screen use.

搁辞蝉蝉鈥� limited screen time for children from birth until kindergarten in licensed child-care facilities, public kindergarten classrooms and specific Pre-K classes. Under the law, the Department of Early Childhood Education, Alabama State Department of Education and Department of Human Resources would collaborate on creative guidelines for appropriate screen time usage.

During committee, Reps. Alan Baker, R-Brewton, and Marcus Paramore, R-Troy, brought extending the limit to 12th grade and requiring students to follow the 鈥�20-20-20 rule鈥� during scheduled screen breaks. The 20-20-20 rule states every 20 minutes students must look at an object at least 20 feet away from them for at least 20 seconds. The method has been recommended by the to reduce and prevent eye strain.

Mark Dixon, president of A+ Education Partnership, a education nonprofit, said in an interview Friday the organization supported the bill. 

鈥淲e鈥檝e seen the benefits of the cell phone ban that legislature and Gov. Ivey passed last year; we were already seeing the benefits in classes this year, and A+ is support of limiting screen time in an age-appropriate manner,鈥� he said.

Messages seeking comment were left with School Superintendents of Alabama and Alabama Association of School Boards Friday.

During the meeting, Rep. Terri Collins, R-Decatur, who chairs the committee, said Rep. Chris Blackshear, R-Smiths Station, brought the idea of expanding the limit to 12th grade. Attempts to reach Blackshear were not immediately successful.

Under HB 584, a 17-member task force composed of educators; vision specialists and national experts in child development, digital media research or cognitive science will work in collaboration with the Alabama State Department of Education to develop guidelines for best practices for screen-based instruction.

鈥淲e want it to be high quality and to be used intentionally, again, just avoiding that passive use of technology, just like with the birth to age five kindergarten, but on up through 12th grade, our technology is intentional,鈥� Ross said.

Ross said after her original bill passed she heard concerns from parents about whether or not the bill would dictate what goes on in their homes. She said both bills only relate to instructional time in classrooms.

鈥淚t has nothing to do with what parents choose to do in their homes, but all to do with what happens in public schools and in places that receive public funds,鈥� she said.

The bill was not on Tuesday鈥檚 House agenda as of Friday afternoon. There are seven legislative days left in the 2026 regular session. 

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Alabama Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Brian Lyman for questions: info@alabamareflector.com.

The Iowa House passed a measure Monday to make the current pilot program providing free child care for child care workers permanent.

Iowa鈥檚 Child Care Assistance (CCA) program is available to parents with a gross monthly income below 250% the federal poverty level, if they are gone during the week days due to their job, schooling, vocational training or state activities. However, Iowans working at least 32 hours a week in the child care field have also been able to access the CCA program outside of the income restrictions through a pilot program implemented in 2023 and extended in subsequent years.

, passed 86-3, would make this program permanent. Rep. Ryan Weldon, R-Ankeny, said since July 2023, 2,105 families have received child care through the CCA pilot program, with the average family receiving support being at 302% of the federal poverty level. The funding for the program has come, and will continue to draw from the state鈥檚 Child Care Development Fund, which Weldon said had $112 million in the previous fiscal year, with a projection of carrying forward $107 million in FY 2026 and $91 million in FY 2027, alongside federal funds.

According to the , the bill would have an estimated cost of $11.7 million in FY 2027 鈥� with the state paying $7 million 鈥� and $12.1 million in FY 2028, with the state paying $7.3 million.

The bill was amended to require an annual report on state and federal costs, the number of participating families and children and the average household income of those receiving the CCA program support.

Rep. Tracy Ehlert, D-Cedar Rapids, said she was 鈥渆xcited鈥� the bill was introduced, as it was a proposal House Democrats have introduced in previous legislative sessions and Iowans working in child care have called for lawmakers to approve.

鈥淎s I have talked to different programs, this is one of the number one things that they said they needed to stay in place to help them,鈥� Ehlert said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 helping communities, it鈥檚 helping children, it鈥檚 helping our early childhood workforce.鈥�

Another proposal 鈥� which survived the first legislative funnel as  and  鈥� also contains language to codify the CCA pilot program. These companion bills are the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services鈥� larger proposal including a shift in some funding from the Early Childhood Iowa system to HHS.

is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Iowa Capital Dispatch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Kathie Obradovich for questions: info@iowacapitaldispatch.com.

Everyone鈥檚 shoes are off. Each family has found a spot on the rug, forming a circle. An 8-month-old girl squeals and claps her hands 鈥� a skill she鈥檇 picked up just a few days earlier 鈥� as she bounces up and down. All eyes are on the teacher, Alyson Hayes-Myers, awaiting her notes on the piano, which will signal that class has begun.

Over the next 45 minutes, an otherwise bare room comes alive with sound and feeling. All seven babies are engrossed in Hayes-Myers鈥� direction and movement, in the songs, in the close interactions the program encourages between them and the adult who brought them. 

Research is clear about the myriad benefits of music in early childhood. It can support , , and . It and . It can strengthen relationships and expose students to languages and customs from other parts of the world. 

In Hayes-Myers鈥� class, the evidence of the links between music and early development that are found in scientific studies come to life. In the presence of children who are singing or being sung to, who are listening to instruments or playing the instruments themselves, the brain development is obvious 鈥� and the joy is infectious.

Her class is in week four of a 10-week session that invites children from birth to age 4 to participate with a caregiver 鈥� often a parent, but sometimes a grandparent or nanny. It鈥檚 located in Denver, Colorado, at Twinkle Together, a licensed center of Music Together, which is an early childhood music and movement program with locations in over 2,000 communities across 35 countries.听

The program is designed for children, but the target audience may actually be their caregivers, explained Karee Justice-Bondy, director of Denver鈥檚 five Music Together locations. 鈥淧arents are key,鈥� she said. 鈥淭hey are really our students, not the children. We know children love music.鈥�

So many parents today, Justice-Bondy added, are inundated with information about how best to raise their children, and they end up ignoring their own intuition about how to parent, love and play with their little ones. 

鈥淭his can help remind you,鈥� she said of music. 

It can be empowering for families to engage with music, creating opportunities for them to bond and grow together. Many initiatives around the country, including Music Together, are trying to help parents and caregivers tap into that. 

Carnegie Hall鈥檚 is another program designed to leverage the power of music in early childhood. The Lullaby Project pairs new and expecting parents with professional artists to write personal lullabies for their babies. The project began almost 15 years ago in partnership with a New York hospital 鈥� music was identified as a tool to improve maternal mental health and well-being while strengthening bonds between parent and child 鈥� but has since reached families across the globe, in spaces such as refugee camps, opioid recovery centers and neonatal intensive care units, according to Tiffany Ortiz, director of early childhood programs at the Weill Music Institute, an education arm of Carnegie Hall. 

The Lullaby Project worked so well, Ortiz said, that families began asking, 鈥淲hat鈥檚 next?鈥� In response, staff at Carnegie designed and built out additional for young children and their caregivers, including , a free 10-week music class for infants and toddlers up to 18 months old. 

鈥淧eople think of Carnegie Hall and these very polished performances, big stages,鈥� Ortiz said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 really these micromoments and the way music can be used every day. 鈥� We really are trying to empower families to feel really confident in their music-making, to bolster that bond.鈥�

It鈥檚 working, she said. Parents and caregivers have shared with Ortiz that, after participating in a music program, they find themselves singing and making music throughout the day with their child 鈥� often during times of transition that can be challenging, such as brushing teeth, mealtime and bedtime. Music takes those tough moments and turns them into something fun and playful, Ortiz recalled families saying. 

鈥淥ften, music and music experiences are put on a shelf as a nice-to-have,鈥� Ortiz noted. 鈥淚t can be a really powerful tool in early development, but it can also help parents and families navigate the more stressful parts of early childhood. I鈥檝e seen it transform so many people鈥檚 lives and create a sense of meaning and connection with a child.鈥�

Dennie Palmer Wolf, principal researcher at WolfBrown, an arts research firm that has collaborated with the Weill Music Institute to its early childhood music programs, thinks of music as one of a few 鈥渘atural resources鈥� every family has (laughing and physical closeness are among the others, she said).

鈥淚t can potentially give parents a sense of being effective or capable,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a source of strength and resilience, in a world that takes that away, grinds it down.鈥�

Of course, this only works if parents are comfortable singing, and many are not. 

Ann C. Kay, co-founder of The Rock 鈥榥鈥� Read Project, which leverages music for early literacy, believes that shows like American Idol and The Voice have convinced adults that if they can鈥檛 sing well, they should not bother to sing at all. 

鈥淭here鈥檚 all these messages in our culture now that you鈥檙e going to be embarrassed if you open your mouth and sing,鈥� Kay said. 

Susan Darrow, CEO of Music Together Worldwide, made a similar point. Many people now feel that unless they 鈥渟ound like Lady Gaga, they should sit in the audience and listen.鈥澛�

鈥淭hat might be fine for our culture, but it鈥檚 a disaster for early childhood,鈥� Darrow said. 鈥淚 would love to be able to return music-making to the amateurs. 鈥� We want to raise children who are not afraid to sing.鈥�

That starts at home, where the only judge is a benevolent one: To a baby, the most beautiful singing voice is that of their parent or caregiver, regardless of that adult鈥檚 ability to carry a tune. 

鈥淲e鈥檙e not trying to raise the next Yo-Yo Ma,鈥� Darrow added. 鈥淲e鈥檙e trying to raise children who love and participate in music.鈥�

Beyond the benefits to parents, Palmer Wolf expounded on the way that music helps with children鈥檚 social-emotional development. When young children are singing and dancing together, they have an awareness of music stopping and starting, of taking turns, of getting quieter and louder, of imitating sound and movement, of self-regulation. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 an opportunity for kids to learn that your face, your hands, your eyes, your whole body says something to others,鈥� Palmer Wolf said. 

And music can communicate messages far beyond the lyrics of a song, she added. Palmer Wolf has been studying the role of music in some preschools in Boston that have a growing immigrant population, she said, and she鈥檚 found that culturally-relevant songs can signal to families that they are welcome in the community. When preschools use music in that way, it helps to build a sense of trust among families who might otherwise be wary, she added. 

鈥淲e can鈥檛 underplay the signaling power of music,鈥� she said. 

Colorado officials say money that helps 18,000 low-income families pay for child care could run out by Jan. 31 if federal officials don鈥檛 lift the freeze they鈥檝e imposed on funding for several safety net programs in five Democrat-led states.

If that happens, some children could go without care and some parents would have to stay home from work. State lawmakers could cover such a funding gap temporarily, though Colorado is facing a significant budget crunch.

The Trump administration announced the freeze on $10 billion in child care and social services funding for Colorado, California, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York in a press release Monday.

In letters sent to the two Colorado agencies that run the affected programs, federal officials said they have 鈥渞eason to believe that the State of Colorado is illicitly providing鈥� benefits funded with federal dollars to 鈥渋llegal aliens.鈥�

The letters didn鈥檛 cite evidence for that claim and a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services didn鈥檛 respond to questions from Chalkbeat about why federal officials are concerned about fraud in Colorado.

Spokespeople from both state departments said by email on Tuesday they鈥檙e not aware of any federal fraud investigations focused on the programs affected by the funding freeze.

The five-state funding freeze follows a federal crackdown in Minnesota after a right-wing YouTuber posted a video in late December alleging that Minneapolis child care centers run by Somali residents get federal funds but serve no children. It鈥檚 not clear why the other four states have gotten the same treatment as Minnesota, but all have Democratic governors who have clashed with President Donald Trump.

In a New Year鈥檚 Eve social media post, Trump called Colorado Gov. Jared Polis 鈥渢he Scumbag Governor鈥� and said Polis and another Colorado official should 鈥渞ot in hell鈥� for mistreating Tina Peters, a Trump supporter and former Mesa County clerk who鈥檚 serving a nine-year prison sentence for orchestrating a plot to breach election systems.

The federal freeze will affect three main funding streams in Colorado that together bring in about $317 million a year. They include $138 million for the Colorado Department of Early Childhood for child care subsidies for low-income families and a few other programs.

The subsidy program, known as the Colorado Child Care Assistance program, helps cover the cost of care for more than 27,000 children so parents can work or take classes. It鈥檚 mostly funded by the federal government with smaller contributions from states and counties.

The other two frozen funding streams go to the Colorado Department of Human Services and pay for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, and other programs.

In the letter to the Colorado Department of Early Childhood, federal officials outlined new fiscal requirements the state will have to follow before the funding freeze is lifted. They include attendance documentation 鈥� without names or other personal identifiers 鈥� for children in the child care subsidy program.

A state fact sheet issued in response to the funding freeze said funding for the child care subsidy program would be depleted by Jan. 31. It also outlined several measures already in place to prevent fraud or waste, including state audits, monthly case reviews by county officials, and efforts to recover funds if improper payments are made.

The state said it is exploring 鈥渁ll options, including legal avenues鈥� to keep the frozen funding flowing.

Six Democratic state lawmakers, most in leadership positions, released a statement Tuesday afternoon calling the funding freeze a callous move that will make life more expensive for working families.

鈥淲e stand ready to work with Governor Polis and partners in our federal delegation to resist this lawless effort to freeze funding, and we sincerely hope that our Republican colleagues will put politics aside, get serious about making life in Colorado more affordable, and put families first,鈥� the statement said in part.

The statement was from Speaker of the House Julie McCluskie; Senate President James Coleman; House Majority Leader Monica Duran; Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez; Rep. Emily Sirota; and Sen. Judy Amabile.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

It is up to individual states to determine if they want to adopt the newly announced Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommendations that now advise universal vaccination against 11 diseases 鈥� down from 17.  

The new guidelines will lead to 鈥渕ore splintering of vaccine policies鈥� and a patchwork system, warned vaccine law expert Richard Hughes, who also predicted legal challenges to the way the change was implemented.

Northe Saunders, president of the pro-vaccine advocacy organization American Families for Vaccines, said 鈥渢here鈥檚 going to be a red-state, blue-state divide where blue states look to the science, and red states look to the ill-conceived recommendations of the federal government.鈥�

鈥淲ith differing vaccine schedules state by state,鈥� he continued, 鈥減arents aren鈥檛 going to know what the right thing to do for their family is.鈥�

The new guidelines continue to universally recommend vaccines against 11 diseases including measles, mumps, rubella, polio and tetanus. But, shots protecting against a number of other diseases will no longer be recommended and will only be available for certain high-risk groups or after a consultation with a medical professional, also known as shared clinical decision-making. 

These include meningococcal disease 鈥� which causes meningitis 鈥� hepatitis A, hepatitis B, rotavirus and respiratory syncytial virus, more commonly known as RSV, the

CDC officials said their decision will more closely align the United States with other peer nations, mirroring a policy objective voiced by President Donald Trump in December, but one that critics claim is a false equivalency meant to further the administration鈥檚 anti-vaccine agenda.

鈥淎fter an exhaustive review of the evidence, we are aligning the U.S. childhood vaccine schedule with international consensus while strengthening transparency and informed consent,鈥� Health Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr., a longtime vaccine skeptic, said Monday. 鈥淭his decision protects children, respects families, and rebuilds trust in public health.鈥�

Sean O鈥橪eary, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Infectious Disease, said Monday 鈥渨hat was announced today is part of a decades-long effort on the part of the health secretary to spread fear and falsehoods about vaccines. This is another step in the secretary’s effort to dismantle the U.S. vaccination system.鈥�

While shared clinical decision-making for these vaccines 鈥渕ay sound good on its surface, it’s actually really problematic,鈥� said O鈥橪eary. Pediatricians are already having these conversations with parents before vaccinating their kids. Shifting the recommendation won鈥檛 strengthen those exchanges, 鈥渋t just makes things more confusing for parents and clinicians,鈥� he said.

The American Academy of Pediatrics will continue to recommend kids get vaccinated against all 17 diseases, and multiple states have already banded together to form regional health alliances and establish their own vaccine recommendations. In September, the governors of California, Oregon and Washington created the to 鈥渆nsure residents remain protected by science, not politics.鈥�

Later that month, several others announced the . While neither alliance is solely focused on immunization policy, both have stated goals of science-based vaccine recommendations and equitable access to shots.

At the same time, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis veered towards a vastly different approach, announcing the state鈥檚 intention to become the first to drop all vaccine mandates, including for schoolchildren. State officials have since taken steps towards making that goal a reality.

鈥楥hildren鈥檚 lives are at stake鈥�

William Moss, director of the Johns Hopkins鈥� International Vaccine Access Center, told 社区黑料 this week鈥檚 dramatic shift in the CDC鈥檚 recommendation 鈥渨ill lead to more disease and potentially some deaths in children in this country that could have been prevented.鈥�

The process that led to the changes represents a sharp departure from past practices, which would have required extensive research, a forum for public comment, an opportunity for relevant stakeholders 鈥� such as vaccine manufacturers and pediatricians 鈥� to weigh in and a formal meeting of the CDC鈥檚 Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, also known as ACIP. 

Significant changes such as the one announced Monday were historically 鈥渧ery deliberate by design,鈥� said O鈥橪eary because 鈥渓iterally children鈥檚 health and children鈥檚 lives are at stake.鈥�

None of those steps were followed here, said Hughes, a George Washington University law professor.

鈥淭hese are not rigorous analyses,鈥� Hughes said. 鈥淭hese are not people who are qualified to be making these decisions. They鈥檙e not grounded in evidence. And for that reason they are unlawful.鈥�

Kennedy last year fired all 17 ACIP members, replacing them with hastily hand-picked advisors who largely share his views on vaccines. It has since voted to overturn a recommendation that all newborns receive the hepatitis B vaccine; change policies surrounding the measles, mumps, rubella and varicella (chickenpox) combination vaccine; and roll back recommendations around 2025鈥檚 COVID 19 booster. 

The decision to change the childhood vaccine schedule in a much more far-reaching way did not go through ACIP, and the premise it was based on 鈥� to more closely match U.S. policy with those of other wealthy nations such as Denmark 鈥� is not a sound one, according to medical experts.

鈥淵ou can鈥檛 just copy and paste public health,鈥� said O鈥橪eary, who argued there are fundamental differences between the counties that lead to very different needs.

Moss echoed this point: 鈥淒enmark has a universal health care system where we have this very fragmented, insurance-based health care system. Denmark’s the size of Wisconsin, so [the U.S. is] just a much bigger country, a more complex country.鈥�

And, when it comes to diseases such as hepatitis B, Denmark has much stronger screening rates.

While HHS claimed all vaccines previously recommended will remain fully covered by insurance and available to parents who want to vaccinate their kids, others are less sure. According to O鈥橪eary, HHS leaders appear to have misunderstood how insurance companies determine coverage: Historically vaccines recommended for high-risk groups are only covered for children included in that group.

At the very least, doctors and advocates argue, the shift will put up additional barriers in an environment that is already filled with vaccine hesitancy and confusion, inevitably leading to diminished uptake and, ultimately, more sick kids. Health care providers may also start stocking fewer vaccines, making it harder for families to access them. 

There also remains uncertainty around who can actually participate in the shared clinical decision-making; in some states, this may mean that pharmacists can no longer administer vaccines, such as RSV, independently.听

And even if the shots remain available, this week鈥檚 action by the CDC will likely further undermine confidence in vaccines, as immunization rates are already falling and diseases are on the uptick. 

In 2025, there were 2,065 confirmed measles cases 鈥� the most recorded since the U.S. deemed the virus eliminated a quarter-century ago. The vast majority of cases were in unvaccinated kids, died. 

Flu cases this season are also rising at a faster rate than in previous years, There have been 7.5 million cases so far, leading to 81,000 hospitalizations, and 3,100 deaths 鈥� including eight children. Despite this week鈥檚 updated guidance, the still recommends everyone 6 months and older receive a flu shot. 

Colorado parents will soon be able to get partial refunds on certain upfront fees they鈥檝e paid to child care centers if their children don鈥檛 land a seat there within six months.

A that takes effect on Jan 1. aims to ease the cost burden on families who pay waitlist, application, or deposit fees to child care programs that their children don鈥檛 end up attending. It requires child care providers to provide the refunds if a child has not been offered a spot within six months and the parent requests the refund in writing, such as by email.

Democratic lawmakers pushed for the proposal during the 2025 legislative session, citing instances where families sometimes pay fees of $100 or more to a dozen or more child care centers as they search for a slot.

The law applies to fees paid on or after Jan. 1, 2026, so families won鈥檛 be able to obtain refunds until they hit the end of the six-month window in July 2026 or after. Families who are offered a spot at a child care center but decline it aren鈥檛 eligible to recoup any of the fees they paid.

Under the law, providers are allowed to keep a 鈥渞easonable鈥� portion of the waitlist, application, or deposit fee to cover administrative costs. , according to a Colorado Department of Early Childhood document released Thursday.

Besides the refund provision, the new law requires child care programs to disclose their tuition and fees when a prospective family requests pricing information, joins the waitlist, enrolls in the program, or when the provider changes the fee schedule. It doesn鈥檛 require that tuition and fees be posted publicly.

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

Half of Americans think we should be at least somewhat worried about the impact of falling birth rates on society, according to the fielded in September.

Mary Aured, a 65-year-old based in Florida, indicated in the poll that she was 鈥渧ery worried鈥� about the country鈥檚 falling birth rate and told The 19th: 鈥淚鈥檓 desperately afraid that there will not be a generation that can support the generation above it.鈥�

Aured, a member of the Baby Boomer generation who identified as Republican or Republican-leaning, said she thinks people still want to have kids but simply can鈥檛 afford it. She pointed to her 28-year-old daughter and 30-year-old son.

鈥淢y son wants to get married, but he鈥檚 questioning having children because of the economic cost of it,鈥� Aured said. 鈥淎nd my daughter just moved in with us because she lost her job.鈥�

Joe Stock, 65, also said he was 鈥渧ery worried鈥� about the falling birth rate and 鈥渟trongly agreed鈥� that society should return to traditional gender roles. For Stock, an Independent voter in Connecticut who supports President Donald Trump, it is more of a cultural issue: Young people鈥檚 life trajectories and mindsets are 鈥渘ight and day鈥� compared with his youth.

鈥淭he idea of family now is basically nonexistent or in some circles, it exists but with a twisted, abnormal and counter-growth kind of an approach,鈥� said Stock. For him, the traditional nuclear family 鈥� consisting of a man, woman and children 鈥� is the 鈥渧ery foundation and the bedrock of society.鈥�

The 19th News/SurveyMonkey Poll was conducted online from September 8-15, 2025, among a national sample of 20,807 U.S. adults 18 and older. It has an error estimate of 卤1.0 percent.

The 19th spoke with survey respondents, academics and experts about why so many people are concerned about falling birth rates, historical echoes and how the Trump administration鈥檚 policies further the message.

First: Are birth rates falling in the United States?

Yes. In 2024, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that the nation鈥檚 fertility rate hit a record low of 1.6. That鈥檚 about what it was in the 1970s, after rates rose to 3.7 during the baby boom. Experts generally agree that a total fertility rate, or average number of births over the birthing population鈥檚 lifetime, should hover around 2.1 for a population to replace itself solely through reproduction.

The changes are part of a long-running international trend.

Experts say a have impacted the birth rate, which has dropped significantly from the first half of the 20th century. Women鈥檚 鈥� the pill was approved in 1960, and abortion availability rose after Roe v. Wade was decided in 1973 鈥� as well as rising participation in the workforce and pursuit of higher education meant people were choosing to have kids later. The costs of child care, insurance coverage and all impact decisions on whether to have kids, and at what age.

Still, according to the World Bank, the United States has one of the higher fertility rates . Low fertility rates in countries such as and have caused international panic about aging populations. Economists worry about the impact falling birth rates will have on the future job market, or whether there will be enough caretakers for the older generation. Tax revenue , as well as gross domestic product.

Who is most worried about the country鈥檚 birth rate?聽

Nearly every demographic group expresses anxiety about falling birth rates. Breaking the 19th News/SurveyMonkey poll down across racial and ethnic lines shows little variance 鈥� about half of all groups are worried.

There is a strong gender divide. Men are more concerned than women, 58 percent versus 48 percent. Fifty-eight percent of White men are concerned, compared with 45 percent of White women, who are the least concerned of all race and gender breakdowns.

Republicans tend to be more concerned than Democrats or Independents, but significant portions of people across parties say they are worried about birth rates.

What is motivating the fear of falling birth rates?

The partisan differences, paired with , hint at deeper concerns expressed through the fear of falling birth rates.

Joshua Wilson, a political science professor at the University of Denver, said national identity is a 鈥渞eal obsession鈥� with the rise of conservatism across the world.

鈥淔ear of birth rates is a way of feeding into this anxiety of national identity, who we are and how we are being threatened,鈥� Wilson said. 鈥淛ust look at the words of MAGA itself: Make America Great Again. It鈥檚 a very conservative view because it鈥檚 saying that in the past, there was a kind of ideal America and we鈥檝e been knocked off track. We need to reestablish that old identity 鈥� even if it鈥檚 a myth.鈥�

The anxiety is closely tied to anti-immigration policies as well. Immigration could be seen as a solution to the falling birth rate 鈥斅燽ut opponents connect migration with a loss of culture, loss of control in democratic institutions and loss of status.

For the right, Wilson said, 鈥渢he question becomes, how do we win back the culture through majorities? How do we win elections and guarantee future elections? We make majorities through procreation 鈥� it is a kind of really basic arithmetic.鈥�

What is pronatalism?

Pronatalism is the promotion of reproduction in a population, and today more commonly refers to the belief that a steady birth rate is essential to a stable society. Historically, it鈥檚 often a result of the fear of falling birth rates and a loss of national identity.

As women fought for suffrage and expanded social rights in the United States, pronatalism was a reactive force.

鈥淭here鈥檚 this linkage between women鈥檚 educational and aspirational futures and the declining birth rate,鈥� Laura Lovett, author of 鈥淐onceiving the Future: Pronatalism, Reproduction, and the Family in the United States, 1890-1930,鈥� earlier this year. She said President Theodore Roosevelt blamed young White women going to college for

How else have pronatalist ideas been linked to nationalism and extremism?

Pronatalism is often entwined with eugenics, and authoritarian regimes have often capitalized on this. In the leadup to World War II, the Nazi party discouraged single 鈥淎ryan鈥� women from having abortions and tasked German women with birthing enough 鈥減ure鈥� children to take over the continent. Officials to honor women based on the number of children they had.

These attitudes can rear their head in any nationalist movement. The Black Panthers and Nation of Islam were 鈥渟taunchly opposed to abortion or any other form of reproductive control, even if voluntarily chosen,鈥� wrote historian Jennifer A. Nelson in an article about .

鈥淭hese nationalists insisted that by increasing their numbers, people of color would gain political power,鈥� she wrote. 鈥淭hey called upon women to bear children as their contribution to the Black Power movement.鈥�

Wombs are essential to ethnic nationalist movements, and pronatalist messaging can emphasize traditional gender roles as a way to contribute to a larger project. Historically, a lot of pronatalist messaging was anti-feminist. Seyward Darby, journalist and author of 鈥淪isters In Hate: American Women on the Front Lines of White Nationalism,鈥� said pronatalism was wielded in the service of subjugating women by keeping them constrained to the home.

At the same time that White women won suffrage in the 1920s, the Ku Klux Klan was recruiting them into the white supremacist movement. The KKK was founded on the idea that White women needed protection from Black men, Darby said, and that was very tied to the idea that 鈥渢heir purpose, politically, socially, was to have babies.鈥� Klan messaging focused on the importance of White mothers as keepers of history and tradition for the White race, she said.

Concerns over White birth rates have been used to justify extremist, racist violence in recent years too. That includes a 2019 attack in New Zealand in which 51 people were killed by a White Australian man who expressed concern over a shrinking White population and a 2022 shooting in Buffalo, New York, in which the shooter killed 14 and cited the that foments fear about the extinction of the White race due to rising populations of people of color.

How partisan is the discussion about declining birth rates?

Democrats and Republican platforms differ greatly in their proposals to address falling birth rates. In general, progressives tend to talk about family planning in more economic terms as an affordability issue, while conservatives see it as a need for a certain cultural identity, typically with religious undertones.

Sixty-five percent of Trump voters are worried about falling birth rates, compared with 45 percent of Kamala Harris voters, and the numbers are similar for Republicans and Democrats.

Wilson pointed to 鈥� a 920-page conservative presidential policy blueprint authored by the Heritage Foundation 鈥� as a key in understanding the modern American pronatalism movement. Its first and foremost recommendation is to 鈥渞estore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children.鈥� The second is to 鈥渄ismantle the administrative state and return self-governance to the American people鈥� 鈥� an approach that rejects policies like universal day care.

鈥淭his movement captures the classic conservative tension between the family ideal and the intervening dangerous state,鈥� said Wilson, whose research focus includes abortion politics and modern American conservatism. 鈥淏ut when you cut out all the social supports, then what鈥檚 the subtext there? Who do you want to be producing?鈥�

Still, a significant portion of progressive Americans, including LGBTQ+ people (43 percent) and Gen Z women (51 percent), are concerned about the nation鈥檚 fertility rate. The left tends to address the problem through the lens of affordability and strengthening the social safety net.

Is the Trump administration pushing pronatalist policies?聽

Yes. Pronatalist rhetoric creeps into the policy and talking points from members of the Trump administration. President Trump called himself the 鈥渇ertilization president鈥� on the campaign trail, promising free in vitro fertilization for all, and Vice President JD Vance The secretary of transportation, who is a father of nine, to prioritize projects that 鈥済ive preference to communities with marriage and birth rates higher than the national average.鈥�

Tech billionaire and Trump ally Elon Musk, the , decried the country鈥檚 fertility rate, , 鈥渁 collapsing birth rate is the biggest danger civilization faces by far.鈥� There is a specific strain of pronatalism among tech elites that advocates for the use of assistive reproductive technologies to engineer the smartest kids possible.

In a recent report,鈥�,鈥� the National Women鈥檚 Law Center expressed caution about policies like $1,000 baby bonds and that are coming from the administration. (The IVF proposal of Trump campaign-trail promise to make insurance companies cover the procedure.)

Amy K. Matsui, the vice president for child care & income security at the center, said there鈥檚 strong evidence that these policies are meant to benefit certain people, particularly the White and more affluent.

鈥淲e鈥檙e seeing the confluence of a purported concern about birth rates being used to advance an agenda, which is really about exercising control over women鈥檚 bodies, over gender roles, over women鈥檚 role in public life,鈥� Matsui said.

Matsui said she sees the Trump administration鈥檚 pronatalist policies as part of 鈥渁 shrinking government that literally makes it harder for people to make ends meet.鈥� She added there are 鈥渇laws and dangers鈥� to encouraging a 鈥渢raditional family structure where women are not in the workforce but are staying home and primarily responsible for caregiving.鈥�

Matsui pointed to the , which is disproportionately women and people of color; the during the ; and and women鈥檚 health.

At the same time that the administration is encouraging more births, Matsui said it is also dismantling structures that support families and make it harder for certain women to have choices around family planning.

鈥淭here鈥檚 a really strong kind of racial thread going through this as well because these policies are paired with opposition to immigration, an underlying concern about the wrong kind of people having children 鈥� which includes non-White people, non-heterosexual people, people who are not in traditional marriage structures,鈥� Matsui said.

How do religion and traditional gender roles play a role in pushing pronatalist messaging?聽

Anxiety over birth rates is more present among religions that emphasize traditional gender roles, the importance of families and a lack of effective contraception. Mormons (69 percent), evangelical Christians (65 percent), Orthodox Christians (63 percent), Catholics (59 percent) and Muslims (59 percent) are most likely to worry about the impact of low fertility.

Wilson said it鈥檚 impossible to discuss the modern conservative movement without acknowledging the prominence of white Evangelicals and now conservative Catholics in the Republican Party. The party is reflecting those values, he said, referencing the high value that the Christian right places on traditional and growing families and pointing specifically to the .

鈥淥nce that happened, it created this void,鈥� Wilson said. 鈥淭he big defining issue of decades fundamentally changed, and it disrupted boundaries and created this space that needed to be filled. So that鈥檚 why we get that and why we鈥檙e talking about natalism, gender roles and reproduction.鈥�

According to those who are concerned, what are potential solutions?

It鈥檚 something people in many countries are considering. Christina Scott, a professor of psychological sciences at Whittier College who taught in Japan as a Fulbright Scholar for five months, said she asked young women in Japan about their feelings around having children. The country鈥檚 birth rate is lower than that in the United States, and for many, financial circumstances caused hesitation. That鈥檚 despite the fact that Japan offers incentives including a , , cash payments per childbirth, parenting classes and monthly subsidies to parents with children younger than 15.

鈥淭here鈥檚 so many things that would help level the playing field, but so much of the responsibility of children falls primarily to mothers,鈥� Scott said. 鈥淢any women are trying to make the determination between child care, education and careers. And different parties will call this selfish, but we don鈥檛 call it selfish when men have these determinations.鈥�

Many Americans pointed to child care as a key issue.

Rafael, a 45-year-old father of two who asked to be identified by only his first name due to his job, is concerned about falling birth rates. He said he and his wife originally weren鈥檛 going to have kids because of the cost, but with some careful budgeting realized they could afford it. His family lives nearby and frequently helps with child care, but primary care for his eldest still costs $15,000 a year.

That cost plus little parental leave from work were major concerns; Rafael took three weeks of vacation and his wife had six weeks of leave when their child was born. He thinks at least six months of fully paid parental leave would ease the transition between work and parenting. He thinks the United States should invest in families stateside, instead of sending money to Israel or spending money on 鈥淟GBT or whatever.鈥�

Rafael, along with other survey responders, praised pro-family policies in European countries. 鈥淭he Scandinavian countries have it really figured out,鈥� said Catherine Campbell, an 85-year-old retiree in Santa Monica, California. 鈥淭hey have wonderful care for kids.鈥�

Campbell said on the survey she was worried about falling birth rates, but in an interview clarified that the population size does not concern her. She said it was expensive for governments to subsidize child care, but it is worth it.

was originally reported by Mariel Padilla and Jasmine Mithani of . Meet and and read more of their reporting on gender, politics and policy.

For some programs, the promise of incoming funding will be enough to restart operations. But many won鈥檛 be able to open their doors until they receive their federal dollars, which could take up to two weeks, said Tommy Sheridan, deputy director at the NHSA. 

Sheridan said the Trump administration understands the urgency and is 鈥渕oving as fast as they possibly can.鈥�

That said, this interruption had an opportunity cost, and it’s led to instability for families and providers, he said, adding that the shutdown caused staff to focus on issues they “should not be worried about,鈥� such as fundraising and contingency planning.

Some providers fear greater delays since the Trump administration shuttered half of the Head Start regional offices earlier this year. 

鈥淭hey鈥檙e going to be working as hard as they can, but they鈥檙e going to be doing it with half the capacity,鈥� said Katie Hamm, former deputy assistant secretary for early childhood development under President Joe Biden.

And even once the funding comes through, closed centers will need to go through a series of logistical hurdles, including reaching out to families who may have found alternative child care arrangements and calling back furloughed staff, some of whom have found employment elsewhere. 

鈥淗ead Start is not a light switch,鈥� Hamm said. 鈥淵ou can鈥檛 just turn it back on.鈥�

This interruption has also further eroded trust between grantees and the federal government that was already shaky, she added.

The Administration for Children and Families did not respond to a request for comment on when programs can anticipate communication from the office or their funding.

Since Nov. 1, approximately 65,000 kids and their families 鈥� close to 10% of all of those served by Head Start 鈥� have been at risk of losing their seats because their programs had not received their awarded funding during the longest government shutdown in history. The early care and education program delivers a range of resources to low-income families including medical screenings, parenting courses and connections to community resources for job, food and housing assistance. 

At the peak of the Head Start closures, roughly 10,000 kids across 22 programs lost access to services, according to Sheridan. A number of the remaining programs were able to stay open through private donations, loans, alternative funding streams and staff鈥檚 willingness to go without pay.

Valerie Williams, who runs a Head Start program with two facilities in Appalachian Ohio, was excited to tell parents that classrooms would be reopening soon. Her centers have been closed since Nov. 3, impacting 177 kids and 45 staff, many of whom already live paycheck to paycheck, she said.

A number of families were doubly impacted, losing access to Head Start鈥檚 resources as well as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as SNAP, simultaneously. In the days leading up to the closure, Williams and her staff prepared families as best they could, sharing information about resources for food, assistance for utilities and heating and guidance on child care options. 

On Thursday, Williams wrote to parents via an online portal that she hopes to restart the normal school schedule sometime next week. The post was quickly flooded with comments. 

鈥淭his is super exciting!!鈥� wrote one parent. 鈥淏est news in a long time. Carter has been asking every day. Hope to see u guys very soon.鈥�

鈥淵ayyy,鈥� wrote another. 鈥淭he kids miss you guys so much!”

Still, Williams knows reopening won鈥檛 be seamless. Along with program leaders across the country, she鈥檒l need to call back furloughed staff, place food orders and handle a number of other operational challenges.

And despite the excitement, the transition back may also prove tricky for some kids.

鈥淚 do think that it will feel like starting school again for a lot of our classrooms,鈥� Williams said. 鈥淭hey鈥檝e been out for two weeks 鈥� You鈥檙e going to work on separation anxiety issues, you鈥檙e going to have to get into that routine again and the structure of a classroom environment. So I think that will be a big issue for a lot of our teachers.鈥� 

As of Friday afternoon, Williams was still awaiting communication from the federal Office of Head Start with information about the anticipated timeline for next steps. 

鈥淎s soon as we get that notice of award, [I want to] start our staff and kids back immediately,鈥� she said. 鈥淭he very next day.鈥�

Now that the shutdown has ended, what’s next for Head Start?

Funding for Head Start is complex. Some 80% comes from federal grants that are released to local providers on a staggered schedule throughout the year. This year, grant recipients with funding deadlines on the first of October and November were left scrambling, as the federal shutdown dragged on.

The government began to resume operations late Wednesday night after President Donald Trump signed a bill, funding through Jan. 30 and allowing programs that didn鈥檛 receive their funding on time, including Head Start, to use forthcoming dollars to backpay expenses incurred over the past month and a half.

Here鈥檚 what Hamm predicts will happen next: The Office of Head Start will recall all staff to resume, including those who were furloughed during the shutdown. The employees will review grant applications, a process which requires them to flag any language that might be reflective of diversity, equity and inclusion practices. Next, money will be sent along to the remaining regional offices, and eventually dispersed to individual grantees. The NHSA is hopeful that this process will be completed by Thanksgiving for all grantees.

There are two things the federal government can do to help centers open faster, according to Hamm. First, they could waive a typical protocol that leads to a period of seven days between when a member of Congress is notified that their state will be receiving funding and when the funding actually goes out, Hamm explained. 

Officials could also notify grantees, in writing, about how much money they鈥檒l get and when it鈥檚 expected to come through, so they can begin planning. 

Unlike SNAP, which received guaranteed funding through the budget year, money for Head Start remains uncertain beyond Jan. 30. While the fear of another shutdown has caused 鈥渜uite a bit of worry鈥� among the Head Start community, Sheridan said it would likely lead to fewer program disruptions, since it wouldn鈥檛 fall at the start of the fiscal year.

To prevent similar chaos moving forward, Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin introduced in the final days of the shutdown that would guarantee uninterrupted service for fiscal year 2026. 

鈥淭he 750,000 children and their families who use Head Start shouldn鈥檛 pay the price for Washington dysfunction,鈥� Baldwin, the ranking member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee for Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, wrote in a statement to 社区黑料.

Multiple funding threats and deep staffing cuts by the Trump administration over the past year have plunged programs across the country into uncertainty. In the wake of that recent upheaval, a leadership change is also underway. The acting director of the Office of Head Start, Tala Hooban, accepted a new role within the Office of Administration for Children and Families and will be replaced by political appointee Laurie Todd-Smith, according to an email statement from ACF. Todd-Smith currently leads the Office of Early Childhood Development, which oversees the Office of Head Start. 

Sheridan described this move as anticipated and not particularly concerning, though others were less sure. Joel Ryan, the executive director of the Washington State Association of Head Start, noted that Hooban was a longtime civil servant and strong supporter of the Head Start program. Without her, he fears 鈥渢here鈥檚 nobody internally with any kind of power that will push back,鈥� on future threats to the program.

Another worry plaguing providers: current funding for Head Start has remained stagnant since the end of 2024, meaning that through at least Jan. 30, programs will be operating under the same budget amid rising costs across the board.

In previous years, the program鈥檚 grant recipients typically got a cost-of-living adjustment, such as the bump ($275 million) for fiscal year 2024. In May, a group of almost 200 members of Congress signed to a House Appropriations subcommittee, requesting an adjustment of 3.2% for 2026. A recent statement from NHSA suggested that instead, the proposed Senate bill for next year includes a jump of just , or $77 million.

鈥淚f we don’t see a funding increase in line with inflation, that means that Head Start will be facing a cut of that degree,鈥� said Sheridan. 鈥淚t’s just kind of a quiet cut, or a silent cut.鈥�

鈥淚 think what will end up happening,鈥� said Ryan, 鈥渋s you鈥檒l end up seeing a massive reduction in the number of kids being served.鈥�

After the federal government failed to renew a $1.5 million federal grant by Saturday, officials at the Gogebic-Ontonagon Community Action Agency say they had little choice: They closed a free preschool program that has served two counties in Michigan鈥檚 Upper Peninsula since 1965.

The program was among that missed expected weekend payments because of the ongoing federal government shutdown. Unlike others, the UP program could not secure alternative resources in time to continue operations.

That means 85 students 鈥� along with 30 other families with children in Early Head Start 鈥� won鈥檛 be getting the education, meals and other services they rely on until funding is restored. And employees are currently out of work, program director Renee Pertile told Bridge Michigan.

鈥淲e’re kind of one big family, and now it seems like a piece is missing,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t’s awfully quiet here today.鈥�

Funded primarily by the federal government to serve low-income preschoolers and their families, Head Start programs in Michigan and around the country are among the latest to feel direct impacts from the government shutdown that鈥檚 dragged on for more than a month.

Coupled with the recent impacting 1.4 million Michigan residents, advocates warn the ongoing turmoil surrounding federal funding is putting vulnerable kids at risk.

While local schools and community groups can in some cases step in to help keep Head Start programs going, those resources are 鈥渘ot going to be universal, and it’s not going to be a one-to-one replacement,鈥� said Bob McCann, executive director of the K-12 Alliance of Michigan.

鈥淭he longer this goes on, the more damage it’s going to do,鈥� McCann continued. 鈥淭his is a crisis of choice by (politicians), and it’s kids that are paying the price for it.鈥� 

As of Tuesday, the Gogebic-Ontonagon program was the only confirmed closure in Michigan since Nov. 1, , which has so far reported 25 closures nationwide. 

Education advocates warned other programs around the state that have missed grant payments are at imminent risk of running out of money, too. 

Statewide, Michigan has 48 Head Start and Early Head Start programs that serve nearly 30,000 children, bringing in $423 million in federal funds annually, said Robin J. Bozek, executive director of the Michigan Head Start Association. 

Nine of those programs serving 2,944 children, many of them in the Upper Peninsula and northern lower Michigan, saw their funding grants expire Nov. 1, Bozek said. 

Though some of those programs have been able to piece together enough funds from local schools or community groups to temporarily keep them afloat, the lack of new federal funding means money is tight and the future is uncertain, Bozek said. 

鈥淎nytime there’s a pause or a stop鈥t totally disrupts the system for this type of grant,鈥� she said. 

For the Gogebic-Ontonagon Community Action Agency, there was no money to fall back on. When the grant didn鈥檛 come through, the Head Start program had to wind down. 

鈥淲e started looking at this in mid-October, thinking, we鈥檇 better prepare just in case this was going to happen,鈥� Pertile said. 鈥淎s it got closer to the deadline, we knew that it was highly unlikely we would get our grant.鈥�

In the short term, program employees are able to collect unemployment, and a local daycare offered to open up temporary slots to help care for kids who鈥檇 previously been attending the Head Start program, Pertile said. 

The agency is also looking at the possibility of setting up a mobile food drive for local families in need, and Pertile is planning to provide weekly updates to staff and parents as they learn more.

Even if the shutdown ends tomorrow, it will still take some time to get operations back up and running, she added, noting that many Head Start participants in their rural community don鈥檛 have other options readily available for early learning programs, health checks and meals. 

鈥淭he longer this goes on, the more concerned we get,鈥� Pertile said. 鈥淏ecause we’re such a rural program, there are limited resources鈥hey might be able to do it for a couple weeks, but then they might have to look for something more permanent.鈥�

Looking ahead to next month, grants for another four Michigan Head Start programs will come up for renewal Dec. 1, Bozek said, meaning the financial pressures felt by Gogebic-Ontonagon and eight other programs could soon extend to others across Michigan. 

Losing Head Start options would be 鈥渁 huge hardship鈥� to families whose parents need a safe place for their young children while at work, Bozek said. 

But beyond that, she said, it would put early educators out of work and cut needy families off from a connector for additional resources, including food assistance, health care, and even warm coats for kids as the cold weather creeps in. 

鈥淲hen a Head Start program closes, it impacts the entire community,鈥� Bozek said.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .

Therefore, the response begins at City Hall.   

Education leaders and equity advocates reject the idea that standing up for students and protecting funding are mutually exclusive. Both can and must be pursued. Every child in New York City deserves to feel safe, seen and supported in school. The new administration should be guided by that commitment. 

EdTrust-New York has expressed to work closely with the Mamdani administration to fulfill the long-standing promise of free, universal child care for children age two and under, as well as full access to Pre-K and 3-K. Families across the city still pay up to $26,000 annually for child care, and too many remain on waitlists.

Meeting this demand requires sustainable funding, additional child care sites, a well-paid workforce and full-day programs in neighborhoods where families live. Such investments would give all children a strong start. 

New York City must also confront the alarming reality that nearly half of fourth graders score below basic proficiency in reading, with even worse outcomes for Black and Latinx students. While initiatives like NYC Reads and NYC Solves mark progress, they need ongoing support and expansion.

EdTrust-New York encourages the Mamdani administration to continue expanding multilingual materials, provide interventions for English learners and students with disabilities, and ensure that all educators receive training in the science of reading. At the same time, the city should work toward developing a comprehensive adolescent literacy plan to support middle and high school students.

Mamdani鈥檚 leadership should reflect a deep commitment to a curriculum that honors the identities and experiences of all students. Fully implementing culturally responsive education means expanding Black, Native American, AAPI and Latin studies, as well as giving educators the training and tools needed to teach the curricula. The city鈥檚 schools also need greater investment in collective care teams, educators, counselors, nurses and social workers who can provide the academic and emotional support students need.

Segregation continues to divide New York City students by race and class. The incoming administration has an opportunity to take meaningful steps toward integration by encouraging all districts to create integration plans, using admissions models such as lottery. The city also needs to recruit and retain more educators of color and publicly report school integration data to track progress. 

The Mamdani administration should also protect and support immigrant students and multilingual learners, who face growing threats from federal policies and systemic barriers. Schools can strengthen scaffolds in literacy and math, expand bilingual curricula  and provide mental health services for students facing trauma.

In addition, older immigrant students should have access to the full high school experience, not just for language acquisition or diploma-completion programs. Higher education partners can also play a vital role also by expanding financial aid and creating safe, supportive pathways for undocumented students to attend and graduate from college. 

Improving school climate is another key priority, particularly the need to shift from exclusion and punishment to belonging and support. With more than a third of students chronically absent 鈥� especially Black, Latino, and those from low-income backgrounds 鈥� and many affected by punitive discipline, the city can invest in restorative justice and mental health programs.

That should include funding restorative initiatives in all schools, training educators in healing-centered approaches and increasing weighted funding for the most-affected student groups. 

Under mayoral control, New York City has achieved important system-wide progress, such as the expansion of universal pre-K and the launch of NYC Reads. Mamdani should maintain this structure but ensure stronger accountability and input from parents and students. He can build on this success by ensuring that parents, students and caregivers, who should be granted voting power on Community Education Councils, have meaningful influence over district policy decisions. 

Finally, the Mamdani administration should expand access to college and career pathways. Too few students can enroll in college in high school programs that boost college success. Let鈥檚 expand these programs citywide, closing access gaps and strengthening support in college. That should include proven initiatives like CUNY鈥檚 ASAP and ACE, which help students persist and graduate despite financial emergencies. 

As Mayor-elect Mamdani prepares to lead the nation鈥檚 largest school system, he inherits both profound challenges and enormous opportunities. This moment offers a shared chance to build a public education system that not only aspires to equity but truly delivers on that promise. 

Members of Gov. Josh Stein鈥檚 bipartisan Task Force on Child Care and Early Education got an update on licensed child care closures during their most recent meeting.

鈥淛ust in the month of August, we had more than twice as many programs close as open,鈥� said Candace Witherspoon, director of the Division of Child Development and Early Education (DCDEE).

Her statement is evidence that 鈥� 鈥� the overall trend of licensed child care losses has continued since the end of pandemic-era stabilization grants earlier this year.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 社区黑料 Newsletter

Based on data provided by the N.C. Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&R) Council in partnership with DCDEE, that North Carolina lost 5.8% of licensed child care programs during the five years when stabilization grants were used to supplement teacher wages.

That net loss has increased to 6.1% since the end of stabilization grants. Family child care homes (FCCHs) make up 97% of that net loss.

Trends among licensed centers and homes

Since February 2020, the last month of data before the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of licensed FCCHs has decreased by 23%. The number of licensed child care centers has decreased by 0.3%.

The trend for licensed FCCHs since EdNC began tracking the data in June 2023 has been one of consistent net loss, decreasing each quarter.

There were 1,363 FCCHs in February 2020. That number was down to 1,096 in March 2025, the last data before the end of stabilization grants. Now there are 1,052 FCCHs across the state.

While licensed child care centers have also experienced a net loss since February 2020, the trend has been less linear.

There were 3,879 licensed centers in February 2020. When EdNC began tracking in June 2023, the number was slightly higher at 3,881. From then on it fluctuated, with net gains in some quarters and net losses in others. There are now 3,868 licensed centers statewide.

While the net loss of centers remains small, the effect of a single center closing is huge 鈥� especially in rural communities.

Families on Hatteras Island are learning this firsthand. The only licensed child care program on the island is scheduled to close at the end of the year. With no licensed FCCHs and no clear way to save the sole licensed center, families are trying to figure out how to keep their businesses open and remain in their communities without access to child care.

Access to high-quality, affordable early care and learning is crucial to child and family freedom and well-being. It enables parents to participate in the workforce or continue their education without concern for the safety of their children. It also puts North Carolina鈥檚 youngest residents on a path to future success.

Trends among subgroups

In addition to monitoring overall licensed child care trends, EdNC zooms in on trends among three subgroups of counties each quarter.

In the counties that make up the area covered by the (Avery, Buncombe, Burke, Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, Macon, Madison, McDowell, Mitchell, Polk, Rutherford, Swain, Transylvania, and Yancey), the number of licensed child care sites is 5% lower than before the pandemic. These counties had a net loss of eight programs from July through September 2025, the largest single-quarter decrease since EdNC began tracking.

In the majority-Black counties (Bertie, Edgecombe, Halifax, Hertford, Northampton, Vance, Warren, and Washington), the number of licensed child care sites remained relatively stable during and after the pandemic. But in the most recent quarter, these counties had a net loss of nine programs, putting them 4% lower than before the pandemic, a sudden and dramatic shift in circumstance. As with the Dogwood counties, this represents the largest single-quarter decrease since EdNC began tracking.

In Robeson and Swain, which both have large Indigenous populations, the number of licensed child care sites had also remained relatively stable during and after the pandemic. In the most recent quarter, for the first time since EdNC began tracking, the number of licensed child care programs in these counties has dipped just below pre-pandemic levels.

Editor鈥檚 note: The Dogwood Health Trust supports the work of EdNC.

This first appeared on and is republished here under a .