Troubling Fidelity of Implementation

• In Event: Searching for Insights: The Diverse Nature of Pre-K Policy and Practice

Abstract

As the number of states investing in public programs for 3- and 4-year olds continues to grow, policymakers are expecting fidelity of program implementation, assuming that pre-K sites will be brought into alignment and be of similar quality. In this paper we ask how is public pre-K policy interpreted and enacted in local communities and what are the costs and benefits of differing interpretations and enactments?
We conducted a case study of pre-K policy enactment in Wisconsin and New Jersey. In 3 pre-K sites in each state we developed cases of pre-K policy through weekly observations, interviews of teachers, children, families, district and state leaders, and analysis of policy documents. Drawing on the work of Braun, et al. (2011) we examined the pre-K data as a series of enactments. We assumed that implementing policy is an intellectual and political process shaped by actors and contexts. Using this analytic lens, we developed case portraits that illustrate the forces shaping pre-K in each district, the aspects of state policies and standards that were emphasized by local actors and how the policy was enacted in each classroom.
Despite the high level of standardization of pre-K policy in New Jersey many of the mandates were shaped to suit local conditions. Teachers and leaders across all sites shaped the chosen curriculum model in response to perceived community needs.. Competing policies of different program auspices burdened already stretched teachers and led to direct resistances to state policies such as bending the staff-child ratio at different points in the day. Similarly, limited resources meant that in 2 of the sites, children sporadically had the mandated 45 minutes of daily large motor activities.
In Wisconsin’s low regulation context, teachers improvised within the district policy. Dickson 4K teachers were assigned to use a mixture of curricula, including: Everyday Math, Handwriting Without the Tears, Tools of the Mind, Jolly Phonics, and the Second Step program. 4K teacher Zelda, noted “how you use [these curricula] is up to you in your classroom.” Competing demands were most pointedly felt in the slew of assessments required by the state, district and center. Zelda explained that, “sometimes you feel like you're just doing assessments.” However, she figured out her own style for getting these assessments done, noting that she went in with the mindset, “[w]e're just doing this little bit today of assessments and we're moving on. And we'll fit this in.”
Though policymakers often see policy implementation as a matter of people on the ground executing programs as intended in policy, we found that pre-K policy was more a process of mutual adaptation that reflects the demands of the setting (Berman & McLaughlin, 1978). The policy shaping enacted in pre-K programs reflect pre-K’s location at multiple intersections across programs, funding streams, goals, and outcomes. For this reason it is vital that we start and end discussions around pre-K policy focused on the needs of both pre-K teachers and their students, recognizing how the good intentions of regulation can go awry.

Authors

• Sharon Ryan, Rutgers University

• Mary Elizabeth (Beth) Graue, University of Wisconsin - Madison