Effects of Early Stimulation and Enhanced Preschool: Pathways to Effective Learning

• In Event: What happens next? Sustained impacts of early childhood interventions in low- and middle-income countries

Abstract

Millions of children are at risk of developmental deficits in low-and-middle-income countries. Reviews show that psychosocial interventions for children under 3 years old improve short-run child cognition and language. Whereas nutritional interventions are most effective under 2 years old, best ages for psychosocial interventions are unclear. Is it necessary to initiate stimulation under 1 year old or is starting with preschool around 3 years old soon enough, as in some successful interventions? Are effects greater if birth to school enrolment is covered? Is there any complementarity between early parenting interventions and preschool quality? We estimate the impacts of two interventions, early stimulation (ES) targeted to children under 3 years old and enhanced preschool (EP) targeted to children over 3 years old, and their interactions. In Odisha, India, a random half of 192 villages were assigned to ES and the other half to no early stimulation (NES). Within each village, about eight mothers with children initially aged 7-16 months were enrolled, receiving ES or NES accordingly (n=1449). Subsequently when children were ~3y old, the villages were re-randomized to either EP at Anganwadi centers or no enhanced preschool (NEP) This yielded four groups: (1) ES and EP; (2) Only-ES; (3) Only-EP; (4) No Intervention. Trained Anganwadi workers ran the EP. Primary outcomes, measured at baseline and follow-up after ~ 1 year, were children’s IQ (summarizing cognition, language, and executive-functioning) and school-readiness (SR). Data were collected at the Late-Trial baseline (coinciding with the Early-Trial endline) and follow-up, 9 months after EP implementation (2019) when the children were aged 46-55 months. 15 months after ES ended, only-ES had a sustained benefit on IQ and on SR. Only-EP concurrently improved IQ and SR. Children receiving both interventions had improved IQ and SR, with no significant interactions between them. Both ES and EP increased IQ and SR. Only-ES impacts were sustained since ES ended 15 months previously. Only-EP resulted in considerable catch-up for children that did not receive only-ES. The absence of significant complementarities should be investigated further due to its profound policy implications.

Authors

• Orazio Attanasio, London's Global University

• Jere Behrman, University of Pennsylvania

• Monimalika Day

• Sally Grantham-McGregor, University College London

• Prachi Gupta

• Pamela Jervis
  Presenting Author

• Prerna Makkar

• Costas Meghir

• Angus Phimister