MOOSE JAW — Researchers know the first year of a child’s development is important, but they are realizing that there are benefits to intervening in the second year with high-quality care and education.
Dr. Mark Tremblay from the University of Ottawa was one of seven speakers during the recent “Believe In Our Future” International Early Learning Conference at the Temple Gardens Centre.
The “first 1,000 days” in kids’ lives is the time between conception and the end of their first year, while “the next 1,000 days” is when children reach age four, with this second period critical for physical, cognitive and social development, Tremblay explained.
Most researchers focus on the first half, but focusing and building on the second half is just as important since this is when children gain autonomy and “develop like crazy,” he continued. Their care “switches from being predominantly health-based to being early childhood education-based.”
Many children worldwide don’t receive the nurturing care they require during their first 1,000 days, so the opportunity exists to put them on a healthy trajectory, which will provide dividends for the rest of their lives if educators are successful, said Tremblay.
Challenges and roadblocks
Roughly 53 million children (or 8.4 per cent) under age five worldwide — including in middle- and high-income countries — face challenges, have disabilities or limitations, are vulnerable to trauma and abuse, generally have poorer health and have limited access to educational programs, the professor noted.
Furthermore, they face malnutrition and micronutrient deficiencies, which are happening alongside increasing rates of obesity. This creates a “double burden of disease” of undernutrition and overnutrition.
Environmental factors
Health services are the primary means to promoting sound nutrition during the first 1,000 days, but early childhood education (ECE) services in the next 1,000 days may also offer opportunities, Tremblay said. However, more research is required to determine whether nutritional interventions — such as preschool feeding programs — can be integrated with ECE services.
Also, in home environments, the quality of stimulation and caregivers’ behaviours and knowledge contribute to better child outcomes, he added. Further, parents — who play a critical role — need to provide regular support, fathers must be present and violence must be prevented.
Nearly 54 per cent of children ages three to five worldwide are enrolled in ECE programs, with disadvantaged or marginalized children seeing larger gains and boys and girls benefiting equally, Tremblay said.
Furthermore, pollution and climate change cause developmental delays in psychomotor, communication and socioemotional skills, while second-hand tobacco smoke contributes to poor cognitive performance and behaviour, he continued.
In Canada, wildfire smoke and heatwaves “have (a) tremendous impact on the health of our young kids,” including with educators delivering outdoor ECE programs, he pointed out. Meanwhile, in some developing countries, families heat their homes with indoor fires, which produce contaminants and affect cognition.
Water contamination and chemical and heavy metal pollution are problematic, and while low-income countries may not be aware of these issues, Canada is and still uses pesticides — a neurotoxin — for activities like keeping golf courses green, Tremblay continued.
Indoor environments can be just as harmful since many objects are coated with long-lasting fire-retardant sprays that leach into children who are teething, he said. Moreover, families have greater exposure to these toxins since they spend more time inside than outside.
International data
Tremblay then discussed data from the International Development Early Learning Assessment (IDELA), which assesses children ages three to seven in low- to middle-income countries.
He noted that children with no access to early learning or responsive care are 0.3 to 0.5 points below baseline, but those who have access to ECE, learning materials and high stimulation are 0.3 to 0.5 points above baseline.
“This is a huge change that equates to approximately two years (ahead) in (the) advancement of development,” Tremblay added.
Nearly 100 scientific studies show that the best interventions for developing children’s next 1,000 days include government-provided cash transfers — like tax credits — to parents, early childhood care programs, nutritional initiatives, parental involvement and combinations of these, he said.
Furthermore, the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) acquired data from 79 high- and middle-income countries that compared children who did and did not attend ECE programs, he continued.
That data showed that children with at least one year of ECE were 0.13 points higher in math than those who didn’t and were 0.16 points higher in reading than those who didn’t. The scores continued to increase for children who had more years of ECE access.
The cost of ECE programs
What Tremblay found interesting was only 40 per cent to 59.9 per cent of Canadian children ages three to five participate in ECE programs, while countries like Russia, Brazil and Australia have 100-per-cent participation rates. So, this situation allows researchers to study and conduct cross-country comparisons, both between high-income and low-income nations.
Other research shows that providing universal access to ECE would cost US$337 per child for low- and medium-income countries and US$522 for high-income countries like Canada, he said. These figures would amount to the former group spending 0.5 per cent of GDP and the latter group spending 0.1 per cent of GDP.
“It’s a fantastic investment. (However), it’s outside of the range of interest of most politicians because it’s an investment in the future,” Tremblay added. “Sometimes the best gains are going to be 20 or 30 years down the road but make no mistake that it is the best investment we can make.”
