Sustaining Gains at the Pre-K to Kindergarten Transition

State policymakers have worked hard to increase prekindergarten enrollment and ease young children’s transition to kindergarten, and with good reason. There is abundant evidence that attending a formal preschool program such as state pre-K or Head Start boosts students’ academic and social competencies significantly and meaningfully, regardless of race or linguistic or cultural background, and particularly for those in low-income homes.[1] However, the skill boosts for pre-K attenders, relative to those of nonattenders, diminish over the kindergarten year by more than half.[2] That is, students who attend pre-K outperform their peers at first, but nonattending students catch up (figure 1).[3]

There is also evidence of significant misalignment between pre-K and kindergarten in terms of instructional practices and policies. This misalignment is jeopardizing states’ efforts to propel students across this critical transition. In an aligned system, all early education settings would share pedagogical, operational, and environmental features, with a consistent, coherent approach for students, educators, and parents across the grades.[4] But because this alignment is largely absent, the boost that students initially get from pre-K diminishes. If state policymakers identify ways to align pre-K and kindergarten better, they can bolster students’ long-run success and see a return on their sizable investment in preschool.

Researchers detect the biggest initial gains from pre-K in reading and math, where instruction typically focuses on discrete, easily taught and assessed knowledge or skills such as naming letters and counting.[5] For more open-ended skills, such as self-regulation or vocabulary, the boost from pre-K can last longer into elementary school.[6]

What accounts for discrepancies in rates of learning in kindergarten, and how can schools extend and amplify the benefits of pre-K? Two sets of factors around students’ transition into kindergarten are at play.[7] The first involves students’ experiences in kindergarten and pre-K classrooms, and the second focuses on practices outside the classroom and policies that shape the transition.

Classroom Experiences

Numerous studies with large samples of diverse pre-K and elementary classrooms cover the key classroom elements: teachers’ involvement in educational activities, teacher-student interactions, content rigor, and accumulated exposure to academic content. Each factor supports learning in its own right, but in combination their effects are magnified. When curricular and instructional resources are better aligned to children’s skill profiles across time, all children—pre-K attenders and nonattenders—gain skills year over year.

Activities. As far as the type of activities go, pre-K and kindergarten settings are similar: Students spend the largest share of their day in teacher-directed, whole-group instruction, with little time in individual or small-group settings. Across settings, almost a third of the school day is spent on academics and another third in routines, transitions, and meals, with few opportunities for socioemotional learning.[8]

Academics. But in the limited research on academics across the transition, the picture is different. For example, a nationally representative study of Head Start programs indicated that pre-K and kindergarten classrooms differed substantially in their emphases on literacy and math instruction.[9] Only a third of Head Start students experienced an increased focus on literacy and math and increased use of learning centers in kindergarten, which would have been aligned with their preparation and developmentally appropriate.[10] Instead, a majority received instructional content in kindergarten that was too easy or less focused on reading and math.

Relatedly, a study of the Boston public pre-K program suggested that pre-K attenders who experienced high instructional alignment in kindergarten sustained their boost in reading and math more effectively than attenders with less alignment.[11] Among pre-K attenders wth low alignment, students were likely retaught information they had already mastered, and teachers focused on more basic skills to help their nonattending peers catch up. If instruction in kindergarten does not build on skills acquired in pre-K, it stands to reason that attenders’ advantages will fade over time. Also, they are benefiting less from kindergarten compared with nonattenders.[12] This trend toward instruction below students’ capacities has also been observed in nationally representative data.[13] There is also evidence that all students, regardless of skill levels at the beginning of kindergarten, benefit from exposure to more advanced content.[14]

Teacher-Child Interactions. In addition, the quality of teacher-child interactions (e.g., emotional and instructional support) in kindergarten shifts noticeably compared with pre-K, with increasing time spent in structured whole-group instruction and rote learning in literacy and math.[15] This pattern of decreases in teacher-child closeness and in the quality of teacher-child interactions across the transition has been linked to decreases in students’ social competence, learning behaviors, and executive function skills. When teacher-student interactions decrease, or the amount of time in teacher-structured activities increases, students show lower levels of reading and math skills than those who experienced greater alignment.

All of these elements—teacher-child interactions, instructional time in literacy and math, and the degree of academic challenge—are consistently associated with students’ academic development. What happens when students are exposed to consecutive years in which these elements are present and aligned to their individual needs? Mounting evidence suggests that students’ academic outcomes improve more if they receive two or three consecutive years of exposure to high-quality teacher-child interactions across pre-K and kindergarten.[16] Consistent, consecutive, multiple years of high-quality classroom environments extend the impact of pre-K and also provide the best opportunities for students who come to school with no formal preschool exposure.

Young students’ transition into a new educational environment tends to increase their levels of stress.[17] Discrepancies between settings exacerbate this stress.[18] If these inconsistencies are significant, students’ challenges are likely greater; greater alignment and similarity between environments may conversely ease the stress that accompanies transitions.

In sum, young students’ experiences in pre-K and kindergarten are rather inconsistent. They would benefit from policies and programs that ensure high levels of alignment in the quality of teacher-student interactions and exposure to educational and academic content that is increasingly challenging.

Transition Practices and Policies

Transition practices. While national-level data reveal few significant links between transition practices and academic outcomes,[19] there is evidence that the intentional use of a range of activities can support students’ well-being in kindergarten and mitigate fade-out.[20] Preschools, elementary schools, or parents may initiate such practices: for example, collaboration between pre-K and kindergarten teachers, classroom visits for students, parent-child orientation, and parent-teacher meetings.[21] Transition practices have been linked with better student adjustment in the first year of school,[22] especially for students at socioeconomic disadvantage.[23]

In contrast, parent and educator interviews reveal exceptionally variable, inconsistent approaches to the use and experience of transition practices across particular practices, years, schools, classrooms, and students.[24] Practices around child assessment and data use are particularly marked by variability and diffuse responsibility. Preschool teachers report spending a lot of time completing transition forms with detailed descriptions of students’ skill levels, though it was unclear whether these forms ever reached the student’s kindergarten teacher or, if they did, what purpose they served. Kindergarten teachers in any case say they prefer to assess students themselves and mostly use pre-K data to form balanced classrooms, not to plan instruction. Although it is understandable that kindergarten teachers want current student information, not making use of assessment data from pre-K teachers may contribute to misaligned instruction and diminished pre-K impacts.

Defining student outcomes. Another challenge to preK-kindergarten alignment is the lack of a common, clear definition of school readiness that could help parents, teachers, and administrators better structure the handoff—one that would fix on an agreed outcome for pre-K and a starting point for kindergarten. Broadly, school readiness reflects academic, behavioral, and socioemotional domains that are foundational for success in school. School administrators place great focus on academic skills, while parents appear to value social and behavioral competencies.[25] Kindergarten teachers tend to express low academic expectations for students entering their classrooms. These varied perceptions may contribute to the lack of consistency in how the transition process is organized, managed, and implemented and lead to an almost ad hoc approach, even as adults frequently invoke the importance of being “kindergarten ready.”

Policies. States’ efforts to align pre-K and kindergarten include decisions about class sizes, teacher workforce training and requirements, state learning standards, curricula, assessment and evaluation, and family support services. These decisions may be made by different agencies working from different assumptions, goals, and values.[26] For example, kindergarten teachers usually must obtain a bachelor’s degree, and many states require a certification or license in a specific specialty area.[27] But pre-K teachers in the same state may need only a high school or associate degree, depending on the state.[28] State learning standards also vary. Kindergarten expectations are structured around children’s acquisition of academic proficiency, and pre-K standards incorporate more elements of play-based learning and social-emotional development.[29]

The extent to which policy is aligned or misaligned shapes young students’ experiences, with implications for their development and successful transition into kindergarten. As such, it is important that educational stakeholders and policymakers have a multiage, multigrade perspective and emphasize that programs, practices, and policies should be consistent across time.

But better alignment is possible. For example, the Dallas Independent School District uses the same measurements of teacher-student interactions across pre-K through first grade and the same professional development supports for teachers. This alignment produced greater continuity across grades, which led to improved student scores on the state reading assessment in third grade.[30] Virginia supports implementation of a statewide data system integrating information on assessment and classroom quality across settings and age/grade level so that a common information base can be used to gauge alignment and student progress.[31]

Recommendations for Policymakers

The policies described below are targets toward which states can work to build a more coherent, aligned early education system. While states and school districts vary considerably in their resource base, needs, and available policy options, policymaking can benefit from clear statements and aims for policy work that promotes successful transitions.

Classroom Experiences and Assessments of Skills. State and local education leaders can set several policies to ease the transition into kindergarten for young pre-K students and their families:

• Ensure that assessments, descriptions of school readiness and student adjustment, and instructional programs include executive-function and social-emotional skills, integral to students’ success in the classroom. Assessments of children’s skills and definitions of readiness should be aligned across both years.
• Ensure that the measurement and improvement of high-quality instructional practices, teacher-student interactions, and use of curricula support a range of skills.
• Support educators’ use of multiyear, multigrade curricula and assessments that focus on aligned, developmentally sequenced skills that foster skill growth over time.

The Teacher Workforce. State and local education policies can address teacher workforce alignment across pre-K and kindergarten by promoting the following:

• Provide teachers with resources and coaching opportunities to align instructional practices, assessment, and curricula.
• Conduct joint professional development for pre-K and kindergarten teachers focused on instructional and curricular alignment.[32]
• Encourage implementation of more challenging instruction for all children, particularly in kindergarten.

Education Systems. To sustain the skill boost kindergarten students receive from their pre-K experiences, these policies can improve systems-level alignment:

• Require coordination across pre-K and kindergarten systems to better align policy decisions for both settings.
• Make teacher workforce requirements, certifications, and compensation consistent.
• House the governance of early care and education programs, including state pre-K programs, within state education agencies or departments of early learning to increase the alignment of opportunities across the span of birth through elementary school.

[1] Robert C. Pianta et al., “The Effects of Preschool Education,” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 10, no. 2 (August 2009): 49–88, https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100610381908.

[2] Arya Ansari et al., “Persistence and Convergence: The End of Kindergarten Outcomes of Pre-K Graduates and Their Nonattending Peers,” Developmental Psychology 56, no. 11 (November 2020): 2027–39, https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001115.

[3] Robert C. Pianta et al., “Summary of Findings from the Fairfax Pre-K to 3rd Grade Study, 2016–2021,” research brief (Early Learning Network, October 2021).

[4] Kimber Bogard and Ruby Takanishi, “PK‐3: An Aligned and Coordinated Approach to Education for Children 3 to 8 Years Old,” Social Policy Report 19, no. 3 (September 2005): 1–24, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2005.tb00044.x; Virginia Vitiello et al., “Alignment and Misalignment of Classroom Experiences from Pre-K to Kindergarten,” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 52 (2020): 44–56, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2019.06.014.

[5] Christina Weiland and Hirokazu Yoshikawa, “Impacts of a Prekindergarten Program on Children’s Mathematics, Language, Literacy, Executive Function, and Emotional Skills,” Child Development 84, no. 6 (March 27, 2013): 2112–30, https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12099.

[6] Robert C. Pianta et al., “Sustaining the Pre-K Boost: Skill Type Matters,” policy brief (Early Learning Network, spring 2021).

[7] Vitiello et al., “Alignment and Misalignment.”

[8] Vitiello et al., “Alignment and Misalignment.”

[9] Tashia Abry et al., “Continuity and Change in Low-Income Children’s Early Learning Experiences across the School Transition: A Comparison of Head Start and Kindergarten Classrooms,” Kindergarten Transition and Readiness (2018): 85–109, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90200-5_4.

[10] Meg Dane Franko, Duan Zhang, and Kristina Hesbol, “Alignment of Learning Experiences from Prekindergarten to Kindergarten: Exploring Group Classifications Using Cluster Analysis,” Journal of Early Childhood Research 16, no. 3 (May 19, 2018): 229–44, https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718×18775761.

[11] Tiffany Wu et al., “What Sustains the Pre-K Boost? New Evidence from Boston Public Schools,” brief (Early Learning Network and Boston Early Childhood Research Practice Partnership, January 2023).

[12] Amy Claessens, Mimi Engel, and F. Chris Curran, “Academic Content, Student Learning, and the Persistence of Preschool Effects,” American Educational Research Journal 51, no. 2 (April 2014): 403–34, https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831213513634.

[13] Mimi Engel, Amy Claessens, and Maida A. Finch, “Teaching Students What They Already Know? The (Mis)Alignment between Mathematics Instructional Content and Student Knowledge in Kindergarten,” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 35, no. 2 (June 2013): 157–78, https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712461850.

[14] Vi-Nhuan Le et al., “Advanced Content Coverage at Kindergarten: Are There Trade-Offs between Academic Achievement and Social-Emotional Skills?” American Educational Research Journal 56, no. 4 (January 4, 2019): 1254–80, https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218813913.

[15] Vitiello et al., “Alignment and Misalignment”; Virginia Vitiello et al., “Differences between Pre-K and Kindergarten Classroom Experiences: Do They Predict Children’s Social-Emotional Skills and Self-Regulation across the Transition to Kindergarten?” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 59 (2022): 287–99, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.11.009.

[16] Anne Henry Cash et al., “Power of Two: The Impact of 2 Years of High Quality Teacher Child Interactions,” Early Education and Development 30, no. 1 (October 30, 2018): 60–81, https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2018.1535153.

[17] Kristin Bernad et al., “Examining Change in Cortisol Patterns during the 10‐Week Transition to a New Child‐Care Setting,” Child Development 86, no. 2 (October 6, 2014): 456–71, https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12304.

[18] Jodi A. Quas et al., “Predictors of Children’s Cortisol Activation during the Transition to Kindergarten,” Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics 23, no. 5 (October 2002): 304–13, https://doi.org/10.1097/00004703-200210000-00002.

[19] Michael H. Little, “School-Based Kindergarten Transition Practices and Child Outcomes: Revisiting the Issue,” Elementary School Journal 118, no. 2 (December 2017): 335–56, https://doi.org/10.1086/694221.

[20] Aprile D. Benner, Anna Thornton, and Robert Crosnoe, “Children’s Exposure to Sustainability Practices during the Transition from Preschool into School and Their Learning and Socioemotional Development,” Applied Developmental Science 21, no. 2 (May 19, 2016): 121–34, https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2016.1175946.

[21] Karen M. La Paro, Marcia Kraft-Sayre, and Robert C. Pianta, “Preschool to Kindergarten Transition Activities: Involvement and Satisfaction of Families and Teachers,” Journal of Research in Childhood Education 17, no. 2 (January 2003): 147–58, https://doi.org/10.1080/02568540309595006.

[22] Annarilla Ahtola et al., “Transition to Formal Schooling: Do Transition Practices Matter for Academic Performance?” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 26, no. 3 (July 2011): 295–302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.12.002; Amy B. Schulting, Patrick S. Malone, and Kenneth A. Dodge, “The Effect of School-Based Kindergarten Transition Policies and Practices on Child Academic Outcomes,” Developmental Psychology 41, no. 6 (2005): 860–71, https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.41.6.860.

[23] Jennifer LoCasale-Crouch et al., “Pre-Kindergarten Teachers’ Use of Transition Practices and Children’s Adjustment to Kindergarten,” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 23, no. 1 (January 2008): 124–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.06.001.

[24] Vitiello et al., “Alignment and Misalignment.”

[25] Vitiello et al., “Alignment and Misalignment.”

[26] Robert C. Pianta, Jason Downer, and Bridget Hamre, “Quality in Early Education Classrooms: Definitions, Gaps, and Systems,” Future of Children 26, no. 2 (2016): 119–37, https://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2016.0015.

[27] US Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Occupational Outlook Handbook: Kindergarten and Elementary School Teachers,” web page (US Department of Labor, August 2024).

[28] US Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Occupational Outlook Handbook: Preschool Teachers,” web page (US Department of Labor, August 2024).

[29] Sarah Daily, Mary Burkhauser, and Tamara Halle, “A Review of School Readiness Practices in the States: Early Learning Guidelines and Assessments,” Early Childhood Highlights 1, no. 3 (Child Trends, June 17, 2010).

[30] Annie Wright, Dylan Farmer, and Yusuf Kara, “Effects of Sustained Quality in PreK, Kindergarten and First Grade in DallasISD,” report (Southern Methodist University, Annette Caldwell Simmons School of Education and Human Development: Center on Research and Evaluation, August 2018).

[31] Virginia’s Link B5 system is described here.

[32] Julia E. Koppich and Deborah Stipek, “PreK-3 Alignment: Challenges and Opportunities in California,” study (Policy Analysis for California Education, January 2020).