Report on New Jersey’s Abbott Preschool Program and its Contribution to Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Legal Mandate for Educational Equity

New Jersey’s state-funded preschool program, established as a result of the landmark Abbott v. Burke school funding litigation, represents a significant initiative to advance educational equity. The program was mandated by a 1998 State Supreme Court ruling to remedy unconstitutional funding disparities between affluent and high-poverty urban districts. By providing free, universal, high-quality preschool for 3- and 4-year-old children in its 31 highest-poverty districts, the initiative directly addresses several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), primarily SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Alignment with SDG 4: Quality Education

The Abbott program is designed to provide inclusive and equitable quality early childhood education, a key target of SDG 4. Its structure is based on standards identified by early learning experts to ensure effective and developmental learning environments. This commitment to quality is foundational to leveling the educational playing field for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

• High-Quality Standards: The program mandates specific quality benchmarks to ensure a robust educational experience.
  1. Class sizes are limited to a maximum of 15 students.
  2. Each classroom is staffed with a certified teacher and an assistant.
  3. The curriculum must conform to New Jersey’s standards of quality in early education.
  4. A full six-hour school day is provided.
  5. Support services, including transportation and health services, are offered as needed.
• Decent Work for Educators (SDG 8): The program requires that preschool teachers receive pay and benefits on par with K-3 teachers in their district, promoting decent work and helping to attract and retain qualified professionals.

Addressing SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

The core mission of the Abbott preschool program is to mitigate socioeconomic disparities in educational access and outcomes, directly contributing to SDG 10. By intervening at an early age, the program aims to close achievement gaps before they widen, ensuring that children from low-income communities have an equal opportunity for success.

• Targeted Intervention: The program specifically serves the 31 highest-poverty urban school districts, targeting the children most at risk of academic disadvantage due to systemic inequality.
• Promoting an Inclusive Workforce: Historically, the program successfully utilized incentives like scholarships and bonuses to build a diverse teaching workforce that reflects the student body. In the 2024-25 school year:
  • 22% of preschool teachers in the 31 districts were Black, compared to 6% of K-12 educators statewide.
  • 25% of preschool teachers were Hispanic, compared to 9% of K-12 educators statewide.

Program Successes and Long-Term Impact

After 25 years of operation, research has validated the program’s effectiveness in achieving its goals and advancing SDG 4 targets. Longitudinal studies demonstrate significant, lasting academic and developmental benefits for participating children.

1. Improved Academic Performance: Students who attended the program scored higher on math, literacy, and science tests by the fifth grade compared to peers who did not attend.
2. Reduced Achievement Gaps: For children enrolled for two years, the program’s impact was sufficient to close approximately one-third of the achievement gap between Black and white children.
3. Lower Rates of Special Education and Retention: Through 10th grade, former Abbott students had a 15% lower rate of grade retention and a 7% lower rate of special education placement.
4. Enhanced School Readiness: The program’s success in preparing students has enabled districts like Union City to advance core curriculum, such as offering algebra in seventh grade instead of ninth.

Challenges to Sustainability and Universal Access

Despite its proven success, the program faces significant challenges that threaten its sustainability and ability to provide universal access to all eligible children, thereby limiting its full potential to meet SDG targets.

• Enrollment Deficits: The program is failing to reach its target of enrolling 90% of eligible children.
  • Over 10,000 eligible children are currently not enrolled.
  • In the 2023-24 school year, only five of the 31 districts met the 90% enrollment goal, a sharp decline from 18 districts in 2009-10.
  • Overall enrollment stands at approximately 78% of those eligible.
• Barriers to Access: Obstacles include a lack of awareness among newly arrived families, parental hesitation about schooling for 3-year-olds, and discriminatory enrollment requirements in some districts, such as demanding government-issued IDs.
• Funding and Administrative Constraints: Previous budget cuts diminished recruitment efforts and state oversight. The state’s early childhood office now oversees a statewide expansion with fewer resources than were dedicated to the original Abbott districts.
• Workforce Development: The elimination of financial incentives like scholarships and bonuses has weakened the pipeline for recruiting and retaining a diverse, qualified teaching workforce.

Conclusion

New Jersey’s Abbott preschool program stands as a powerful model for leveraging public policy to advance Sustainable Development Goals 4 and 10. It has successfully reduced educational inequality by providing high-quality early childhood education to disadvantaged communities, yielding measurable long-term benefits for students. However, persistent challenges related to enrollment, funding, and workforce support must be addressed. To ensure the program’s continued success and fulfill its foundational promise of equity, a renewed commitment to targeted recruitment, adequate administrative resources, and strategic investment in the educator workforce is essential.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 4: Quality Education
   • The entire article focuses on providing high-quality early childhood education. It describes the Abbott v. Burke court ruling that mandated “free preschool for 3- and 4-year-old children” in New Jersey’s highest-poverty districts to ensure a “thorough and efficient” education for all. The program’s design emphasizes quality through standards like small class sizes, certified teachers, and pay parity, directly aligning with the goal of ensuring inclusive and equitable quality education.
2. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
   • The program was created as a direct response to inequality. The article states it was a remedy for “uneven funding between rich and poor districts.” By providing targeted support to children in the “highest-poverty urban school districts,” the program aims to reduce disparities in educational outcomes and “leveling the playing field from the very beginning,” which is a core principle of reducing inequalities within and among countries.
3. SDG 1: No Poverty
   • The article connects quality early education to long-term success, which is a key factor in breaking the cycle of poverty. The program targets children from the state’s “highest-poverty urban school districts.” By improving educational outcomes, such as higher test scores and reduced grade retention, the program provides a foundation for better future economic opportunities. The article notes that similar programs have been linked to a “12 percent increase in college enrollment,” a clear pathway to economic mobility.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 4.2: Ensure access to quality early childhood development and pre-primary education.
   • This target is central to the article. The Abbott program’s mission is to provide “universal and free preschool” for 3- and 4-year-olds in targeted districts. The article details the program’s efforts to enroll children and the high-quality standards it must meet, such as limiting class sizes to 15 students and employing certified teachers, to ensure children are ready for primary education.
2. Target 4.5: Eliminate disparities in education and ensure equal access for the vulnerable.
   • The program specifically targets children in vulnerable situations—those living in New Jersey’s 31 “highest-poverty urban school districts.” The article highlights the program’s success in “reducing learning gaps” and closing “the achievement gap between Black and white children,” which directly addresses the goal of ensuring equal access and eliminating educational disparities.
3. Target 4.c: Increase the supply of qualified teachers.
   • The article emphasizes the importance of a qualified and diverse teaching workforce. It mentions that the program requires a “certified teacher and an assistant” in each classroom. It also discusses past incentives like “bonuses and college scholarships for teachers” that successfully created a “diverse workforce of teachers that looked just like the children,” which is crucial for increasing the supply of qualified educators.
4. Target 10.2: Empower and promote the social and economic inclusion of all.
   • The program’s fundamental goal is to counteract the disadvantages faced by children in poor districts, thereby promoting their future inclusion. The article explains that the court’s aim was to get “kids caught up” and level the playing field. The positive long-term outcomes, including higher test scores and lower special education rates, are evidence of empowering vulnerable children for future success.
5. Target 10.3: Ensure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome.
   • The Abbott program is a direct result of policy action to reduce inequalities of outcome. It was established through the “landmark school funding case Abbott v. Burke,” which found the existing school funding system unconstitutional and discriminatory. The court-mandated program is a corrective action designed to ensure children from poor districts have an equal opportunity to succeed.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Enrollment and Participation Rates
   • The article provides specific data points to measure participation in early childhood education (Target 4.2). It mentions the state’s goal of “enrolling 90 percent of eligible children,” the current enrollment rate of “about 78 percent of those eligible,” and the fact that “over 10,000 children eligible for the program are not enrolled.” These figures are direct indicators of access and participation.
2. Educational Achievement and Outcomes
   • To measure the program’s impact on reducing inequality (Targets 4.5 and 10.3), the article cites research findings. These include students who attended the program “scored higher on math, literacy and science tests,” and that the program helped make up for “a third of the achievement gap between Black and white children.” These test scores serve as clear indicators of progress.
3. Special Education and Grade Retention Rates
   • The article mentions that through 10th grade, program participants’ “grade retention and special education rates were down 15 and 7 percent respectively.” These statistics are powerful indicators of the program’s success in providing early support, reducing the need for later interventions, and ensuring equal opportunity (Targets 4.5 and 10.3).
4. Teacher Qualifications and Diversity
   • Progress towards having a qualified teaching force (Target 4.c) is measured by the requirement for “certified” teachers. The article also provides statistics on teacher diversity, stating that “22 and 25 percent of preschool teachers… were Black and Hispanic, compared to just 6 and 9 percent of K-12 educators in New Jersey,” indicating success in building a representative workforce.
5. Per-Pupil Funding
   • The article mentions that New Jersey is “investing roughly $16,000 per pupil” in the program. This figure serves as an indicator of the financial commitment to providing high-quality education and reducing resource inequality between districts.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: hechingerreport.org