Yet as her 30th anniversary working as a special education teacher for the approaches, Lengen increasingly feels disillusioned: still happy in her work, but distraught about remaining in what may be the only profession in New York that hasn’t gotten a substantive raise — in absolute terms, much less adjusting for inflation — in three decades. Any modest rate increases the state’s early intervention providers (which include teachers like Lengen and a range of therapists) have benefited from, were generally counterbalanced by cuts. “As a 30-year veteran with a master’s degree, I am working twice as hard as when I started in early intervention, and making less now,” Lengen said.Ěý

Over the same time period, New York’s hourly minimum wage has , from $4.25 in the mid-’90s to more than $15 now. The average salary for public school teachers jumped from in the mid 1990s to about in 2023-24, according to the National Education Association. And, while New York state data is elusive, nationally the for chief executives climbed from nearly $6.4 million in 1995 to more than $20 million in recent years.

The Economic Policy Institute’s Elise Gould, who researches wages and economic inequality, said she knows of no precedent for a job where the absolute pay hasn’t risen in 30 years. “It’s a little hard to believe,” she said.

Early intervention providers deliver critical services including speech, physical and occupational therapy to children from birth through age 3 who have a range of developmental delays and disabilities. When done well and promptly, that it can reduce the need for costly special education services, as well as other public assistance down the road, and improve life outcomes. 

Early intervention systems are state-led and designed, and the mix of specific funding sources can vary considerably across states. New York relies on a combination of private insurance dollars and county, state and federal funding, including Medicaid, to serve approximately 70,000 children. 

Many of the therapists, special education teachers and others who provide early intervention services are not salaried employees. In New York, they are paid a fee for service rate that is set by the state. After providing the service, they submit a claim for reimbursement and are paid either by Medicaid if the child is eligible, or by the state, which draws from a combination of funding streams. 

For many services, including the specialized therapy and support that Lengen provides, that rate was higher in the 1990s when early intervention began in New York state, than it is today. For instance, a published by The Children’s Agenda, a Rochester-based group which has advocated for increased pay for providers over the years, found that a standard visit — at least 30 minutes — was reimbursed at a statewide average of $79 in 1994, compared to $69 in 2022. Brigit Hurley, chief program officer at the group, said that according to a recent staff analysis, “reimbursement rates would need to increase by 240% to have the same spending power as it did when the early intervention program began.”

People in the field say it’s typical for therapists, who all have at least a master’s degree, to earn between $50,000 and $70,000 a year — far less than they could make doing the same work in a different, often less stressful, setting.

“If you were a governor or a legislator and were stuck at your 1995 salary, would you stick around for that job?” said Amanda Wilbert, the regional director of Step by Step Pediatric Services in Rochester, an agency that coordinates early intervention services. Two of the young occupational therapists Wilbert oversees left earlier this year for jobs doing the same work in a nursing home. The positions came with an approximately $30,000 raise, bringing their pay from about $60,000 to $90,000, and better benefits, Wilbert said.

Partly because of that pay-induced exodus, advocates say that New York in terms of timely delivery of early intervention services to kids. In the spring of 2024, after a long, hard battle by advocacy groups, a pay boost appeared to be on the horizon. a 5% rate increase for in-person early intervention services, plus an additional 4% for those working in rural and underserved parts of the state. But so far, therapists have yet to see that bump, with final approval pending with the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. (In late September, federal officials did approve the 4% for those working in underserved areas, but it’s unclear when it will be implemented, or how many providers it will reach.)

Meanwhile, with the Trump administration having recently slashed Medicaid by trillions of dollars, the long-delayed full increase might not get the federal stamp of approval for the indefinite future, according to advocates, and the system will likely continue to bleed providers. Said Lengen: “In the end these kids are losing out, and it’s a very vulnerable population.”

New York is hardly an anomaly. Other states — both red and blue — report similar challenges, including Texas, Rhode Island and Illinois. In Illinois, a 2024 into the finances and pay in early intervention found that the median annual income for independent contractors in the field was about $71,000, which is significantly lower than typical incomes for similar roles in the state. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median annual wages for a speech and language pathologist in various settings in Illinois is about $88,000 and for physical therapists, it’s about $104,000. As in New York, that disparity has caused many early intervention professionals to leave the field, with the number of speech therapists in the program dropping 13% between 2018 and 2023, and physical therapists falling 16%, according to the 2024 report.

The problem is only likely to worsen nationally, said Elisabeth Burak, a senior fellow at Georgetown’s Center for Children and Families. States will struggle to raise rates for any service that’s funded partially through Medicaid, she said. 

No one knows exactly what the fallout from the Medicaid cuts will be, but untold numbers of families with children could be booted off the program. At the same time, the amount of money states get for Medicaid-eligible families could shrink, forcing state policymakers to make tough decisions about how to make up the losses. “States are already having a hard time but it has the potential to get a lot worse,” said Burak.

New York’s early intervention program was created in 1993 and it’s had a rocky history with compensation. The first significant rate decrease occurred in the late 1990s, according to the state compiled by The Children’s Agenda. Rates stayed the same for over a decade. And then , there were two cuts, said Brigit Hurley, chief program officer at the group.

A few years ago, in 2022, some providers in New York, including physical and speech therapists, . But that “didn’t bring the pay above when the program started,” said Hurley. And the across-the-board pay bump that the brought hope to many providers, but without final approval at the federal level for the 5% bump, they still haven’t seen the increase. 

“I’ve had providers tell me they are getting paid less now than when they graduated 30 years ago with a master’s degree,” said Hurley. “It’s a really dire situation.” 

Much — and on particularly bad days, most — of early intervention professionals’ work is uncompensated: travel time to homes; “no shows” when the families aren’t available; lesson planning and other preparation for the sessions; communication with families between visits; equipment and supplies; mandated annual continuing education sessions; extensive reporting that’s required on each case.

“This year and last year … I come home after seeing four to nine kids and I’m at the computer for two to three hours doing reports,” Lengen said. “With [26] kids on my caseload, that’s a lot of reports to do.”

Lengen, 62, graduated in 1985 with a bachelor’s degree in special education and, a few years later, earned a master’s in reading. She worked for nearly a decade in K-12 classrooms, and then shifted to early intervention around the time the program debuted in New York in the 1990s. Initially, she worked for an agency and made a full-time salary. But she left the staff position in 2004 when the agency stopped providing early intervention services. “The pay was decent, but it was a big learning curve on my part,” she said.Ěý

Today, Lengen works in homes and child care programs, supporting kids and their caregivers, often coaching the latter on how to manage challenging behaviors. She also winds up filling gaps left by other holes in the intervention system, like supporting children with autism in their sensory development. “I end up doing a lot of sensory play since most of the kids don’t have occupational therapists — ,” she said. 

Since she began working independently over 20 years ago, the demands of the job — including higher caseloads and increased reporting requirements — have increased but the stagnant pay hasn’t come close to keeping up with inflation and the rising cost of living. There were the two pay cuts across the board — 10% in 2010 followed by another 5% in 2011 — and, nearly a decade later, special educators were overlooked when some therapists got the modest bump in 2022. “At that point, I was really thinking long and hard about leaving early intervention,” Lengen said. 

Despite her financial advisor’s recommendation that she at least consider working in a school district, Lengen decided to stick around, noting that she loves the work and didn’t want to start over late in her career. But many other early intervention providers have left the field.

When Sandra Ribeiro started providing physical therapy through early intervention in 2000, she said, “we were some of the highest paid across our profession, and we had support.”

At that time, all of the early intervention providers involved in a child’s case would gather monthly with each family to coordinate services and brainstorm what could be changed or improved. But that practice began to erode more than a decade ago when the state stopped paying professionals for the time spent in those meetings. 

Ribeiro has a doctorate in physical therapy, and is fluent in five languages (Portuguese, French, Italian, Spanish and English). That’s a huge asset in the many multilingual homes she’s visited. She points out that providing in-home therapy to an incredibly diverse group of families — some cooperative and supportive of her efforts and others less so — is a complicated assignment. 

“It requires a high skill level to be able to work with a very young child to start with,” she said, “and then you have to be able to incorporate the family.” Still, she found it deeply rewarding to see the progress a child could make when delays and challenges were addressed early in life. One grateful family still sends her a Christmas card every year, even though the “child” she helped is now 24 years old. “I don’t think you can get that in other settings — you’re not a fixture of the home,” she said.

Over the years, not only did Ribeiro’s pay fail to rise significantly, but it also became much more difficult to get reimbursed for her work at all. “If you forget to do one little thing on your paperwork it gets kicked back and it can be months before you get paid,” she said. Over the last decade, there have been some in the program, and that has led to stepped up reporting requirements and auditing for all. 

On weeks when everything went very smoothly — and there were no last-minute cancellations or no shows — Ribeiro would clear $1,500. But many weeks there were hiccups beyond her control that cut into that income. Two and a half years ago, she decided she had had enough and left early intervention for a job teaching physical therapy at LaGuardia Community College in New York City. Most experienced therapists she knows have also left the state-run program over the years, Ribeiro said. 

“We all know that when you go into health care it’s not for the money,” she said. “But you have to be able to say to yourself, ‘My work is worth something.’ And a lot of therapists have been so demoralized they shy away from early intervention even though in our hearts we would love to still be in those homes.” 

Since Ribeiro left the field, the payment issues have only gotten worse. Over the last year, scores of New York providers have faced because of glitches with the state’s new data and payment portal, the .

Meanwhile, across New York state, countless families no longer have access to critical therapies because of the steady attrition from the field. Rural families have been especially hard hit. In the remote Tri-Lakes region of northern New York, Katie Wheeler’s 3-year-old daughter missed months of early intervention services that she was entitled to because of a shortage of providers. 

Diagnosed with autism around the age of 2, the child qualified for in-home special education services and speech therapy. In early 2024, she was assigned a special ed teacher who came to her home two or three times a week, but a few months later, when the state dissolved the agency providing those special education services, the toddler lost access to that support for about a year. She received speech therapy virtually last winter; in-person early intervention sessions weren’t an option due to the lack of providers in the region. The virtual sessions went surprisingly smoothly for the toddler. “It worked so well, I was surprised,” said Wheeler. “They really pour their heart into what they are doing, and she grew immensely.”

At the start of 2025, however, New York’s virtual early intervention providers learned that they would be getting a sizable pay cut. Ironically, the rate cut for telehealth services, as they are officially known, was initiated to free up funds for the pending 5% increases for in-person services in the state, which is still awaiting approval from the federal Medicaid office.

Wheeler’s daughter’s speech therapist, along with most other virtual providers in her county, promptly quit, which Wheeler says she entirely understands. “We were not given anyone else because there was no one else to be given,” she said. The family did pay out of pocket for some speech therapy, but in the six months that her daughter went without early intervention services over the winter and spring, Wheeler said she could see significant regression. When she was in speech therapy, the child could name an animal when shown a picture, and make its sound, for instance; but without services, much of that language slipped away. 

When the girl became old enough to receive special education services through school, there was another months-long delay to get services set up. In an effort to access more robust special education services, the family recently moved to nearby St. Lawrence County. Wheeler knows that most families would not be able to take such an extreme and expensive step.

With the recent loss of virtual providers, she said, “there are going to be so many kids without anything.”

Research has shown that timely receipt of early intervention, in the years when the brain is developing far more rapidly than at any other point, is critical to child development, and can improve life outcomes far down the road. Many children who receive early intervention do not in kindergarten, including slightly less than half of those with developmental delays, according to one 2007 study.

When delays and challenges aren’t addressed in the early years, they show up — often aggravated — in schools, where there’s rarely the time and resources to address them. “Kids are going to preschool and kindergarten with lower skills than ever,” said Amanda Wilbert. “They’ve never gotten services, and they desperately need them.”

There are many reasons, advocates say, that it’s been such a long struggle to increase pay for early intervention providers in New York. The isolated instances of fraud have been cited by some state officials as a reason for not investing more, said Hurley.

But the unprecedented rate freeze — which long predates the fraud — also speaks to the societal and political invisibility of babies with developmental delays and disabilities, according to early childhood advocates. And it speaks to the invisibility of an overwhelmingly female labor force whose work occurs largely in the private space of the home. 

For now, with the slashes to Medicaid, the push to increase rates in New York is on the back burner, although it is not totally off the table. Hurley and others say they remain committed to advocating for changes that will improve the system, including studying alternative models for delivering services.

Lengen said that many months ago, she stopped looking for the 5% rate increase promised a year and a half ago to finally provide a small boost to her income. “At some point, you stop believing that it’s going to come,” she said.

But unlike so many others, she has no plans to go anywhere. “I hate the fact that the state and county don’t think we are worth giving money to,” she said. “But I love the job and the families,” she added, noting the joy that comes from teaching and playing with the littlest learners on their level.

“I will work in early intervention until the day I can not get up off that floor.”

And yet, shows that the skills needed for reading begin developing before a child is born, and that signs of reading challenges can emerge as early as 18 months old.

“People don’t understand that children don’t start kindergarten with a clean slate,” said Nadine Gaab, an associate professor at the Harvard School of Education involved in the research. Learning to read “is a long process with many milestones that unfold over many years, and it starts primarily with oral language. Years of brain development lead up to the point where formal instruction puts it all together and enables them to read. The process starts in utero.”

The human brain evolved specifically for spoken language, said Perri Klass, professor of journalism and pediatrics at New York University and the national medical director of the nonprofit . Every society across the world uses spoken language, but the transition from spoken to written language is a giant leap for the brain.  

That jump, Klass said, requires the brain to recruit structures and networks throughout its many layers and folds just to recognize a letter on a page, involving the vision and memory portions of the brain. The brain then must remember the sound the letter represents and connect that letter with others to make sounds that associate with the picture on a page. Finally, at lightning speed, the brain recognizes that those letters work together to say, “Cat.”  

“Learning to read is a challenge for all children,” she said. “And for some children it’s really a struggle. It’s not that you develop spoken language and then, boom, you get to school and develop written language. Spoken and written language have been developing together directly from birth, and all the exposure to language from the environment — what they hear from their parents, whether they’re read to, talked to, whether someone sings to them or holds them — are there. So, it’s the brain the child takes to school that helps them succeed at this impressive task of learning to read.”

Klass points to the new Harvard research to underscore how early that “brain the child takes to school” begins developing. For years, a prevailing attitude has been that a child starts learning to read in pre-K or kindergarten. A longitudinal study by Gaab and her colleagues using MRI scans and an array of other assessments confirmed that the bases for reading skills begin to develop in the child’s brain by birth and continue building between infancy and preschool. 

“We wanted to see how early the developmental trajectories of children who later develop good versus poor reading skills diverge, because that can give us a really important clue for when we should intervene, as well as what some of the risks and protective factors are,” Gaab said, 

A key finding of the study is that the developmental trajectories of children with and without reading disabilities start to diverge around 18 months, rather than at 5 or 6 years old as previously assumed.  

And yet, Gaab said, a wide gap currently stands between the time children are identified as having a reading impairment and the start of intensive intervention. This is particularly problematic for children diagnosed with dyslexia, she said, adding that researchers call this the The majority of school districts in the U.S. employ a “wait-to-fail” approach, meaning that many children are only flagged by the school system after they have failed to learn to read over a prolonged period of time — often years — even though there’s evidence that reading intervention is most effective earlier. The experience of failure can erode self-esteem, she said, and lead to the higher rates of anxiety and depression that are found in struggling readers.

The Study

The study, “Longitudinal Trajectories of Brain Development from Infancy to School Age and Their Relationship with Literacy Development,” is the first to track brain development from infancy to childhood focused literacy skills — a window into later academic attainment.     

Over a decade, Gaab and co-authors Ted Turesky, Elizabeth Escalante and Megan Loh conducted MRI brain scans of 130 study participants starting at 3 months old. Half of the children had a risk of dyslexia, with either an older sibling or one or both parents diagnosed with dyslexia, which can increase a child’s risk of reading challenges. For the first year of the study, the babies peacefully slept through the scan, tucked into the MRI machine wearing noise protection (“We got really good at putting other people’s babies to sleep,” Gaab said). 

At 18 months old, the babies came back for another scan, though “peacefully sleeping” was becoming a fond memory. By the time the babies were toddlers, the researchers took a break, for reasons any parent of unruly toddlers can understand. The children returned when they were a more cooperative 4 years old and every year after until age 10. 

The study also assessed such factors as cognitive abilities, literacy environment and home language. Funded by the NIH, the researchers aimed to continue for another five years and follow the participants into high school. Though the grant application had received a fundable score at NIH, future funding is uncertain due to the Trump administration’s termination of .

Building the Brain’s Architecture

Babies are born with the raw material they need to hear, see, move and remember. The nerve fibers, or axons, that connect these disparate brain regions don’t grow automatically. They are cultivated by babies’ environments. MRIs of the participants as infants showed predictably smaller brains that appear more solid or smooth in the images. By the time the children were 5, the scans showed a robust network of branching pathways of these nerve fibers, said coauthor Turesky.  

“The infant brain is very different compared to all other stages of life,” he said. “But if you look at the scan of a child at 5 years and then at 10 years, you can see there’s hardly any change in [those pathways]. Those early years are a time of very rapid growth.”

Though the human brain remains plastic and mutable for a lifetime, Turesky said, the scans underscore that earliest years are the busiest for building brain architecture — a fact that has important policy implications for early intervention and improved literacy curricula in preschools. 

Giving Them the ‘Good Stuff’

Some brains are better equipped to build the neural scaffolding that ultimately leads to reading, Gaab said, and some brains are less optimized, which means those children might struggle to read. It doesn’t mean their brains are faulty, or that there is something seriously wrong with them. 

“They’re built differently, and they’re optimized for other things, because every brain is different,” she said. “But it does point to the need for good early pre-reading instruction and the games and good oral language input, and home and school environment interactions that we know build these connections. Some brains just need more of the good stuff.”  

“Call it preventative education, just like preventative medicine,” she said. “Help these kids build these connections before they struggle and prevent them ever seeing a special educator or ever getting a dyslexia diagnosis.” A large number of studies now show that early intervention and prevention are leading to better outcomes for children at risk of dyslexia, Gaab said, and the research has led to aimed at early identification and intervention. 

That includes teaching the specific skills that can close the gap between proficient and struggling readers. Those skills include phonological awareness, letter-sound knowledge, rapid automatized naming, vocabulary and oral language comprehension. This teaching takes place naturally when caregivers read aloud to their children. Reach Out and Read, the nonprofit Klass leads, has a network of clinicians who work directly with pediatric care providers to help them integrate read-aloud experiences into their interactions with parents and provides developmentally appropriate books for caregivers to take home. 

“Our tremendous advantage in pediatric primary care is that the clinicians see the children over and over in these early years,” Klass said. “We see them for a newborn visit and a one-month, a two-month visit … The schedule is sort of engraved on all our hearts, so we get to talk with the parents about reading and early literacy repeatedly during those early years of life. 

“We know that the developing brain is shaped most of all by the interactions with the adults taking care of that child, Klass said. “The wonderful thing about this study is that it literally looks at the building of the brain and says very clearly that it’s not just that the brain is being built, but the specific structures that will allow the child to read.” 

If doctors can identify young children who are going to struggle more with learning to read as they get older, they can target those families with books and other support early on, Klass added.

“We’re hoping with…the books the caregivers are taking home, the child is learning a motivational lesson: ‘I like books. If I carry a book and give it to my parent, they might sit down and talk to me in that voice,’” Klass said. 

Klass said no one needs to tell parents to “teach” this idea to their children. The children will sort it out if they grow up around books and reading. A baby doesn’t want or need an authority on literacy to walk through the door and teach them how to read, Klass said. A baby wants their parent’s voice, presence and back-and-forth interactions. 

“Your baby wants to be on your lap hearing you read. Your baby will love books because your baby loves you.”

AI is dominating headlines — and rightly so. It’s reshaping industries, redefining work and increasingly influencing homes and childhoods. But as policymakers and technologists rush to prepare K-12 schools for an AI-powered future, they risk overlooking a critical window: the early years, when than at any other point in life.

My own kids, who are 2 and 4 years old, are AI natives. They follow the blue dot on Google Maps, thank the car when it welcomes us across state lines and ask Spotify to play their favorite songs. They recently had a lively conversation about a Roomba they saw vacuuming the office building across the street. They’ve followed a virtual trainer through an “intelligent” home workout. And when my son asked to see a parrot with pigeon wings, DALL-E helped make it real.

Their ease with AI is both fascinating and a little unsettling. To them, machines are as trustworthy as parents or teachers. As a tech-forward parent, I welcome these tools, but I also teach my children a critical distinction: technology is a helper, not a human.

That distinction is already blurring. Voice assistants and recommendation engines sound authoritative, even when they’re wrong. And without early education on how AI works and where its limits lie, the youngest generation is at risk of growing up to trust machines without question. This is especially concerning for children with learning differences, who may be more likely to anthropomorphize technology and treat machines as social beings, according to .

To its credit, the that inspired the pledge recognizes a real need: America’s youth must be prepared to thrive in an AI-driven world. But waiting until kindergarten misses a key window of opportunity. The foundational skills that matter most, especially in a post-AI world — creativity, critical thinking, empathy, resilience — start to take root long before formal schooling begins.

Teaching AI literacy to 3- and 4-year-olds may seem premature, but with companies like Google , it’s more important than ever to start early. Young children are remarkably capable of understanding complex ideas when taught in developmentally appropriate ways. At my children’s preschool in New York City, they’ve learned about skyscrapers and even touched on the events of 9/11. When wildfire smoke from New Jersey recently polluted the air, they discussed climate and health. If I can trust their teachers to guide these complex conversations, I can trust them to begin introducing the concept of AI in ways that are meaningful to my children.

Supporting early AI literacy doesn’t mean more screens for toddlers. It means fostering the human skills that will help young children thrive in a machine-filled world. But who will teach these skills? Parents play an essential role and deserve access to helpful resources, but early childhood educators are especially well-positioned to lead developmentally appropriate conversations on these concepts. And publicly funded early childhood programs, like NYC’s Pre-K for All, can provide the structure and scale needed to ensure all young children are supported, not just those with tech-forward parents. 

The challenge is, most early childhood educators have not been introduced to the concept of AI literacy themselves. As national efforts — such as the new , launched earlier this month by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) — prepare to train K-12 teachers, early childhood educators are being left out of the conversation entirely. 

If we want to build the strongest foundation for AI literacy, we need to start earlier. As economist James Heckman has shown, high-quality early learning programs can . Head Start, which reaches from low-income families across the U.S. through a two-generation approach, presents a powerful opportunity to advance AI literacy early and at scale.

One of Head Start’s unique strengths is its , which outlines five key domains of early learning and serves as a foundational guide for state-level early learning standards. Embedding elements of AI literacy within this widely adopted framework could help ensure inclusive access to essential digital skills. By integrating AI concepts into play-based learning, educators, children and caregivers can engage with technology in thoughtful, confident ways.

Imagine an early childhood classroom where teachers and children discuss: What can machines do? What can’t they do? Why do they sometimes make mistakes? These simple questions can grow into the digital discernment our future demands.

AI isn’t coming, it has already arrived and it’s changing how our children learn, play and create. With the right support from our early care and education system, children can be ready to thrive in a world we’re only beginning to imagine.

One of the fundamental tasks for early childhood educators is to teach children to cooperate, not just to keep things running smoothly in the classroom, but because it’s a life skill that prepares them for collaboration in their daily lives, in school and in the workforce.  

Researchers at the University of Washington’s Institute for Learning & Brain Science (I-LABS) have been studying the effects of synchronized movements on social interactions among young children for years and it turns out that synchrony enhances cooperation. published in 2024 by I-LABS in the journal Nature shows that the simple act of moving in time with each other can promote prosocial behaviors, such as helping, sharing and empathizing. 

The study, which analyzed how a group of 4-year-olds cooperated with each other after a synchronous exercise, was authored by Tal-Chen Rabinowitch, a researcher at I-LABS who is now director of the Music & Social Development Lab at Israel’s University of Haifa, and Andrew Meltzoff, co-director of I-LABS. Researchers built a swing set that enabled two children to swing in unison in precisely controlled cycles of time. This study was set up so the children could see each other’s silhouette but not their facial expressions. The purpose was to determine if the synchronized movement itself, rather than facial or emotional cues stimulated prosocial behavior. 

Pairs of children who were strangers to each other were randomly assigned to one of three separate groups: one that swung together in precise time, one that swung together but not in time, and another that didn’t swing at all. After the swinging exercise, the pairs participated in a series of tasks to evaluate their cooperation. One was a “give and take” activity that involved passing objects back and forth to each other through a puzzle-like device. Another was a computer game that required the children to push buttons simultaneously to see a cute cartoon figure pop up. 

The researchers found that the children who swung in unison completed the tasks faster, indicating better cooperation than children who had swung out of sync or hadn’t swung at all. A surprise for Rabinowitch was a strategy the children came up with to synchronize their button-pushing. The strategy was never modeled to them but arose spontaneously in many of the pairs. 

“They raised their hands above the button and signaled each other with these exaggerated motions just before the task, like, ‘OK. Are you watching? I’m going to do it, … now,’” Rabinowitch said. “The kids in the synchronous condition did it much more and came up with it more quickly. It’s interesting because it shows that not only were they better at cooperating, but they were also motivated to do so. The signaling made the task better.”  

The study built upon two on synchrony and peer cooperation for preschoolers conducted by Rabinowitch. The distinct takeaway from the most recent study is the indication that, stripped of all the other elements of music, rhythm alone is sufficient to spark cooperation between children who moved together. 

“It doesn’t even have to take a long time,” said Rabinowitch. “Just a couple of minutes doing an activity in sync with each other signals, ‘We’re together. We’re on the same page.’” Being in sync together enhances social interaction in positive ways.

“They could drum together, swing together, tap or dance together,” Rabinowitch said. “There’s no difference, as long as the children are aware of themselves moving in synchrony with each other. Knowing they are on the same page has a positive effect on their cooperative behavior, and the kids feel closer to each other.”

Rabinowitch, a classically trained flutist, became interested in the connection between music and social behavior as an undergraduate psychology student when she volunteered with children with physical and emotional disabilities and saw how music influenced their emotional communication and social interactions. She wrote her doctoral dissertation on how music interaction enhances empathy in children. 

“When I did that research,” she said, “I noticed that I was always going back to playing rhythm games with them. I felt that there was something in the rhythm, in the synchrony itself that made a difference and that taught them something about how to communicate and listen. So, I continued in my postdoc to study synchrony specifically.” 

Rabinowitch said many studies on the effect of music in creating cooperation among adults have been conducted and the results are the same. In a paper she authored in 2020, about whether , she writes that music has accompanied human civilization since its beginning and likely played an important role in forging human social behavior.  

Music has a lot of potential to foster cooperation, Rabinowitch said. “Music has an ability that’s much more than just synchrony … It’s social glue,” she said. 

“It’s this incredibly simple mechanism. … We’re just doing the same thing at the same time.” This mechanism can support all ages, she said. “It works with adults, it works with kids, it even works with babies. A of 14-month-old toddlers showed that being bounced in synchrony enhanced their helping behavior,” she added. 

Though there is still much to be understood about the mechanisms that link music and social behaviors, Rabinowitch’s studies underscore how uncomplicated, simple and profound it can be to bring people together. She isn’t suggesting a swing in every office, or drum circles in every school. Nor is she saying that synchronous movement is the answer to world peace. But it might be a start. 

“I would love to say something stronger about politics, about how this could be used in very different contexts in the longer term. But I’m not confident enough of the science to say that yet. It is something one can dream about,” she said. 

But nowhere is the neutral palette more prominent than in the nursery. On social media, the decorative trend has been dubbed “” parenting. Marked by ivory walls, natural wooden toys, neutral clothing and a conspicuous absence of primary colors, the “beige baby’s” room leans toward a chic aesthetic rather than a playful one.

The term “sad beige” began as “” by on TikTok in 2021, as a satirical reference to fashionable parents who want their children to grow up in style. Over the years, the has seen an uptick in beige hues, but there’s been over whether and how the trend shapes infant development. Vision and psychology experts suggest that a beige nursery shouldn’t hinder a baby’s development, though it may be a bit of a bore for them.

Thank you for the sad beige feature @buzzfeed these are the ones that started it all

“Honestly, I would have no concerns about the beige baby trend affecting children’s vision or their eyesight,” said Courtney Aldrich, an instructor with the child and family development team at Michigan State University who provides programming for early learning professionals and parents. “At such a young age, they’re not even able to see the decorations on the walls.”

An infant’s vision and brain development are closely linked, according to Dr. James D. Reynolds, a pediatric ophthalmologist and chair of the department of ophthalmology at the State University of New York at Buffalo. 

“Especially the eye and brain, it’s a very complex symphony,” said Reynolds, whose research focuses on the fetal retina. “I like that analogy because an orchestra with just one instrument playing, yeah, that can be entertaining, but when all the instruments are playing and they’re not all playing the same notes, it’s a very complex structure. And that’s how the retina brain develops.”

Their trip to Washington, D.C., could not have been timelier. Days after their departure, the House voted in favor of a that puts their priorities in jeopardy. At the rally, we heard directly from a broad, bipartisan swath of legislators — including House Democratic Whip Katherine Clark of Massachusetts,  Republican Rep. Juan Ciscomani of Arizona, and Democratic Reps. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and Rashida Tlaib of Michigan — affirming the necessity of these programs. As the bill moves to the Senate, the upper chamber would be wise to listen to Strolling Thunder families and stop these reckless cuts in their tracks. 

On the chopping block? Medicaid, which covers over 40% of births in the US; the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food to 4.5 million children under age 5; and funding for families and states that cover child care, foster care and other basic needs. 

These programs are lifelines that give kids a solid start, especially for families who face extra hurdles because of their income, where they live, a disability or their background. 

Parents like Rachell Dumas, a nurse and maternal health advocate from Atlanta, who shares that, “After nine pregnancy losses, I thought the hardest part was over once my son was born. But I was wrong. PTSD from years of trauma made it hard to bond with my miracle baby, and there was no system in place to support us. Babies don’t just inherit our love. They inherit our pain, too.”

That’s why Dumas  is telling Congress to protect and strengthen the support new parents need. This includes safeguarding health and nutrition by protecting and strengthening Medicaid and SNAP so every baby receives essential well‑baby visits, immunizations and nutritious meals. 

And take parents like Charlein Downs from Delaware, whose son, Jeremiah, has benefited enormously from Early Head Start. “[Early Head Start teachers] have given me clear guidance on what milestones Jeremiah should be reaching and practical tools I can use to help him grow. His teachers are amazing — not just for his education, but for mine,” Downs says.

In many rural areas, these programs are the only option for infant care, and they set children up for the strongest start in school. Cutting them doesn’t just shrink opportunities; cuts force families to choose between work, health and their child’s future.

Dumas and Downs joined with other parents on Capitol Hill, not as lobbyists but as living proof of what’s at stake. They’re continuing to ask for more than promises: They want protection for programs like Medicaid and SNAP, stronger funding for Early Head Start and other early learning opportunities, and a fair shot for their children to thrive.

Parents shared what’s at stake for their babies, while emphasizing that this isn’t just an individual family problem; it’s an economic problem. 

Between birth and age 3, a child’s brain . When babies’ caregivers get the support they need to provide a nurturing home, stimulating surroundings and regular check‑ups, babies learn to talk, think and manage feelings much faster. Without those supports, kids are more likely to have health problems, fall behind in school or struggle with behavior, costing all of us billions later on.

Research shows that every $1 we spend on a child under 3 pays back up to $13 in benefits, like more graduates, lower health bills and less crime spending. But when early supports are cut, parents miss work, employers lose productivity, tax revenues shrink and public spending climbs as families turn to emergency rooms and food pantries.

“Medicaid is there to catch us all when we fall,” said Amidon, who lives in Manistee, Michigan. “It’s not just for people who’ve always needed it; it’s for people like my family as well, who never thought that we would be in a position to rely on it. Without Medicaid and these early intervention services, our family would be facing a much different reality.”

As plans for cutting hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid take shape and, parents and child health advocates are warning about collateral damage. Namely, the healthy development of young American children.

Nationwide, 31 million children rely on Medicaid, and experts such as Julie Kashen, senior fellow and director for women’s economic justice at , have, saying, “Reductions in coverage could worsen the health of those children and their communities.” 

While Congressional debate is largely focused on cutting coverage for low-income adults and limiting states’ ability to raise taxes for healthcare spending, the impact could well cause children to lose services and access to health care. 

“There’s not a lot of fat to cut in Medicaid,” Elisabeth Wright Burak, senior fellow at the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families said on a . “Cuts would put states in a very difficult position of making hard decisions between spending more or rolling back existing coverage or services.” 

Medicaid, a state-federal partnership, supports American families in many different ways. The health coverage it provides to low-income children has been shown to . Nearly are covered by Medicaid, and it is a major funder of community health workers. 

Medicaid also helps fund part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which provides early intervention screening and services., the program is designed “to enhance the development of infants and toddlers with disabilities, to minimize their potential for developmental delay and to recognize the significant brain development that occurs during a child’s first three years of life.” The program provides early intervention screening and services with resources that

Nationwide, about 540,000 children under age 3 receive Part C services, and about half of them are enrolled in Medicaid, from the Infant and Toddler Coordinators Association. Part C saves taxpayers money by minimizing long-term costs for children with disabilities, promoting school readiness and reducing the prevalence of severe disabilities in adulthood. These benefits have been extensively documented:

• These services are proven to support outcomes for infants and toddlers with .
• As a result of early intervention services, did not need special education by the time they reached kindergarten.
• Infants and toddlers with disabilities who receive services under Part C — with two-thirds substantially improving and about one half catching up to a level appropriate for their age.

Every state has different Medicaid , which can limit the support that children receive. In Texas, 75% of the state’s Medicaid enrollees are children, said Adriana D. Kohler, policy director of , a children’s advocacy nonprofit. About 2.8% of the state’s children under age 3 receive Part C services compared to 7% nationwide, the show “It’s pretty complicated for the early intervention providers,” Kohler said. “We leverage over a dozen different funding sources, and Medicaid is a critical source of funding.”

Owing to in Medicaid that Texas lawmakers enacted in 2011, the number of early intervention providers dropped from 58 to 40, while enrollment in the Part C program dropped by 20% to 30% in some areas, according to Kohler. “You had to be a more severe case or have higher needs in order to qualify,”  she said. “These programs are having to do more with less.” 

Texas is also that has not agreed to the Medicaid expansion approved in the Affordable Care Act, meaning that uninsured adults living under the poverty line cannot access Medicaid unless they are pregnant, gave birth in the past year, have a disability or live in a nursing home. 

Burak underscored the particular risks for children’s health care in states that did not expand Medicaid and rely on taxing managed care organizations to pay for services. A proposal now before Congress would prohibit such meaning states like Texas would likely be forced to cut back on coverage or services for kids.

Screen time permeates the lives of toddlers and preschoolers. For many young children, their exposure includes both direct viewing, such as watching a TV show, and indirect viewing, such as when media is on in the background during other daily activities.

As many parents will know, . As scholars who specialize in and , we are particularly interested in the recent finding that too much screen time is associated with less parent-child talk, such as .

As a result, the and suggest limiting screen time for children.

Beyond quantity, they also emphasize the quality of a child’s engagement with digital media. Used in moderation, certain kinds of media can – and even contribute to language development.

These tips may help parents structure and manage screen time more effectively.

No. 1: Choose high-quality content

Parents can enhance their children’s screen-time value by choosing high-quality media – that is, content with educational benefit. , from “Nature Cat” to “Sid the Science Kid,” that would qualify as educational.

Two other elements contribute to the quality of screen time.

First, screen content should be age-appropriate – that is, parents should choose shows, apps and games that are specifically designed for young children. Using a resource such as allows parents to check recommended ages for television shows, movies and apps.

Second, parents can look for shows that use evidence-based educational techniques, such as participatory cues. That’s when characters in shows break the “fourth wall” by directly talking to their young audience to prompt reflection, action or response. that children learn new words better when a show has participatory cues – perhaps because it encourages active engagement rather than passive viewing.

Many classic, high-quality television shows for young children feature participatory cues, including “,” “,” “” and “.”

No. 2: Join in on screen time

The that whenever possible.

This recommendation is based on the evidence that increased screen media use can reduce parent-child conversation. This, in turn, can affect . Intentionally discussing media content with children increases language exposure during screen time.

Parents may find the following joint media engagement strategies useful:

• Press pause and ask questions.
• Point out basic concepts, such as letters and colors.
• Model more advanced language using a “think aloud” approach, such as, “That surprised me! I wonder what will happen next?”

No. 3: Connect what’s on screen to real life

because their brains struggle to transfer information and ideas from screens to the real world. Children learn more from screen media, research shows, when the content connects to their real-life experiences.

To maximize the benefits of screen time, parents can help children connect what they are viewing with experiences they’ve had. For example, while watching content together, a parent might say, “They’re going to the zoo. Do you remember what we saw when we went to the zoo?”

This approach promotes language development and cognitive skills, including . Children learn better with repeated exposure to words, so selecting media that relates to a child’s real-life experiences can help reinforce new vocabulary.

No. 4: Enjoy screen-free times

Ensuring that a child’s day is filled with varied experiences, including periods that don’t involve screens, increases language exposure in children’s daily routines.

Two ideal screen-free times are mealtimes and bedtime. Mealtimes present opportunities for back-and-forth conversation with children, exposing them to a lot of language. Additionally, bedtime should be screen-free, as using screens near bedtime or having a TV in children’s bedrooms .

Alternatively, devoting bedtime to reading children’s books accomplishes the dual goals of helping children wind down and creating a .

Having additional screen-free, one-on-one, parent-child play for at least 10 minutes at some other point in the day is good for young children. Parents can maximize the benefits of one-on-one play by letting .

A parent’s role here is to follow their child’s lead, play along, give their child their full attention – so no phones for mom or dad, either – and provide language enrichment. They can do this by labeling toys, pointing out shapes, colors and sizes. It can also be done by describing activities – “You’re rolling the car across the floor” – and responding when their child speaks.

Parent-child playtime is also a great opportunity to extend interests from screen time. Including toys of your child’s favorite characters from the shows or movies they love in playtime transforms that enjoyment from screen time into learning.

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .

A lead researcher on the study said when preschoolers spend time on tablets at 3 ½ years of age, they show increased outbursts of anger by age 4 ½, which then leads to increased time on computer tablets at age 5 ½.  

Researchers described the trend as a “vicious cycle,” where excessive tablet use delays children’s ability to deal with their emotions, leading them to use screen time to soothe themselves when they’re upset. 

“The preschool years are a very important time for learning how to cope with negative emotions [like frustration and anger],” said Gabrielle Garon-Carrier, an assistant professor of psychoeducation at the University of Sherbrooke in Quebec. “Learning to recognize emotions and adopt behaviors that are acceptable to society cannot be done in front of tablets.”

The study was published this month in JAMA Pediatrics.  

Previous research has linked the use of mobile devices to emotional dysregulation in children, Garon-Carrier said, but few studies have been able to show a direct link between tablet use and a cycle that could interfere with the development of self-regulation skills. 

Preschoolers learn to use time in front of a screen to cope with frustration or other challenging emotions, Garon-Carrier said, rather than how to manage those feelings. 

Student researchers visited the homes of 315 families with preschool-aged children in Nova Scotia, Canada three times — when children were 3 ½ in 2020 and again in 2021 and 2022. 

Parents were asked how much time children spent using a tablet and also about emotional behaviors; along with how the child handled transitions at bath or bedtime.  

Researchers found that children whose tablet use increased by 75 minutes when they were 3 ½ were 22 percent more angry or frustrated at other points of the day by the age of 4 ½, according to the study. A year later, the same children were using the tablet about 17 minutes more per day.

The study followed the same children over three years, from 2020 to 2022, as part of a bigger research project into other aspects of family life such as sleep and physical activity, Garon-Carrier said.

A parent can’t be blamed, she said, for letting a child who has frequent tantrums spend more time in front of a screen.

“It’s probably challenging for parents who have kids with destructive behaviors,” she said. “That could explain the cycle. The child spends time on the tablet and doesn’t learn to regulate his emotions. He has more outbursts and the parent is exhausted.”

She acknowledged that the research took place during the pandemic, when both children and adults spent more time in front of screens. But the findings hold, she said, because children continue to spend time in front of tablets.

The findings led Garon-Carrier and her co-investigators to believe parents should delay introducing young children to screen technology. This aligns with , which stress the importance of physical activity, interactive play and quality sleep over sedentary screen time.

While the study did not account for what type of content children were watching, Garon-Carrier said many preschoolers watch videos on Youtube, which allows parents to adjust settings on their accounts so that once one video is over, another doesn’t automatically begin. This approach helps limit screen time to just one video at a time.

It’s especially important to remove screens from important moments in the day, she said, including mealtimes and before bed. Also, parents can model good screen habits for their children. It can be helpful to make a family plan about screen use, which might include a rule that bans phones at the dinner table.

“This can be challenging for adults,” Garon-Carrier said. “Imagine how challenging it is for preschoolers. They need external people to say, ‘That’s enough.’ They can’t say that for themselves.”

On January 31, the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE) hosted a discussion exploring how the environment affects early childhood development and what we can do to address the impact of climate change on young children. , dean and Saris professor of education and economics at HGSE, opened the discussion, with featured guest , vice chair of the Clinton Foundation. Clinton then moderated a panel of experts that included: