Who gets what? How Early Childhood Education shapes developmental inequalities in the early years
By Dr James Hall
Early Childhood Education: A system that shapes developmental inequalities
High quality Early Childhood Education (ECE) is widely understood to have the potential to help reduce developmental inequalities in the early years. It is often framed as a means by which we can help all children start school on a more level playing field.
But not all children experience ECE in the same way. Some receive more hours, higher-quality provision, and stronger support. Others face barriers to access, attend lower-quality settings, or receive fewer learning opportunities.
This raises a critical question: How do differences in children’s access to and experiences in Early Childhood Education shape its role in reducing—or unintentionally reproducing—developmental inequalities in the early years?
Selection effects in Early Childhood Education: A key mechanism shaping developmental inequality
Existing understandings of the potential of ECE to help reduce developmental inequalities often de-emphasise: Who goes where? Who gets what? and, How much?
Of course we also know that, in reality, access to high-quality ECE is structured by social and economic factors.
Children from wealthier families are often more likely to:
Attend higher-quality ECE settings with well-trained staff and strong learning environments.
Receive more hours of ECE before starting formal schooling.
Experience ECE as an enrichment opportunity rather than a compensatory intervention.
Children from lower-income backgrounds are often more likely to:
Face barriers to accessing the best-quality provision.
Receive fewer hours of early education.
Experience ECE settings that are underfunded or inconsistently resourced.
These education selection effects—systematic differences in who gets into ECE, for how long, and at what level of quality— are therefore a vital part of understanding how ECE shapes developmental inequalities.
The same factors that contribute to developmental inequalities also influence access to types of ECE that can foster or hinder these inequalities. We need research which combines examination of ECE for developmental inequalities with inequalities in families’ access to ECE.
The Evidence: ECE selection effects driving ECE’s impacts for developmental equality
Findings from two large-scale UK studies, with publicly accessible datasets, illustrate the kind of research we need more of moving forwards:
EPPE Study (Effective Provision of Preschool Education):
Black Caribbean children were more likely to experience inclusive ECE practices, which was then associated with a reduction in ethnicity-based gaps in verbal cognition before formal schooling.
FCCC Study (Families, Children and Child Care):
Higher-income families accessed more hours of ECE, which was associated with a widening of SES gaps in non-verbal cognition before school entry.
These findings do not suggest that ECE is inherently failing or succeeding—rather, they show that selection effects can shape how developmental inequalities evolve and they show that there are no fundamental barriers to research producing findings of this kind.
Yet, despite this, findings such as those above remain rare. Why? Because many traditional research models investigating ECE’s impacts for developmental inequalities do not account for selection effects at all. To truly understand how ECE shapes developmental inequalities, we need more studies that explicitly integrate selection effects into their analyses.
A better way to study how ECE can shape developmental inequalities
So why do we not see more of research with such narratives already?
What has been the problem holding researchers back from producing findings like this?
The answer lies in the conceptual and analytic tools that researchers have had access to and have used.
For the majority of the 20th century, this was the conceptual understanding applied to these issues. We see this, for example, within the highly influential 1966 Coleman Report from the US.
From the late 1990s we see this conceptual understanding slightly change – with new narratives on ECE qualities altering how characteristics of families and children relate to outcomes. In research terms, we say that ECE qualities ‘moderate’ that relationship.
The reality is, of course, that the characteristics of children and families don’t only influence developmental outcomes, but also the ECE qualities that children experience. This is wholly missing from existing research narratives that rely on the idea of ‘moderation’.
Fortunately, we now have a way to model how selection effects influence both access to ECE and its impacts towards developmental equalities. The term for this new tool?: Airbag Moderation.
Airbag Moderation provides researchers with the conceptual tool and the accompanying analytic tools that they need to now start producing understandings of ECE’s contributions to developmental inequalities that much more closely captures what happens in the real-world. The above examples show what is possible. It is now just a matter of application.
For a deeper explanation of Airbag Moderation, and for why it has this name, see these Sage Research Methods videos:
Introduction to Airbag Moderation: Definition, Explanation & Real-World Examples
Introduction to Airbag Moderation: Statistically Testing these Hypotheses
The Big Issue: Why this matters for ECE policy and for ECE practice
Given that ECE selection effects influence both access and impacts for equality, then ECE must be designed, implemented, researched, and (where it is judged to be appropriate) evaluated, with this in mind.
ECE policy must move beyond just expanding access. It must consider who actually benefits, under what conditions, and with what level of support.
Practitioners must recognise how structural inequalities shape children’s experiences. Selection effects mean that even within the same setting, children’s learning opportunities may differ.
Researchers—both qualitative and quantitative—must use and continue to develop approaches that account for selection effects. We need methods that reflect the real-world complexity of ECE participation and outcomes.
Ignoring selection effects means designing ECE systems that work well for some children, but not for all. If we want Early Childhood Education to truly reduce developmental inequalities, we must rethink not just access, but who gets what, under what conditions, and with what level of support.
Dr James Hall is Associate Professor of Psychology of Education at the University of Southampton. He’s also Deputy Director at ESRC National Centre for Research Methods.
Read more:
Hall, J. (2024a). An introduction to Airbag Moderation: Definition, explanation and real-world examples [Video]. Sage Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529697391
Hall, J. (2024b). An introduction to Airbag Moderation: Statistically testing hypotheses [Video]. Sage Research Methods. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529697407
Hall, J., Palardy, G., & Malmberg, L-E. (2024). Selection effects in education and implications for educational opportunity: State of the field and future directions. School Effectiveness and School Improvement. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2024.2385934
Hall, J., Malmberg, L-E., Lindorff, A., Baumann, N., & Sammons, P. (2020). Airbag Moderation: The definition and implementation of a new methodological model. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 43(4), 379-394. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2020.1735334