Citation

Bailey DB. Early Child Res. Q. 2002; 17(3): 281-294.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/S0885-2006(02)00165-5

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Use of the term "critical period" as an argument justifying initiatives to expand early childhood programs has been challenged in recent years. In this article I review the research on critical periods and conclude that reliance on a critical periods argument is neither warranted nor necessary, since other fully justifiable arguments for early childhood initiatives exist. However, I reframe the question as one of timing of critical experiences necessary for healthy development of all children. I suggest that the importance of timing lies not within a set of age parameters but rather in the match between experiences provided, the child's developmental status, and the child's need or readiness to learn a particular skill or concept.