DOCSLIB.ORG

Ten Ideas for Improving Early Head Start— and Why the Program Needs Them

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ten Ideas for Improving Early Head Start— and Why the Program Needs Them TEN IDEAS FOR IMPROVING EARLY HEAD START— AND WHY THE PROGRAM NEEDS THEM Nicholas Zill Early Head Start is a federal child development program intended to bolster the early learning and eventual school readiness of infants and toddlers from low-income families. The best available evidence, from a national random-assignment evaluation study, indicates that the program is not performing as intended. This paper suggests ten ways to improve the program, such as by placing more emphasis on family stability, parent- child interaction, and cognitive skills that are predictive of later achievement; using technology to help teach parents and children; employing volunteers to make early intervention less costly; and dispersing more funds to communities with greater need for the program. Nicholas Zill is a research psychologist and independent consultant based in Washington, DC. Prior to his recent retirement, he was Director of the Child and Family Study Area at Westat. In that capacity, he headed several national surveys and assessments of Head Start program performance. 40 ZILL Early Head Start (EHS) is a federal program for the child. Both small-scale observational intended to address the same social problem research4 and large-scale survey studies5 that the larger and better-known Head Start have found that young children in low- program addresses. That problem is that income, low parent-education families young children from economically and receive significantly less stimulation and socially disadvantaged families begin support than those growing up in families elementary school with knowledge and skill with higher parent-education and family levels that are substantially below those of income levels. According to the Head Start children from more advantaged families. Family and Child Experiences Survey Furthermore, attempts to create equality of (FACES), at the time children from low- educational opportunity have not produced income families enter Head Start, their equal educational results.1 By the later average vocabulary test scores are one full grades of high school, youth from standard deviation or more below national disadvantaged families typically have lower norms.6 That is, the number of words whose achievement test scores, more grade meanings they know is thousands of words repetition, higher dropout rates, and lower smaller than the number the typical non- college entrance and completion rates than poor child can identify at the same age.7 So youth from more advantaged families.2 there is research evidence supporting the Indeed, study after study has found that the need for efforts to enrich the early home family from which a child comes is a better environments of children in low-income predictor of educational accomplishment families. Whether EHS in its current form than the schools she has attended.3 provides enrichment that makes a meaningful difference in the development of Like Head Start, EHS is a these children is another question, one I will comprehensive child development program address in a moment. intended for children from low-income families. Comprehensive means that the program provides not only early childhood The available research education services, but also health screening and referral and family support. Whereas evidence suggests that local Head Start programs serve preschool EHS as currently children of ages 3 and 4, and 5-year-olds who have not yet started kindergarten, EHS constituted and serves infants and toddlers below the age of structured is less than 3. Whereas local Head Start programs are predominantly center-based, with some a sterling success. providing home-visiting services as well, EHS programs are predominantly home- based, or involve a mixture of home-based Prior to the passage of the American and center-based services. Recovery and Reinvestment Act, EHS provided funding to some 650 local The rationale for having EHS as well programs, whereas Head Start itself as Head Start proper is that the sooner one supported the operation of more than 18,000 can provide intellectual stimulation and centers and 49,000 classrooms around the emotional support to a child who may not be country. The annual budget for EHS ($690 receiving adequate levels of either, the better million in 2009) was about one-tenth the TEN IDEAS FOR IMPROVING EARLY HEAD START 41 size of that for Head Start proper.8 The entry. There was another follow-up study American Recovery and Reinvestment Act conducted when most of the students were provided an additional $1 billion for EHS in the fifth grade of elementary school. per year in 2009 and 2010. This represents almost a doubling of the program’s Child assessments included appropriations, at least for those two years. cognitive, language, and social-emotional measures based either on direct assessment Is this massive increase in funding or parent report. Parent assessments were justified, given the available evidence on the based on observation (videotapes and by efficacy of EHS? What recommendations interviewers) or a self-report. Families in the can we make regarding the design of the program and control groups were EHS program, based on available evidence demographically comparable at baseline and and practical experience? What policies and assessment points. Several research briefs practices ought the program put into and a journal article have been published 10 operation that might improve its long-term based on findings from the study. impacts on children’s school performance and behavior? What kinds of research The latest research brief that is publicly available is based on the findings as should the program undertake to inform 11 future policy and practice? These are the of the pre-K follow-up study. What that questions that this paper addresses. brief tells us is that, by the time of their entry into kindergarten, participation in EHS Evidence on Program Efficacy had no significant impact on children’s early reading skills, early math skills, English- The best available research evidence language vocabulary knowledge, or ability on the efficacy of EHS as currently to pay attention to a repetitive task in a implemented comes from a national random sustained manner. assignment study of the program conducted by Mathematica Policy Research for the A landmark review of six U.S. Department of Health and Human longitudinal child development studies Services.9 Does the evidence from that compiled by Greg Duncan of the University study justify the surge in funding that of California, Irvine, and his collaborators Congress has bestowed upon the program? showed that school-entry math, reading, and attention skills were the strongest predictors 12 The EHS Research and Evaluation of later academic achievement. Thus, it is Project was conducted beginning in 1996 in particularly troubling that EHS had no seventeen sites representing different impact on these potent predictors of later regions of the country, program auspices, achievement. An earlier report of the program models, and racial and ethnic Mathematica evaluation noted that at age 3, composition of the populations served. the EHS children scored significantly better Some 3,000 children and families from these than control children on the Bayley Scale of sites were randomly assigned either to Infant Mental Development (effect size = receive EHS services or be in a control .10) and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary group whose members could utilize any Test (effect size = .15). The differences were community services except EHS. Children, small (in the 10 to 20 percent range) and the families, and their child care arrangements scores of the EHS group, though higher than were assessed when children were 1, 2, and those of the control group, were still well 3, and 5 years old, prior to kindergarten below national norms. However, similar 42 ZILL differences were not apparent by the time of including internalizing and externalizing kindergarten entry. problems and social skills, were generally insignificant predictors of later academic One subgroup did show a difference performance, even among children with in language development at kindergarten relatively high levels of problem behavior. entry that was linked to EHS participation. There was a significant impact (effect size The pre-K follow-up study also of .27) on the Spanish-language vocabulary reports some positive impacts of EHS on knowledge of Spanish-speaking children. parental behavior, namely, more daily Though this impact was modest, it was reading (effect size = .09) and periodic actually one of the largest effects found in teaching activities (effect size = .09), more the pre-K follow-up study. The brief does supportive home environment (as measured not discuss why there should be an effect in by the HOME scale; effect size = .13), and Spanish but none in English. One may less depression (effect size = -.10), all as speculate that Hispanic parents were reported by parents themselves. Again, culturally less apt to speak with their however, the statistically reliable impacts children in ways that would stimulate the are miniscule in magnitude (effect sizes youngsters’ vocabulary development. ranging from .09 to .13). And balanced Participating in EHS may have worked to against these is a lack of any significant loosen the parents’ reticence in a more impact when the measures of parental pronounced fashion for Hispanic parents behavior are based on direct observation of than for those of other ethnicities. parent-child interaction (no significant differences in parental supportiveness or The pre-K follow-up found some negativity during videotaped play), as significant but tiny impacts of EHS on opposed to being based on parental report. children’s problem behavior (effect size = -.10) and approaches to learning (effect size In sum, the available research =.12), as reported by parents. But three other evidence suggests that EHS as currently measures of socio-emotional behavior and constituted and implemented is something engagement showed no impact. less than a sterling success. If one focuses Furthermore, the review paper by Duncan on the early effects of the program, the and his colleagues found that measures of program seems to show promise.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 50Th Anniversary Head Start Timeline
    Head Start Timeline Delve into key moments in Head Start history! Explore the timeline to see archival photographs, video, resources, and more. 1964 War on Poverty: On Jan. 8, President Lyndon Johnson takes up the cause of building a "Great Society" by declaring "War on Poverty" in his first State of the Union Address. The goal of the War on Poverty is to eradicate the causes of poverty by creating job opportunities, increasing productivity, and enhancing the quality of life. Watch this historic State of the Union Address. The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 is enacted and includes programs such as: Job Corps, Urban/Rural Community Action, VISTA, Project Head Start and many more. Watch Small Miracles, a short video about these programs. Case for Early Education: As a former teacher in a one-room schoolhouse in Texas, President Johnson believes strongly that education was the key to breaking the cycle of poverty. Moreover, child development experts have found that early intervention programs could significantly affect the cognitive and socio-emotional development of low-income children. State of the Union, 1964 1965 Cooke Report: Dr. Robert Cooke sets up a steering committee of specialists to discuss how to give disadvantaged children a "head start." The committee develops recommendations that feature comprehensive education, health, nutrition and social services, and significant parent involvement. Read the Cooke Report [PDF, 47KB]. Head Start Launch: On May 18, President Lyndon B. Johnson officially announces Project Head Start from the White House Rose Garden. Head Start launches in the summer of 1965, serving more than 560,000 children and families across America in an eight-week summer program through Head Start Child Development Centers throughout the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Closing Session: Reflections of the History of Head Start Research
    4 Million and Counting: Reflections on 40 Years of Head Start Research in Support of Children and Families Presenter: John M. Love 1965--41 years ago. It’s hard to remember what an amazingly eventful year 1965 was: On January 4, President Lyndon Johnson proclaimed the Great Society in his State of the Union address. In February, the U.S. began bombing North Vietnam in operation Rolling Thunder. On Feb. 2, Malcolm X was assassinated. March 7 became known as “Bloody Sunday,” when civil rights marchers began their trek from Selma to Montgomery and were violently confronted by state troopers. A month later, in a one-room schoolhouse in Texas, President Johnson signed into law the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, which we all know in its latest incarnation as No Child Left Behind. On August 11, the Watts riots began. That year, in Britain, Winston Churchill died—and J. K. Rowling was born. And at the Grammies, Mary Poppins won best recording for children. So with a spoonful of sugar and a ton of sweat and tears, a vast new program for children and families was underway. Within 3 years, Donald Rumsfeld, the new head of the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) would have Head Start as part of his responsibility, guiding the country through an early phase of a different war—the War on Poverty. Research began immediately. One of the first studies in the new Head Start context is a dissertation by an enterprising young University of Chicago doctoral candidate, Diana Slaughter, who investigated the maternal antecedents of African American Head Start children’s academic achievement.
    [Show full text]
  • CITY Councll REPORT Meeting Date: June 30, 2020 General Plan Element: Neighborhoods General Plan Goal: Preserve and Enhance the Unique Sense of Neighborhood ACTION
    Item 6 CITY COUNCll REPORT Meeting Date: June 30, 2020 General Plan Element: Neighborhoods General Plan Goal: Preserve and enhance the unique sense of neighborhood ACTION Adopt Resolution No. 11810 authorizing Contract No. 2020-087-COS a revocable license agreement with Maricopa County, to use space at Paiute Neighborhood Center to operate the Head Start and Early Head Start Programs. BACKGROUND Head Start was established in 1965 as part of Lyndon B. Johnson's "War on Poverty". It began as an eight-week summer program to prepare low-income children for elementary school. The program expanded as a result of the Head Start Act of 1981; more recently under the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act added over 64,000 slots to the Early Head Start and Head Start programs. Head Start is a federally funded program that is currently administered by the Administration of Children and Families (ACF) within the US Department of Health and Human Services. Maricopa County operates a Head Start preschool for children ages 3 and 4 years old and an Early Head Start program for children under 3 years old. Both programs focus on comprehensive early childhood development consisting of education, health, nutrition, and social services to low-income children and their families. The Program helps meet the emotional, social, cognitive, and physical growth needs of children by monitoring progress while and preparing them for kindergarten. The City of Scottsdale and Maricopa County have collaborated to provide a Head Start Program using City playground and classroom facilities at Paiute Neighborhood Center since 1996. ANALYSIS & ASSESSMENT The federal government's initial implementation of the Head Start and Early Head Start programs was influenced by the effects of poverty and its impact on education.
    [Show full text]
  • Lady Bird Johnson
    Lyndon B. Johnson National Historical Park National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Lady Bird Johnson I slept, and dreamed that life was beauty. I awoke and found that life was duty. - - From Mrs. Johnson’s embroidered bedroom pillows. Lady Bird Johnson has lived her life with a quiet determination to experience all that this world has to offer. Her endless curiosity and commitment to duty has led her to expand the boundries of the many roles she has played in life. Whether as a daughter, student, wife, mother, political partner, business person, first lady or environmental activist, she has been a subtle, but powerful influence on the people around her and a subtle, but significant influence on American society. Daughter childhood, but not a lonely one. Claudia Alta Taylor was born to Since her two older brothers were Minnie and Thomas Taylor of away at school she found Karnack, Texas on December 22, 1912. companionship with her Aunt Effie Claudia’s nursemaid described her and in the woods around her home. “as pretty as a lady bird,” an Her father, whom she adored, gave appropriate nickname for a child of her nearly complete freedom to roam nature. After her mother’s death in the small town. This made her self- 1918, the five-year-old Lady Bird reliant, but the lack of social Taylor began her life long love affair interaction made her shy and unsure with nature. Hers was a lonesome of herself in public. Student By 1930, Lady Bird Taylor was majoring in history at the University of Texas in Austin.
    [Show full text]
  • JOSEPH CALIFANO Special Assistant to Lyndon Johnson Interviewed by Trey Ellis March 22, 2017 Total Running Time: 43 Minutes
    ! JOSEPH CALIFANO INTERVIEW KING IN THE WILDERNESS KUNHARDT FILM FOUNDATION JOSEPH CALIFANO Special Assistant to Lyndon Johnson Interviewed by Trey Ellis March 22, 2017 Total Running Time: 43 minutes 00:00:06:00 CREW: Joseph Califano, take one, marker. 00:00:09:00 TREY ELLIS: So, you talk about this partnership between LBJ and Doctor King. Can you talk a little bit about that, that, you know, they really- their futures were entwined in this? 00:00:21:00 JOSEPH CALIFANO: Well, I think they- they were- first of all, they were both committed to the same cause. Civil rights was the centerpiece along with poverty of Johnson’s administration and civil rights was Doctor King’s life. Secondly, they really knew what each other’s’ job was. They had a real sense of that. People think of Doctor King as being a minister, a man of God, but he was also a very good politician in the sense that he understood politics. I think there are lots of examples of that. In nineteen sixty-four when Johnson went after the Civil Right Act, his own staff said, you know, “Don’t do it, it- we’re coming up to an election.” And Johnson said, “What the hell’s the presidency for?” And he worked with all the civil rights leaders including Doctor King. What Johnson knew was that he had to pass the sixty-four Civil Rights Act before the Great Society programs came in because those- the- the- because the Civil Rights Act required that anyone who received federal funds could not discriminate and had- had he not passed the civil rights act first in nineteen sixty- four before he went ahead with Medicare and elementary and secondary education, ! !1 ! JOSEPH CALIFANO INTERVIEW KING IN THE WILDERNESS KUNHARDT FILM FOUNDATION higher education, those bills would’ve all been bogged down on the issue of whether or not we’re going to have to end discrimination.
    [Show full text]
  • HEAD START SCHOOL-WIDE MODEL Annual Report 2019-2020
    District of Columbia Public Schools Early Childhood Education Division HEAD START SCHOOL-WIDE MODEL Annual Report 2019-2020 1 Table of Contents DCPS Head Start School Wide Model ........................................................................................................................... 3 ...................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Program Funding ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 SY 19 – 20 Budget & Expenditures ............................................................................................................................. 5 Projected Budget for SY 20-21 .................................................................................................................................... 6 Financial Audit Results for ............................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined. ........................................................................................................................................................................ 7 DCPS ECED Leadership Teams ................................................................................................................................... 8 ECED Staff ........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Civil Rights Movement: Timeline 1954-1968
    The Civil Rights Movement: Timeline 1954-1968 1954: Brown v. Board of Education This decision, handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States, has been described as the moment that launched the modern civil rights movement. Following years of protest, led initially by black students and their parents at Molton High School in Virginia, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), made five cases challenging the school system. These cases were later combined under what is known as Brown v. Board of Education. The drive to end segregation in schools across the USA and put African-American and white children in the same classroom ‘was based on a belief that the dominant group would keep control of the most successful schools and that the only way to get a full range of opportunities for a minority child was to get access to those schools’, according to Gary Orfield when co-director at the Harvard Civil Rights Project. 1955: The Montgomery Bus Boycott On 1st December 1955, Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to give up her seat on a public bus in Montgomery, Alabama. Parks was tried and convicted for ‘disorderly conduct and violating a local ordinance’. The Women’s Political Council (WPC), alongside other leaders in the black community, seized on this moment and launched a full-blown citywide boycott of the buses. During the early days of the boycott, the WPC urged those involved in the boycott to attend a mass meeting at Dexter Avenue Baptist Church to hear the words of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Promoting Parents' Social Capital to Increase Children's Attendance In
    ACCEPTED: JOURNAL OF RESEARCH ON EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS PARENTS’ SOCIAL CAPITAL & CHILDREN’S ATTENDANCE Promoting Parents’ Social Capital to Increase Children’s Attendance in Head Start: Evidence from an Experimental Intervention Teresa Eckrich Sommer, Terri J. Sabol, P. Lindsay Chase-Lansdale Northwestern University Mario Small Harvard University Henry Wilde Acelero Learning Sean Brown The University of New Mexico Zong Yang Huang Northwestern University Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank Ascend at the Aspen Institute, especially Anne Mosle and Sarah Haight, for funding and promoting this work. We are grateful to Lori Levine, Jeannette Baker, and Cate Todd Smith at Acelero Learning who were central to program implementation and data collection. At Northwestern University, we acknowledge members of our Northwestern Two-Generation Research Initiative team: Elise Chor, Ummul Kathawalla, Amy Glazier-Torgerson, and Allie Cooperman. And, most importantly, we appreciate deeply the families whose investment in their children made this research possible. This article has been published by Taylor & Francis in the Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19345747.2016.1258099 ACCEPTED: JOURNAL OF RESEARCH ON EDUCATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS PARENTS’ SOCIAL CAPITAL & CHILDREN’S ATTENDANCE Abstract Improving children’s attendance is a high priority for Head Start and other early childhood education programs serving low-income children. We conducted a randomized control trial in a major northern city to evaluate the impact of a low-cost intervention designed to promote parents’ social capital as a potential influence on children’s attendance in Head Start centers. The intervention assigned children to treatment group classrooms based on (1) neighborhood of residence (geography condition) or (2) the geography condition plus the opportunity for parents to form partnerships in support of their children’s attendance, or to control group classrooms according to Head Start guidelines only.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016-2017 ANNUAL REPORT in Memoriam
    The Children’s Center 2016-2017 ANNUAL REPORT In Memoriam The Children’s Center family mourns the passing of Bob ber for the Franklin City Educa- Petty. Bob was the president of our Board of Directors and was tional Foundation, and a board a board member for a number of years, also serving as trea- member for the Franklin-South- surer. ampton Area United Way. He Bob had a soft spot in his heart for the Children’s Center also served as a board member and many times shared his testimony about our programs. He for the Franklin Housing and first came to us 28 years ago as a parent of a child in our pro- Redevelopment Authority and grams. He never left us from that time. He was an advocate, a the Village at Woods Edge. believer, and a leader. Robert Tucker Petty died on Bob served the community of Franklin as a volunteer. He August 26, 2017 after a long was a Book Buddy for Franklin Public Schools, a board mem- and quiet battle with cancer. Bob Petty We nurture andMISSION educate children and their families The best way to find yourself is to lose yourself in the service of others. - Mahatma Gandhi Rosalind Cutchins The annual report gives a chance to look back and see how the Executive Director agency served the community. It also gives the opportunity to look forward toward improvement and opportunities of service. We nurture and educate children and their families. Nurture is to care for and encourage the growth of children and families.
    [Show full text]
  • Since 1965, the Head Start Program Has Served Low-Income 3
    Since 1965, the Head Start program has served low-income 3- and 4-year-old children and their Most children (89 percent) received a families with comprehensive early education and medical screening as required by federal support services. Programs provide services Head Start Program Performance focused on the “whole child,” including early Standards. Thirteen percent required education addressing cognitive, developmental, follow-up treatment, and of those children, and socio-emotional needs; medical and dental the majority (94 percent) received screenings and referrals; nutritional services; treatment. parental involvement activities; referrals to social The majority of children in Head Start service providers for the entire family; and mental preschool programs receive health health services. insurance through public programs. Eighty- eight percent of children had publicly All Head Start programs (including Head Start funded health insurance through Children’s preschool programs, Early Head Start, and Migrant Health Insurance Programs (CHIP), and Seasonal Head Start) are required to complete Medicaid, a combined CHIP/Medicaid the Program Information Report (PIR) on an program, or other state-funded insurance 1 annual basis. The PIR collects data on all children (up 4 percent from the previous year), and pregnant women who participate in Head Start while 7 percent had private insurance in at any point during the program year, including 2013. those who do not complete the year. By the end of the program year, 97 percent of children had a medical home for ongoing This fact sheet uses information reported through care, and 93 percent had a source for PIR to describe the children and families enrolled ongoing dental care.
    [Show full text]
  • A 50-Year Journey and Beyond
    A 50-Year Journey and Beyond Head Start’s war on poverty continues today | Lilly B. Irvin-Vitela his year marks the 50th Today, Head Start continues to hold development outcomes. Now, 50 anniversary of Head Start in up as a way to overcome the disad- years later, Early Head Start, Head the United States. It remains vantages in educational, develop- Start, Tribal Head Start, and one of the most effective set mental, and health outcomes that Migrant and Seasonal Head Start in Tof policies and practices in the war often accompany poverty and lack Wisconsin continue to deliver on our on poverty. There is much to cele- of access to resources. This two-gen- promise to children and families. brate, not the least of which has eration model still serves effectively been our ability in the Head Start to achieve prevention and early | A Shared Responsibility community to prevent Head Start intervention goals. Head Start and Early Head Start from succumbing to a war on those Head Start’s commitment to the have persisted in being a place to in poverty. whole child and the whole family refine best practices, develop an At its inception, Head Start was within the context of their commu- evidence-base for high-quality early designed to be a child, family, and nity and culture has proven to be a childhood and family service, and community strengthening approach. bedrock of positive child and family build relationships with others who Lady Bird Johnson, the First Lady, is shown reading to children enrolled in Project Head Start at Kemper School in Washington, DC, in March 1966.
    [Show full text]
  • Remarks at a Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Fundraiser August 8, 1994
    Administration of William J. Clinton, 1994 / Aug. 8 he and his wife, Eunice, helped to organize a [At this point, Major Leo Mercado, Jr., USMC, conference on juvenile delinquency for the At- Marine Corps aide to the President, read the torney General in 1947 to his efforts for public citations, and the President presented the med- education in Chicago in the 1950's, to his lead- als.] ership of Head Start and legal services and now The President. Ladies and gentlemen, in clos- the Special Olympics, Sargent Shriver has awak- ing let me say that I couldn't help thinking, ened millions of Americans, including many in as the citations were read and I looked into this administration, to the responsibilities of the faces of our honorees and their families, service, the possibilities of change, and the sheer friends, and admirers here, that we too often joy of making the effort. reserve our greatest accolades for our citizens These recipients of the Presidential Medal of when they are gone. I wish that Cesar Chavez Freedom represent different political parties, could be here today. I am grateful that his wife different ideologies, different professions, in- is here, and I am so grateful that all these deed, even different ages. Their different eras, others are here. different races, different generations in Amer- ican history cannot be permitted to obscure the Let us remember today that the greatest gift fact of what they share in common: an unusually any of us can give the Founders of this Constitu- profound sense of responsibility to improve the tion and this Republic is to emulate the work lives of their fellow men and women, to improve of these citizens whom we honor today, every the future for our children, to embody the best day, each in our own way.
    [Show full text]