Monday, March 24, 2014

In this article by Gordon and Mead, the gains of reading and math by children in Head Start is said to be lacking compared to the gains in reading and math by state preschool programs, such as High Scope.  The deficit in the Head Start Program is seen, by Gordon, to be that: there are too many “nit-picky” rules; providing information to families doesn’t really make a difference; and the framework of Head Start focuses on too many domains and subdomains.  The article states, “Within that broad mandate, Head Start asks for progress in everything.  In the process, it can end up limiting excellence in anything” (para. 8). However, the article notes that the program does make a positive difference in the lives of children and should not be eliminated. Rather, it should be adjusted, or “fixed”. Some of the suggestions are that Head Start managers should know the critical goals that they are trying to accomplish.  Also included is a suggestion for adjusting the measures to focus on fewer more important areas of development. Gordon states, “Instead of the tiresome debate over “whether Head Start works,” we’d get more insight into when and how Head Start works best” (para.12)

(https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/how-to-fix-head-start/)

By: Lillian Mongeau

In this article, Lillian Mongeau looks at the original statement, made by Lyndon B. Johnson, “This program this year means that 30 million man-years — the combined life span of these youngsters — will be spent productively and rewardingly, rather than wasted in tax-supported institutions or in welfare-supported lethargy” (para 3).  As shared in the article, a Head Start in Portland, Oregon seems to reflect the characteristics of the program that Johnson envisioned. 

The building is clean and bright, student art covers the walls, teachers with a solid background in early education lead small classrooms of 3- and 4-year-olds in daily half-day programs. All of the primary federal requirements have been accounted for: medical check-ups, eye and dental screenings, a nutritious lunch, a parent council. They also have family case workers who help adults access services for which they’re eligible and set goals to help them move into steadier, better paying work (para. 7).  

 However, if this program was on supported by the federal funds, it could not maintain the standards that make it successful.  The Head Start Program is described as life-changing, but there seems to be little evidence supporting the degree of positive effects it makes on children into adulthood.  “And lacking hard numbers, political thinking as to whether or not children’s futures could be affected positively by Head Start has vacillated between certainty and skepticism” (para.14). Since the original article, three studies have produced evidence that shows several positive outcomes for students that are enrolled in the program.  However, Funds are seen as what impedes the programs ability to serve many eligible children. Some researchers are still uncertain if studies produce enough extensive results to support such hefty funding. 

 

About Hechinger Report: We cover inequality and innovation in education with in-depth journalism that uses research, data and stories from classrooms and campuses to show the public how education can be improved and why it matters.

Early Education and Development, v27 n6 p751-769 2016. 19 pp.

By: Choi, Ji Young; Castle, Sherri; Williamson, Amy C.; Young, Emisha; Worley, Lauren; Long, Melissa; Horm, Diane M.

Summary:

This journal article shares the study of how emotionally supportive and well-organized classroom, with teachers that practice high quality teacher-child interactions, affects the Inhibitory Control (IC) skills of children. According to the article, IC development is linked to theory of mind and academic achievement. The study discussed in this article includes data collected from Early Head Start classrooms of children’s growth in IC skills over a six-month period.  Students that need extra support for self-regulation seemed to benefit the most from the Head Start environment created by educators. The article shares, “High-quality preschool settings are important contexts for early learning and development, especially for children at risk because of poor competencies and family risk factors” (pg. 766).

Written just under two years ago, the zero to three agency posted an article in support of Early Head Start (EHS) on their website. The article discusses science and research to back up their claim that from birth through 36 months, “the brain undergoes its most dramatic development”. Head Start provides prenatal and early childhood education and intervention services to low-income families who have at-risk children to ensure children receive quality interactions and experiences as well as referrals for services when necessary. 

The results and information discussed come from the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project an evaluation designed to find out if Head Start was beneficial to children of low income households. Through the article we learn that children who have participated in EHS program have shown positive impacts up to 2 years after they completed the program. Many benefits to the EHS program are listed; including ways Intellectual, social, & Emotional Development are enhanced, follow up results of preschoolers who were enrolled in EHS programs, and positive impacts of EHS on parents and families.

The link to this article was found on the NAEYC website. The article discusses generational poverty and ways that Head Start is helping families to break poverty cycle. The information provided is based on “A new study of Head Start…(that) found that the children of kids who participated (in HS) were substantially more likely to graduate high school and attend college, and less likely to commit crime and become a teen parent”.

Individuals who attended the program when it was first started in 1960’s were  studied and compared to individuals who lived in the same areas but did not attend the Head Start program. Ideally, investing in high-risk and low income children when they are young, pays off in the future by helping them obtain more education than their parents and grandparents. Thus, helping them to get more education, better jobs, more opportunities, and better life skills. 

Criticism Over New Head Start Testing Program Mounts. (2004, January 14). Education Week, 23(18), 10. Retrieved
from http://link.galegroup.com.proxy.bsu.edu/apps/doc/A215120610/BIC?u=munc80314&sid=BIC&xid=54f868ac

Issues with providing quality care, such as trained teachers, low family involvement, and even health services not being adequately provided make the list. The article goes on to discuss the importance of early intervention services and the fact that research on the benefits is outdated. This article is over 20 years old. 

Zigler E, Styfco S. Head Start: Criticisms in a constructive context. American Psychologist [serial online]. February 1994;49(2):127-132. Available from: PsycARTICLES, Ipswich, MA. Accessed July 2, 2018.

Jing Zhao1 • L. Quentin Dixon2 • Blanca Quiroz3 • Si Chen4

This journal article shares how Spanish–English bilingual children’s vocabulary development during their Head Start year by explaining the relationship between vocabulary and reading, concurrently and longitudinally, partitioning the unique and shared variance in reading accounted for by vocabulary, and examining the role of phonological awareness in the relationship between vocabulary and word reading. The findings demonstrate how Head Start is an important service for children in providing a foundation on which later school success may be determined. “English-language learners (ELLs) constitute the fastest growing group of PK-12 students in the United States (US). In 2012–2013, ELLs comprised 9.2 % of all students, with the most being Spanish-speaking students (Kena et al. 2015). The challenge of educating these students successfully should be of great concern to every educator and teacher as they deal with rapidly increasing numbers of language minority students in schools nationwide” (pg. 27). The findings indicate that children should receive culturally appropriate assessment and support for growth early literacy skills, which are most important to later literacy development.

Zhao, J., Dixon, L. Q., Quiroz, B., & Chen, S. (2017). The Relationship between Vocabulary and Word Reading among Head Start Spanish-English Bilingual Children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45(1), 27-34.
Note: This article shows a positive outcome of the Head Start Program. First, it demonstrates the studies that are able to be conducted through the program, and second, it shows that the Head Start intervention environment is working toward supporting children in using developmentally appropriate practice addressing the cultural diversity and context of children’s lives. 

The writers of the article submit Head Start to a benefit-cost test.  Head Start costs about $9,000 per participating child, paid for by federal, state, and local funds.  Available evidence indicates that the Head Start probably passes a benefit–cost test, but it is not clear.  The impact of Head Start on children depends on the quality of the program as compared to the environments that low-income children would otherwise be experiencing.  With such subjective variables, it is hard to determine a clear answer on the program’s effectiveness. 

The authors offer several suggestions to improve Head Start.  First, there could be even more cost-effective ways of deploying Head Start resources.  The program could focus on academics alone, rather than including the health and social services side. Teachers could be required to have a four year college degree.  Head start could also be restructured to be more like successful state pre-K programs.  However, the authors point out that there is no way of knowing if changes would create more harm than good.

The authors reviewed studies to determine whether early childhood education improved outcomes for low-income children and if programs were worth the cost. They determined that early childhood education improved outcomes for low-income children and benefits probably outweigh the cost. The authors found that state pre-K programs outperform Head Start.

--U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families (January 2010). Head Start Impact Study. Final Report. Washington, DC.

For 3 and 4-year-olds that completed Head Start, there were no lasting benefits in the cognitive domain at the end of kindergarten. No significant impacts were found for language, literacy, or math measures at the end of kindergarten or at the end of 1st grade.  Actually, Kindergarten teachers assessed Head Start children’s math ability as lower than average and have significantly less letter identification. 

There were no significant differences between the Head Start group and the control group on any measures of social-emotional development during the Head Start year or during kindergarten. 

 

The authors focused their study on second generation of Head Start participants because their outcomes would better indicate if Head Start impacted the cycle of poverty.  They conclude that Head Start has long-term benefits for children and families, including less teen pregnancies and crime, and higher educational attainment.  

The authors analyzed cognitive development, social competence, and attention and behavior problems of children to determine if Head Start improved school readiness.   The authors point out that some studies that show no value to Head Start might have a built in bias because the children that the program serves are disadvantaged. So instead of comparing the outcomes of Head Start participants with those of nonparticipants, they compared outcomes of low-income families that did or did not participate in Head Start. The authors determined that children who attended Head Start had improved cognitive ability and social competence and less attention problems in elementary school.  

 

The authors studied the effect of Head Start on children’s cognitive, social and emotional outcomes.  They used a sample of children with different skills prior to enrollment and from different demographic  groups.  They determined that Head Start participation improved school readiness. Also, children with the least amount of school skills starting the program gained the most.  However, the effects did not last through elementary school.  

The article explained how the researchers went about getting the participants for the research. The researchers looked at if there was a high rate of children that went on to graduate high school and that went on to obtain a degree from college. The researcher also looked at siblings that went to Head Start and the other child that didn't go to Head Start. They looked at impact of Head Start on Self-control and Self-esteem, and impact of Head Start on positive parenting. 

The studies found the Head Start children go on the graduate high school, attend college and receive a degree or such. African American participants have positive parenting and self –control and all increased positive parenting skills.  The parents invest more time in their children’s lives when their children are in the program by finding this out the parents report to the teachers what they are doing at home. 

https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-long-term-impact-of-the-head-start-program/ 

 

 

This article discusses the multitude of benefits, proven from different studies, which come from the Head Start program. Both the short term and long term effects of Head Start are presented in the article. Short term benefits include a higher receptive vocabulary and phonemic awareness in children, parents with more positive health and safety habits, and more current immunizations in children. Long term benefits include the decrease in rates of grade retention and special education placements. A long term study is provided as well. Part of this study includes the statistic of girls who were in Head Start being more likely to graduate high school and less likely to be arrested. This article covers both educational and school readiness benefits that stem from the Head Start program. Overall, many of the short term and long term benefits are covered through this article giving insight into the positive aspects of Head Start.  

 

 

This article discusses the impacts the Early Head Start program has on both the child and parents through a study using research and research questions. The study compared children who were in the Head Start program versus those who were not at the age of three. Overall, the study showed that Head Start had positive impacts on both children’s cognitive and language development. Children’s social-emotional development was also positively impacted by the program. This includes less parent-reported aggressive behaviors within their children. Parents of children in the Head Start program also scored slightly higher in some aspects of their parenting behaviors. This study is also compared to other studies which showed positive outcomes for children attending a Head Start program. 

 

This article questions the effectiveness of the Head Start program. It points out the program setting itself up for failure from the beginning due to high bar set and overabundant amount of objectives they strived to meet. After settling to a more set goal of “increasing school readiness for children in low-income families”. However, this expectation alone is not met. While children’s development may increase, it occurs for a short period of time. Studies show that once in school, children who were apart of Head Start perform the same as children who were not. Due to these findings, the article argues that there is no reason to use Head Start programs when the cost for the government is so great and when children will fall in the same performance level by the time they reach school. 

 

 

 This article looks at the effects Head Start has on parents who involved their children in the program. It looks at a study completed with parents and children two years after completing the Head Start program. Interviews with the parents were the main factor in finding results of the effectiveness of Head Start. Education and employment changes occurred, but not were considered significant. Parents were impacted positively by receiving both emotional and financial support.  Parents were also impacted in their personal development, family relationships, and health education. These positive impacts can improve the family relationship and environment for parents and children. Overall, the Head Start, which uses a family approach within their program, can have benefits for both the children and their parents. 

Barr, A., & Gibbs, C. R. (2017). Breaking the Cycle? Intergenerational Effects of an Anti-Poverty Program in Early Childhood.

Head Start and Urban Children's School Readiness: A Birth Cohort Study in 18 Cities. Developmental Psychology,47(1), 134-152. doi:10.1037/a0020784

Head Start Programs Have Significant Benefits for Children at the Bottom of the Skill Distribution. ://poverty.ucdavis.edu/sites/main/files/file-attachments/6_01_bitler_head_start_2.pdf.

Focusing on Families
https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/may2017/two-generation-model-reducing-stress

The Long Term Impact of the Head Start Program
https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-long-term-impact-of-the-head-start-program/

Head Start: Facts and Impacts
https://www.nhsa.org/facts-and-impacts

Head Start’s Lasting Benefits