1 / 23

NHSA Update

Federal Funding Update and the Latest Research on the Successes of Head Start and Early Head Start. NHSA Update. NHSA September 2006 Leadership Institute Arlington, Virginia. Ben Allen, Ph.D. Washington State Conference Call Presentation December 19, 2007.

ishi
Télécharger la présentation

NHSA Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Federal Funding Update and the Latest Research on the Successes of Head Start and Early Head Start NHSA Update NHSA September 2006 Leadership Institute Arlington, Virginia Ben Allen, Ph.D.Washington State Conference Call PresentationDecember 19, 2007

  2. Federal Funding Has Failed to Keep Pace with Inflation Since Fiscal Year 2002

  3. FY 2008 Head Start and Child Care Funding • Head Start programs received a $10.6 million cut. • The Child Care and Development Block Grant program received a zero increase.

  4. Estimated Impacts of Various FY 2008 Funding Scenarios * Subject to Future Office of Head Start Funding Guidance

  5. A large corpus of research demonstrates that the Head Start and Early Head Start Programs have favorable child and family outcomes. To find a some of this research go to http://www.nhsa.org/download/research/REDFactSheets1.pdf.

  6. Despite What You May Have Heard Elsewhere, Head Start Is a Quality Program.

  7. Head Start Is a Quality Program. • Head Start quality has been observed to be consistently good over time (Family and Child Experiences Survey 2000). • Head Start programs are rated as “good” using the ECERS-R (Head Start Impact Study 2005). • Head Start’s quality, comprehensive services ensures that Head Start provides significant educational, health, economic, and law enforcement benefits.

  8. Head Start Is a Quality Program (Continued) • A meta-analysis of reliable studies revealed that Head Start children have increased • achievement test scores and • favorable long-term effects on grade repetition, special education, and high school graduation rates (Barnett 2002; Ludwig and Miller 2007).

  9. Head Start Is a Quality Program (Continued) • Head Start reduced mortality rates for children aged 5- to 9-years-old from causes that could have been affected by their participation in Head Start when they were 3- and 4-years-old (Ludwig and Miller 2007). • Head Start benefits its children and society-at-large by reducing crime and its costs to crime victims (Fight Crime Invest In Kids 2004; Garces, Thomas, and Currie 2002).

  10. Head Start Is a Quality Program (Continued) • The preliminary results of a randomly selected longitudinal study of more than 600 Head Start graduates in San Bernardino County, California, showed that society receives nearly $9 in benefits for every $1 dollar invested in these Head Start children (Meier 2003). • These benefits were projected and include increased earnings, employment, and family stability, and decreased welfare dependency, crime costs, grade repetition, and special education.

  11. Head Start Impact Study • The National Head Start Impact Study is a longitudinal research project designed to evaluate the effectiveness of the Head Start program. • Congressional mandate • Experimental random assignment research design

  12. First-Year Findings of the Head Start Impact Study • These findings reflect 6 to 9 months of Head Start. • Statistically significant favorable findings were found in the following domains: • Cognitive • Social-Emotional • Health • Parenting practices

  13. Impact Study’s Findings in the Context of Recent State-Funded Pre-K Findings • National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) is funding evaluations of state-funded pre-k programs. • Findings (effect sizes) from these evaluations are appearing in publications and the media. • NIEER has been comparing these effect sizes with the Head Start Impact Study’s effect sizes and arguing that state-funded pre-k programs with high standards are more effective than Head Start is. • NIEER’s argument is flawed.

  14. Flaws in the NIEER Argument • Creaming • Different populations • Comparison group inequality • Dissimilar evaluation scopes • Different evaluation designs For more detailed information, go to http://www.northwestern.edu/ipr/events/briefingmay06-cook/slide1.html

  15. Flaws of a 2004 Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) Cost-Benefit Study of Early Head Start • The Outcomes Considered Were Too Few and Narrow in Scope • Full Longitudinal Benefits of Early Head Start Were Unavailable since Early Head Start Impact Study Children Are Now Only 14-Years-Old or Younger • Misleading Presentation of WSIPP Report

  16. Fade-Out Effect • Myth: Gains to Head Start children “fade-out” (Westinghouse Learning Corporation and Ohio University 1969). • Fact: Reliable studies have found resoundingly favorable long-term effects on grade repetition, special education, and graduation rates for Head Start children. Studies that pointed to a fade-out effect in achievement test scores, on the other hand, have been found to have methodological flaws that, when taken into account, show favorable achievement test scores (Barnett 2002). Another explanation for the fade-out effect is that Head Start children attend low quality primary schools after they attend Head Start (Lee and Loeb 1995).

  17. Early Head Start Impact Study • The Early Head Start Impact Study was a longitudinal study designed to measure the effectiveness of Early Head Start on the children and families that it serves. • Congressional mandate • Experimental research design • Timeline: 1996 through 2001

  18. Early Head Start Impact Study’s Participants • Three thousand and one families were randomly selected from the 17 participating programs. • The children were randomly assigned to either a treatment group (which receives Early Head Start services) or a control group (which does not receive Early Head Start services).

  19. Early Head Start Impact Study’s Findings • Three-year-old Early Head Start children • Performed better than the control group did in cognitive and language development. • Experienced higher emotional engagement with their parent during semi-structured play than the control group did. • Displayed sustained attention with play objects, and • Were rated by parents to show lower levels of aggressive behavior than the control group children.

  20. Early Head Start Impact Study’s Findings (Continued) • Compared with the control group parents, Early Head Start parents • Provided more language and learning stimulation. • Were more emotionally supportive. • Read to their child more frequently. • Spanked their children less.

  21. Quality Matters! • Model early childhood programs include the Perry Preschool, Abecedarian, and Chicago Parent-Child programs. • They are more expensive per child than Head Start or most state-funded pre-k programs. • Model programs provide very intensive comprehensive services and yield cost-benefit ratios of 1 to 4 or much higher.

  22. The End

More Related