For your second blog post I'd like you to consider the work of Armour and Sousa (2014), Schweinhart (2010), and Zigler (2010). The articles consider what we know about the Perry Preschool Project, Head Start and other modern ECD/preschool programs. The articles discuss important issues regarding (1) program funding, (2) goals, (3) staffing, (4) curriculum, (5) quality, (6) service intensity, (7) program targeting/participant characteristics, (8) program components, and (9) strategies used to examine the effective of initiatives. If a move toward universal or pubic preK is to be effective, we need to consider what programs should look like and make decisions informed by the existing research base. For this blog prompt consider what you have learned about the issues listed above and what a model public or universal preK program would look like and why. Remember to use these sources to develop and support your ideas. Happy blogging!
Also, another question or thought to ponder... Many of you currently work or have worked in Head Start settings. What do you make of the research which indicates the program has limited effectiveness?
ReplyDeleteZigler's commentary as a former planner and administer of the Head Start program sheds light on why the government and the public have very high and possibly unrealistic expectations for a public preschool program for children living in poverty. From it's creation as a summer program intended to promote school readiness for children living in poverty, Lyndon B. Johnson promised the program would end poverty and that its graduates would avoid welfare dependency, crime and imprisonment later in life (Zigler, 2010). Somehow over time these expectations have become mixed in with other goals of reducing the achievement gap between the poor and wealthy and bringing in a hefty return on the investment in education. These long-term goals are expected from a one or two year preschool program. As a preschool teacher, I believe in the abilities of preschool, but I also believe in the huge importance of family life in tandem with school in raising children to be productive adults.
DeleteOther studies, like the Chicago Child-Parent Centers (CPC) seem to prove that involving the family is a critical aspect of their programs' success. Schweinhart argues that the elements of program success are that it's run by teachers with bachelors degrees, is a duration of two years, daily classes of 2.5 hours or longer, includes teacher visits at least every two weeks and uses the High Scope or equal quality curriculum (2014). Programs vary in cost, but there is no doubt that it's costly, at least $6.9K per child in the CPC program and reaching $15K per child in the Perry School program. In order to be successful, all aspects of success need to be met at. This isn't just expensive for the government, its timely for teachers and parents. It also takes focus and dedication that may not be readily available for anybody in our currently very busy society.
Zigler argues that in order to have a real effect on poverty, even more than mentioned above is needed. Intervention needs to start at pregnancy with home visits until the child is 3 years old, the child needs two years of high-quality preschool and then coordinated programming until the third grade (2011). I agree that this is something that sounds like it would have the impact that the government and the public are seeking. However, the initial costs and the return on costs may be exactly what they do not want to incur.
After working at a former Head Start program that still employed the High Scope curriculum, I agree that the curriculum is high quality. The children loved coming to school, exploring their classroom, asking questions and in my mind they loved each other. My favorite part was watching them create friendships that I knew would be life-long, as that's how it is on the island I was teaching. The program was headed by a director with a B.A. and subsequent education and the head teacher had a CDA. I thought their dedication to the children and the place they all called home was paramount to their actual credentials. I grew up outside of New York City where status and credentials often felt heartless in the end. I think having inspired teachers dedicated to furthering their knowledge base, a strong curriculum and early intervention are all aspects of a successful program. I also think the research and funds aren't available to create a universal and successful program.
I found the information that Armor and Sousa (2014) presented to be extremely interesting. They discussed that studies have shown that Head Start children, although they demonstrated significant progress within their years at Head Start, have not continued to progress, but in fact have declined since in elementary. I have several wonderings provoked by this finding. Initially, I am wondering about the quality of these Head Start programs in which the children within the research attended. Head Start does not require teachers to have the same credentials that elementary teachers have, or a specific curriculum. Just because this is not a requirement, does not mean it is best practice. Where I work at Educare Central Maine, a partnership among Head Start, KVCAP, and other Educare’s across the country, it is a requirement for all preschool teachers to obtain a Bachelor’s degree in early childhood education or a closely related field, and since we also collaborate with AOS 92, at least one teacher per preschool classroom must obtain an 081 certificate. I think that for so long this field has been overlooked and professionals were not required to have the same credentials as other educators. We know that education starts much before kindergarten so having staff with a background in the field and notable qualifications is the first step in quality education for young children. I also think that teaching young children goes beyond following their lead day to day. I think it is a balance of following their lead but also having a prior, well thought out curriculum plan based on developmental appropriateness and skill level. We implement the Open the World of Learning (OWL) curriculum and this has been extremely successful in terms of developmental progress for our children, literacy skills especially. I agree with Allison that a strong curriculum is essential in a quality Head Start program.
DeleteI also thought about the difference between Head Start and public school. Our family involvement is significant and that essentially diminishes once children begin kindergarten. We support our families immensely and provide them with resources to in turn, support their children in all areas of development. Providing them with tools and strategies, however, is all we can do, how they use them and continue to use them is up to them. Zigler (2010) discussed coordinating programs between preschool and elementary. Our program partners with our connected elementary school. This gives children an opportunity to familiarize themselves with the building, staff, etc. before they even enter kindergarten. In addition to this, I think that elementary teachers need to collaborate more with early childhood educators and shift their thinking from school readiness to how they can be ready to best support incoming children. He also, and perhaps most importantly, mentioned that Head Start alone is not responsible for mending broken families, increasing salaries, diminishing community violence, improving health/nutrition, and providing the same enriching experiences that middle-class children have.
Hi Sara…
DeleteAs I am just beginning the implementation of a preschool program and have a great deal of flexibility, I am wondering what you see as both the pros and cons of the OWL curriculum? After visiting multiple programs, I am heavily leaning toward the Tools of the Mind curriculum, but wanted your thoughts as you have used OWL. Thanks!
Allison you make so many valid points. I want to start with I agree that a major portion of learning happens within the home and family life. This is why personally regardless of the costs I feel we must refocus our efforts and support children and families at a much earlier time, in their lives and development. I am not saying Pre-K is not important or shouldn’t be available I just see that by Preschool age, a huge window of opportunity has been missed for both the child and family. I feel if education and supports started earlier children and families would be more ready to enter a Pre-K setting.
DeleteI also think about the Chicago Child Parent Center (CPC) and I think about the 2.5 hours that children are scheduled in a preschool program. It just makes me wonder how that model works for busy families today. I also can’t help but think about my eleven hour a day child care schedule and how families are typically working anywhere from 9-11 hours a day with their own travel times. Knowing that this is typical for the average family, why do we offer programming for 2.5 hours? Doesn’t that add stress to a parents’ life? Is this also something that should be examined further? I think about the children that come from my program and are on the bus for one hour each day and I am not sure how long standing in line waiting for the new transportation system the City of Auburn has chosen to contract with. I wonder how much time is actually spent transitioning, verses planned learning times.
I also think about curriculum. I think about what you said about the teachers you knew on the island. From my perspective, you described them as life-long learners and from your description I got the sense they shared that with their entire school and their excitement of learning was also passed on. At least that was the sense I got from your post. I think that those teachers were very self-motivated and had their own strong beliefs about what Pre-K children should learn and how. I think there are many educators as dedicated yet it is also something that is very individual. I am not sure how a Universal Pre-K could ever be run without individuality at every locality. Maybe it’s me and I just do not understand the concept but wouldn’t we want them to be and look different to meet the needs of the children and families in their communities?
Allison Thank you, I enjoyed reading your post and connected thoughts in many different ways
Armor & Sousa (2014) emphasized that though Head Start is very effective for children while they are in the program, the progress declines once the children enter elementary school. This makes me question whether the problem is simply that Head Start is not effective for children in the long run, or if this is based on the fact that the services Head Start provides is not carried over into public school. At Educare, we provide a long list of family services to support not only the children's learning, but the family at home as well. It is a very hard transition for many families when they go to public school and no longer have the daily interactions and overall support that we provide. What needs to happen is a way to bridge the that gap between prekindergarten and elementary schools. Of course, public schools have so much on their plates already that it would be difficult to add in a lot of extra family services, but it is still something that would help prevent some of these children from struggling upon entering kindergarten.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteAllison - I also agree that dedication and a passion for teaching and learning is paramount in the classroom. Working in a school district, all Pre-K teachers must hold a 081 certification, however our Educational Technicians do not, and I feel that they are just as much invested in our students as we are. I think the lead teacher having an 081 and the training and schooling that comes with obtaining a degree in early childhood is important, as we are able to be more prepared for the different learning styles and needs that students will have as they enter our classrooms, and be able to more effectively help them access their learning using tools and strategies we have learned through obtaining our degree.
DeleteSara - I agree with a lot of points you made. The first being that the lack of required credentials has the field of early childhood often misjudged and overlooked. When I began my undergraduate studies in early childhood, people would often, jokingly they say, ask why I was wasting so much money to be a babysitter. I do not believe that anyone working closely with children to help them grow and strengthen all areas of their development should be referred to as a babysitter, because we are not. There are even times in my own building when the older grade teachers will say "So what do you do all day? I wish we could play all day." Usually I let it roll off my back, but some days I point out that I went to school for 4 years, just like them, got my degree, just like them, and am now going for my Master's, which is like some of them and unlike others who have not had the desire to continue past their bachelors. We are not here to just play the day away, although that is an important part of their learning, we are also here to implement strong curriculums and help them reach academic goals. Secondly, I liked your perspective on the family involvement and outreach, but how they use those resources after they leave your program is up to them. My program does not provide a lot of information in regards to services that are accessible for parents, however I do implement several Family Fun Nights and volunteer opportunities in my classroom. Although I know it is not enough, I am hoping that by providing these times is offering some home-school connection. We also have two conferences with parents throughout the year, more if they request. I have noticed that after they leave Pre-K, there are quite a few less of these opportunities in kindergarten, and it only lessens from there.
Tammy - I agree with your point on wanting different locations to look and be different to best fit the needs of the students. Identical everything would not work for a vast majority of students, and universal pre-k would undoubtedly produce less-than-desirable results.
Ashley - I have the same question: is the problem Head Start, or is the problem that once students enter elementary school they lost the support of the Head Start program and families are told to essentially sink or swim. Yes some of the parents, after intervention from Head Start, would be able to continue accessing necessary services and could use what they learned from Head Start to continue finding and accessing services, but for most families this is not the case. These families cannot be provided quality, intensive services and then have them pulled away suddenly. As Zigler (2010) states, providing services, education, and outreach prior to the child's birth and then aligning the curriculum Pre-K through 3rd grade would potentially allow parents to have that involvement through their child's first 9 years of life, which would allow them a lot of time to practice the skills they are being taught and give them a better chance of being able to utilize those skills. However that leads to me to my next question, if universal pre-k were to include all the things listed above, in addition to home-visits, what would 4th grade look like? Would it be similar to the drop in parent involvement that we are seeing between preschool and kindergarten? Would students flourish Pre-K to 3rd grade, then the results start to diminish?
DeleteHi Denyell - I am personally a huge fan of the OWL curriculum. I will be entering my fourth year entering this curriculum and I have found that it has several benefits. Majorly - literacy skills. We are required to take quarterly observations on all children within our classroom and when three year olds enter our classroom in the fall, I see a significant increase in their literacy skills by the winter quarter, it's quite amazing actually. OWL addresses several developmental domains, interests, and life skills within the curriculum. I think that now I am entering my 4th year I have made it my own a little bit while still honoring the fiedlity tool. I always tell other teachers, a curriculum does not define who you are as a teacher, you define the curriculum by building on it and increasing children's skills through modeling, scaffolding and expanding. I hope this helps!
DeleteAfter reading about the strengths and concerns of monumental and current PreK program studies, I have considered the factors that would contribute to a strong public PreK. As I was reading about these projects, my program came to mind. My public PreK program is part of the Preschool Expansion Grant and it has many strengths. However, one area where my particular program is lacking seems to be parent/home involvement. The Perry Preschool Project had a strong focus on parent/home involvement with teacher’s conducting 1.5 hour long home visits to each family once a week (Schweinhart 2010). An ideal model for universal PreK should include adequate time to meet with each child’s family monthly. I think meeting weekly, like the Perry Preschool Project, would be challenging to accomplish. Monthly home visits would be more realistic. We have a Family Liaison at my public PreK program, who does one home visit a year with each family. She sets goals with the family, and checks in with them through letters, phone calls and emails throughout the year. This is a step in the right direction, however, as the classroom teacher, I would love to have the time and opportunities to conduct home visits as well. I think it would really help link school and home. Maybe a program where students come to school full-day Mondays through Thursdays and teachers could conduct home visits on Fridays would be a stronger design. Home visits are a major component of Head Start. Longitudinal studies have shown that Head Start has very few significant outcomes on children, especially as they advance in their schooling. However, the Head Start Impact Study showed a significant increase in the amount of time that parents spent reading with their child. Unfortunately, these positive results only lasted for the year the child was enrolled in Head Start—the positive effects were not evident in kindergarten and first grade (Armor & Sousa 2014). I think all of the early childhood grades (PreK-3rd) should place importance on home visits and family literacy. If that’s one area where Head Start saw growth, the home visits must have been beneficial. Maybe if the kindergarten and first grade teachers of the children in the HSIS study continued with home visits, they would have seen greater results. Part of the problem with the long-term outcomes of PreK programs seems to be that children and families are given so much support during the preschool year, but then they enter the public school system and the school/home connection is virtually lost. Zigler (2010) discusses the importance of planning and linking care and education from birth through third grade. He proposes that home visits should be conducted with families from pregnancy on, then children should enter preschool at age 3 and receive high quality PreK education for two years, followed by coordinated K-3 schooling and support.
ReplyDeleteStaffing issues are another point of discussion regarding a strong public PreK program. One point of criteria for a high quality PreK program, listed by Schweinhart, states that there should be 16 students, at the most, per classroom and 2 adults—a certified teacher and an assistant (2010). A low ratio allows staff to focus more on treating children as individuals and planning and implementing developmentally appropriate instruction. A low ratio also makes it easier to form deeper connections with each family. The lead teacher in an ideal public PreK program should have a Bachelor’s degree and state certification in Early Childhood Education/Child Development (Schweinhart 2010). Continual professional growth and development should be required of PreK teachers. New research is constantly formed and there is always room for growth and improvement. The assistant teacher/Ed tech should also have some training and background in Early Childhood Education and they should be required to seek continual professional development as well.
-------------------------------------------CONTINUED BELOW-------------------------------------------------
I'd like to make a correction to the citations in my post. Rather than (Schweinhart 2010) and (Armor & Sousa 2014) my citations should read (Schweinhart, 2010) and (Armor & Sousa, 2014). Thank you!
DeleteSchweinhart (2010) states that one of the major components that an effective program must possess is the use of a validated curriculum and check-ins to be sure that the curriculum is being implemented appropriately. He specifically discusses the HighScope curriculum, but acknowledges that other validated curriculum could also be used. I believe that the curriculum should be heavily based on language and literacy development. Many young children, especially children from impoverished and low-income families, have limited exposure to verbal language. I feel that technology is partly to blame for this. It is disheartening to see young children in front of phones and iPods in public places, like airports, restaurants, and even grocery stores, where there are so many opportunities for rich conversations and language development. In my program, we utilize the Opening the World of Learning curriculum, and as part of the grant, we have a coach who visits monthly to check on the fidelity of our program. She observes and takes videos to see whether we are implementing the curriculum appropriately. She offers feedback on ways we could improve curriculum implementation. We also had a visit from Sue Reed, the Early Childhood Specialist at the Maine DOE, this week. She oversees the PEG schools in Maine to ensure the curriculum is being followed.
ReplyDeleteThere are so many factors to consider in planning a public PreK program that is high quality, realistic, and effective.
Marjorie, we use the OWL curriculum as well - Sue Reed is wonderful! I have to agree with you in regards to your comment about curriculum being based on language and literacy. I have seen a significant improvement among our children with this curriculum in place. I think the other academic areas fall into place more easily as they can easily be integrated with language/literacy activities, but literacy and language are the foundation for all children do academically. There are several factors to consider and I think a validated curriculum is a vital component in planning a high-quality program.
DeleteHi Marjorie…
DeleteAs I read your post talking about home visits, it really made me think about the frequency of visits I want to make, what will occur during these visits, and what supports I will need to make sure families’ needs are being met.
I really liked your idea of having home visits in early elementary grades! It makes perfect sense. Being an early elementary teacher myself, I never thought of the importance of home visits. Rather, it has always been activities to bring the family to the school. I have been part of many family involvement activities including: parent-teacher conferences, open houses, family math and literacy nights, and more. Having home visits would include all families, meet more family needs, and build a stronger home-school connection. I am left thinking about how we can make this change in public school systems? I am so excited about this idea, that I will be talking to my executive director about the possibility of implementing this on a small scale next year!
Marjorie and Denyell,
DeleteI too, feel that family involvement is crucial to making a difference in the lives of children, and their "readiness" for school. I am not sure how home visits would work in the public school setting, or how you would go about involving families more in what happens at school, as families time is precious these days, and there is little spare time. I feel lucky to be employed in child care as opposed to a more public-school type of setting. We see families twice a day, as they drop off, and pick up their children. We have many opportunities to connect with parents, share information, and to connect families with services that may benefit their child or themselves. It is my belief that if you want to have an impact on the development of a child, in any of the domains that educators deem as important, then you have to involve the family.
Marjorie - I too feel that my program is missing the parent/home involvement. It is not a requirement to host events and invite parents to volunteer, however I host at least one each month to allow myself time to get to know parents and families better to help me better understand and plan for the needs of my students. I have 30 students, split between two classes, and having a weekly home visit for each family would be impossible! However having a monthly visit may be more reasonable, although still challenging. Having a Family Liaison would also be incredibly helpful to help meet the needs of families. I have one student in particular that does not know where they will be sleeping that night until mom, dad, or nana picks them up at daycare. It breaks my heart to see them, at 5 years old, trying to learn and grow while also having the adult concerns of where they will sleep, what will they eat, etc. The parents have both come to conferences and have expressed their own concerns with their disheveled schedules and how it is affecting both of their children, and I wish that we had more ways as a program to reach out to families such as this one to provide support and guidance. I also have students that, when picked up, will immediately reach for their parents' cell phone to play games. I also notice that these students are among my least achieving when it comes to letter recognition. When these parents ask "What can we do at home to help them?" my response is always the same: read with them, talk with them, point out letters on signs as you're waiting at red lights, puzzles, find letters on boxes at the store, and so many more! I remember one day I brought my box of cereal to school, I often eat with my students to promote that feel of sitting at the table and talking about things that are important to us, and it turned into a cereal box scavenger hunt to find the letters in our names, then all the letters of the alphabet, and so on.
DeleteSara - I agree that a strong curriculum needs to be put into place in order to make universal pre-k a success. From what I have read on these blog posts and research, the OWL curriculum seems to be very effective. My research continues!
Denyell - I, too, have done more "bring the families to school" activities but would love the opportunity to see what my students lives are like outside of my classroom. So many parents at conferences are amazed when I tell them what their child is doing. So often I hear "at home they are rude and bossy, why are they well-behaved here?" and I can't answer that question, because I don't know what they are like at home. Without home visits, we know only as much as we are told, and sometimes it is little. I was fortunate last year in that I had a family who was struggling to make ends meet, and the mother admitted that they did not have a lot of books at home and she was unable to bring her child to the library, so they used sales flyers they got in the mail to help with letter identification practice. When our librarian did her end of the year cleaning out of books in the Pre-K section, she asked if I knew anyone who could benefit from them, and I immediately said yes. I sent home over 20 books with this child across a weeks time, and the mother was so appreciative. That was one of those moments I felt like I had truly made a difference in my student's life, as well as his families. Would I have known there were few books at home without the admission? No, but if I had the opportunity to visit, I would have seen it for myself and I would have been able to start finding ways to help them. I would love to host some family math and literacy nights though! Perhaps you could give me some info on how yours were/are run?!
Julie - I 100% wholeheartedly agree with your final statement. Families know their child best, are their first and life-long educators, and without them educators cannot do them the justice they deserve.
Marjorie,
DeleteAs you know I am apart of the PreK Expansion Grant as well. At our program we have a family service advocate who visits the home two times a year and also has two site visits a year with each family. At our location teachers are fortunate enough to be able to participate in home visits as well. We visit each family at the start of the year in their home before school starts. We also conduct our final conference with families inside their home. Before I was apart of the grant I worked for Head Start and completed two home visits a month per family. This was only able to happen because the program was either a two or three day program. I have seen so much growth in my students over the past two years using OWL and so had the Kindergarten teachers. I wish that we were able to get into the homes more often. I'm wondering if a half day program would be more affective for our children and families.
Sara,
DeleteI agree, Sue Reed is a wonderful resource! It's my first year teaching, however, my school district has seen huge improvements since adding a public pre-K and implementing the OWL curriculum. My district recently screened the incoming kindergartners and they saw the highest district scores ever for letter ID and concepts about print. Over a third of the incoming kindergartners are in the pre-K program. I especially love how connections to language and literacy are naturally embedded during centers time within the OWL curriculum.
Denyell,
It's great to hear your opinion, as an administrator, regarding home visits! I'm thinking of bringing the idea up to my principal and brainstorming ways to make it happen. Finding time to make the visits, especially with the older grades, seems like it would be challenging. I only have 13 students, but some of the second grade teachers at my school have over 20 students. It would be hard to conduct home visits regularly with so many families to visit. Maybe some could be done on teacher workshop days or early release days? The logistics would definitely be tough to figure out.
Julie,
I agree, it's tough to stay connected with families in the public school setting. It must be so beneficial to be able to build relationships with families twice daily at drop off and pick up. 12 out of 13 of my students ride the bus to school. I write short, daily notes to parents and try to call them somewhat regularly. However, face to face contact seems much more effective in building a relationship.
Brittany,
I love the idea of conducting home visits with families before the school year starts. This past year, we received our class lists only about a week before the start of the school year. However, this year I'm hoping to receive my list by the beginning of summer so I can try to arrange visits. I think it would help relieve many families' anxieties about sending their children to Pre-K and it would be a great way to get to know them and start building a relationship. I have often thought that a half-day or even Monday-Thursday program would be more affective for meeting with families. I know the grant requires the full day, five day a week program, but once the grant runs out, I may push for an alternative. Especially since the family liaison position will no longer be funded once the grant runs out. I would like to continue supporting families and find better ways of meeting their needs.
Melissa,
DeleteThat's great that you do monthly events that parents are invited too. I did several events like this throughout the year. Since I'll be starting my second year in the fall, I'd like to do more family/school events. I'd love to hear more about some of the monthly events that you held and how you encouraged parent turn-out.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere have been many considerations to move towards universal or public prekindergarten. In order to effectively implement this program, it is required to think about what it should look like with decisions supported by existing research. There are several components to examine when envisioning universal prek.
ReplyDeleteArmor and Sousa (2014) discussed program funding and what sources would contribute. Majorly, the federal government, in a partnership with individual states, would provide the funds. Although vital for universal preschool to even exist, funds seem to be the least concerning factor. As Armor and Sousa (2014) also mentioned, there has been research that demonstrates Head Start children are not showing the progress they made in preschool throughout later years within elementary school. Thus, proposing the question, what should this program really look like?
I think, along with Schweinhart (2010) that a model prek program needs to have specific qualifications for a quality program. Universal prek needs to have staff who obtain a Bachelor’s degree in early education or a related field and who have certifications in education. Staff who have educational background within the field and experience is essential for a high-quality preschool. There must be a curriculum implemented that is a validated curriculum model that exhibits developmentally appropriateness (Schweinhart, 2010). Not only do all children deserve a quality program, but their parents and families do as well. Therefore, a model program should require teachers to partner with families. Home visits, daily interactions, and supporting families in all aspects are ways to engage in parent outreach in order to connect the home to school environment. Supporting children and their families with certified staff and an effective curriculum are essential for implementing a universal preschool program.
Head Start, although assessed to have no significant improvements after participants left the program (Armor & Sousa, 2014), was once considered the final step in ending the cycle of poverty. Several studies and vast amounts of research have been done on the Head Start program, to find no substantial evidence of effectiveness, which shows that the federal government has little understanding of what components a high-quality program would need to encompass to be successful in working towards ending the cycle of poverty (Armor & Sousa, 2014). Critics of Head Start believe that the lack of certified teachers is one of the reasons why the program has been unsuccessful, along with not having a specific curriculum that is implemented across all sites (Armor & Sousa, 2014). Although having highly qualified teachers is important, having teachers who have a love for learning and a passion for educating children is also important. Teachers who have dedicated their lives to education, but are in the final pushes before retirement benefits come into play, can be burnt out and lack the necessary warmth and drive to provide students with the enriching experiences they deserve and need to be successful.
ReplyDeleteThe HighScope Perry Preschool Study showed much more positive effects than Head Start, participants were tracked through age 40, and the return on investment was high, however it was targeted toward only African-American children who were living in poverty below the national average, rather than towards a group that is more representative of the population of the nation (Schweinhart, 2010) and was conducted for only a small, and specific, population several years ago (Zigler, 2010). Although dated, the HighScope Perry Preschool Program operating under the idea that the more children can conduct their own learning the better their learning will be (Schweinhart, 2010) is more in line with my idea of a high-quality preschool program. Students should not be made, at 3 and 4 years old, to sit and be taught at, but rather to be investigators, to be self-motivated in their learning. Students who feel connected to their learning learn better, as I have witnessed in my program. If I know a student is struggling with letter identification, but I also know they love puzzles, providing puzzles with letters will interest them and allow them to learn in a way that is exciting and attractive to them, rather than putting flashcards in their face. A high-quality program would work to allow all students access to the content while feeling confident and proud of their accomplishments.
The home-school connection is a program attribute I can stand behind with the HighScope Perry Preschool Project and Head Start. Aside from Family Fun Nights and volunteer opportunities, there is little done to bridge the home-school gap in my program. The HighScope Perry Preschool Project has teachers conducting home-visits weekly (Schweinhart, 2010), and Head Start helps families connect to services such as dental health and parenting classes (Armor & Sousa, 2014). I have had a student in my class with significant tooth decay, but who’s family was unaware of and unable to access dental care due to transportation issues. If my program had more opportunity for educational nights that included information on essential services, I feel families, students, and our class as a whole would benefit.
As Zigler (2010) states, we cannot just push policy forward in regards to education just because we want to appear trendy. Although costly, the HighScope Perry Preschool Project provided significant results, and some of the concepts in that program, such as home-visiting, appear to be valuable and should be considered when putting together a plan for universal preschool programming. State and federal funding needs to be placed in areas that have been scientifically proven to be successful, though at this point I am not sure there is enough evidence to prove any method works best, and the funds required would be astronomical and not achievable at this time.
Hi Melissa!
DeleteI just wanted to let you know that I agree with your sentiment, that in order for children's learning to make an impact, it has to be presented in a manner that captures their attention. It must be carried out in a way that has meaning and interest to them, in order for its effects to be sustained. You can be presenting the most reliable, standardized curriculum, but if the topic is not of interest to the child, then the information being provided will, most likely, not be retained. However, you can, like you suggest, offer the material in a modified manner, that allows for the material being offered, to be presented in a way that is of interest to that child. Kudos to you for being able to individualize to the needs of a child!
Melissa,
DeleteI read your comment about how your program aside from Family Fun Nights and volunteer opportunities does not have much of a home-school connection. As part of my philosophy around education I feel that there has to be a home-school connection to make gains. After reading the three articles it seems to me that home visits are essential. Even though home visits can be scary at first, it would be beneficially for your children and families to have this opportunity. Maybe this will be something that your program will adopt.
I agreed completely with your comment about how having educated and highly certified teachers isn't everything... Children deserve teachers who are passionate, nurturing, and excited to learn as well!
DeleteBrittany - it will definitely be something I bring up as we start to plan for next year! I have also scheduled time out of my day to see my students who play T-Ball or do dance to show I have interest in them outside of the classroom, but with so many other parents around it isn't as beneficial to have a one-on-one conversation with just one family.
DeleteI am by no means an expert on preschool, but with my current knowledge base, I feel that a universal preschool program should meet the needs of families who cannot afford to send their child or children to a high-quality, private setting. According to Dogget and Wat (2010), both children from poor and middle-class families are less advanced academically than peers from upper class families. These families cannot afford to send their children to high-quality private preschool centers. A universal preschool program, if high-quality, would afford all children access to the preschool education they deserve.
ReplyDeleteThe goal of a universal preschool program would be to provide learners with academic and social-emotional developmental gains that last. This in turn, would provide positive societal impacts. Dogget and Wat (2010) discussed how economists discovered that investments in universal preschool would provide society with an economic return. This return comes in the form of fewer retentions in school, lower high-school dropout rate, and a reduction in those receiving special education services. The ultimate goal of a universal preschool program would be to help alleviate the negative effects of living in poverty. Zigler (2010) believes it would take an intensive multifaceted program to combat the effects of poverty.
In order to meet the goals of a universal preschool program, there would need to be certain program components in place. Zigler (2010) recommends having home visits that occur regularly from pregnancy to three years of age. I am not sure this is possible, but regular home visitations should be an integral part of a universal program. Schweinhart (2010) suggested all facilitators and educational technicians need to actively participate in weekly parent outreach. Weekly home visits do not seem possible, but this just reiterates the need for families to receive education and support from the school and coordination of comprehensive services. Zigler (2010) proposes two years of quality preschool integrated with connected programing from kindergarten through third grade is needed. This would require a universal preschool program to provide services to both 3-year-olds and 4-year-olds. I am a supporter of providing connected services beginning at three years of age while, working to bridge the transition into kindergarten and beyond. A universal preschool program needs to work in partnership with local public-school district, or districts, to make transitions between programs as seamless as possible. Armour and Sousa (2014) stated that current research demonstrates we do not fully understand what a universal preschool program that is capable of equalizing the playing field for low-income learners would look like.
The intensity of services needed to meet the afore mentioned goals of a universal preschool program dictate the need for a full-day and possibly year-round program. Finn (2010) states that the learners who are living in the most sever poverty, need intensive interventions that would only be realized in a full-day program. Services cannot abruptly end for these learners three months at a time. Perhaps modeling the program after schools in other countries that run year-round would be beneficial. According to Armour and Sousa (2014) a high-quality program must account for the cognitive development, social-emotional development, medical, dental, mental health, and parenting practices of the children and families enrolled in the program. This is a daunting task for anything less than a full-day, year-round program.
I believe the curriculum of a universal preschool program needs to be researched based. Schweinhart (2010) analyzed research and backs up my belief suggesting preschool curriculums and educational practices based on the wealth of child development research available. Quality curriculums are deeply rooted in child development theories. Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky are two developmental theorists. Schweinhart (2010) discussed the benefits of the HighScope curriculum that was used in the Perry Preschool Program. This curriculum is based on Jean Piaget’s theory of child development. When researching curriculums for the program I am beginning next, we chose the Tools of the Mind curriculum which, is based on the child development theories of Lev Vygotsky. I am not sure that a universal preschool program must choose a single child development theorist to side with, but it is crucial that the curriculum be grounded in a solid research base.
ReplyDeleteThe quality of a preschool program depends greatly on the staff running it. Schweinhart (2010) believes that teachers and educational technicians must have a solid education in and understanding of curriculum. Schweinhart (2010) also discussed that state-certified early childhood teachers and educational technicians must maintain a ratio of one facilitator for every eight learners. The program needs to be monitored and assessed regularly to make sure that learners are progressing academically, developmentally, and families are receiving the services they need. A universal preschool program would need to employ the most educated and highly qualified staff members. A solid assessment plan for the program would need to be established prior to the program’s implementation. Brown and Wright (2011) state the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) currently, has the most inclusive set of guidelines for a preschool program and these guidelines should be followed. I agree that a preschool program should have a set of guidelines to follow and NAEYC is a quality organization with policies based in research.
The funding of a universal preschool program is an area that is completely outside areas of expertise. I am learning about school finance as I work alongside our executive director, business manager, grant coordinator, and State of Maine Department of Education to implement a new program. Armour and Sousa (2014) state that they believe the implementation of a universal preschool program should not add additional costs to the budget. I tend to believe this is a good idea for society. I am in favor of taking full advantage of grant opportunities when available. I realize that some grants are publically funded, while others come from private funds. The program I am working to implement will be taking advantage of the Preschool Expansion Grant. This grant provides our program with additional funding for learners living at 200% of the poverty line. I worry grants similar to this, could result in entire classrooms of children living in poverty as opposed to children of mixed socioeconomic status. A universal preschool program needs to have a mixture of socio-economic statuses represented in classrooms.
Policies need to be in place to examine the effectiveness a universal preschool program. Armour and Sousa (2014) claim that research conducted on a preschool program, needs to study and compare a treatment group and a control group. The study needs to be rigorous and include a pre-test. It needs to ensure treatment and control groups are large and representative of area children. The research used to examine the effectiveness of a universal preschool program needs to make sure to eliminate bias created by program dropouts and other factors. Armour and Sousa (2014) suggest that a cost-benefit analysis be performed to determine long-term economic benefits of a universal preschool program. A final suggestion that Armour and Sousa (2014) make is to avoid beginning with full implementation of the program. Begin with a small-scale implementation of the preschool program in a select area of the country. Evaluate the program, in its limited implementation state, with a randomized control study that follows learners through third grade. If the evaluation is positive, a larger scale implementation of the program can commence.
ReplyDeleteI am not an expert on universal preschool programs. This brief outline of the components I feel are essential to make any universal preschool program successful are flexible as I learn more about the research behind preschool education, policies, and funding.
Denyell - I also agree with Doggett & Watt (2010) in that children in the gray area of not being poor enough and being middle-class but not able to afford high-quality education are being underserved. In order to provide all students the education needed to be considered "school ready" all socioeconomic statuses must be represented, as you stated. Children learn a lot from their peers, and the experiences of a high-class student could help to enrich another students understanding of certain topics and areas of academics. My students often tell each other stories about their experiences, fun trips they've gone on, etc. I hear a lot of things such as "I've never been to Florida!" but then I also hear them using the information they have gathered from their peers to help them in other aspects of the classroom.
DeleteHome visits weekly would definitely be a struggle, even if it were a full day program running all year long. If the program ran for a full year, it would be more likely that a monthly home visiting schedule would be possible, especially with two certified staff members.
As Zigler (2010) stated, Head Start could not possibly combat the cycle of poverty as quickly and effectively as policy makers promised. The same would go for a universal program. Running small pilot studies in different areas of the country would provide the information needed to determine if the program was successful, and if it wasn't, could help determine the areas of weakness.
There are so many thoughts to consider when thinking about Universal Pre-K. One thought truly speaks to me and that is the idea of Universal Pre-K should be explored with new research and state of the art lenses, where thoughts and decisions can be formed on the new findings. These findings will be more relevant to the current day in age and the problems that children and families face today. In the Commentary that Zigler wrote he highlighted how poverty back then was so much different than today. It is important to consider and research these differences that have a great potential to alter results and outcomes. Zigler commented on this when he spoke about George W Bush criticizing head start of not “readying” at risk children to the same degree as middle class children. He also pointed to others who called it to be “magical thinking” to believe that program could “fix” the many problems a family may face. (Zigler, 2010).
ReplyDeleteThe research done by Schweinhart also leads to some interesting conclusions and something I think is still relevant in our day in age, the research on the Perry Preschool Project. The study states that all children living in lower economics families would greatly benefit from being enrolled in a program with similar features as the Perry Preschool Project. I personal feel we could learn a lot from the research done on the specifics of programming and resources to achieve their goals for the children and families enrolled there. (Schweinhart, 2010)
Armor and Sousa discuss Head Start’s performance standards and how the results are not as favorable as children move through the elementary years. Head Start is a federally funded program, yet each program is run at a local level much like our elementary schools. It makes me wonder what will make a Universal Pre-K different then current Head Starts or Public Pre-k’s. (Armor and Sousa, 2010)
Which is why, with so many changes in our current world from years past I think it’s important to gather more recent documentation and examine the results. We need a wider research base than just one program in one section of the United States We need several in many different areas and income levels to get an accurate picture of what Universal Preschool does for all children. Only then would we get a clearer picture of what we might want a Universal Pre-K to resemble.
Hi Tammy, What may be specific issues with the existing research on Head Start? Take a look at the variables examined and the amount and type of data collected. How might this too inform how we look a public preK as a program?
DeleteAnyone can reply to the question I posted above to Tammy. There is a wealth of data on Head Start but have they looked at the important variables? Too many? Too much quantitative?
DeleteI certainly wish that I had more "free time", as I would love to read up more about Head Start, and all the research about it. Have they looked at the effects of a classroom that has mixture of children from different socio-economic backgrounds? How many children came from single parent homes back in the 60's, compared to today? I guess I have more questions, rather than answers...which requires more reading...which I currently do not have time for.
DeleteI totally understand Julie. You heading toward what I was looking for. You've read some of the seminal work about Head Start. Now the question is what are the other questions? What would we still like to know? Why might the effects not persist? What may have influenced the results?
DeleteI had a similar question as Julie in regards to the mixture of students with different socio-economic backgrounds. Given that Head Start is meant to serve children living in poverty, I would assume there is little evidence to show the effectiveness and longevity of students who were in a classroom with a population more representative of the area, and even country. My students who have more enriching experiences than others often take on a teacher-esque role with students who may be struggling and use their own experiences and knowledge to help them grow. We have discussions early on about how no one in our classroom is better than anyone, that we are all different, we have some things the same, and none of us know everything, not even Miss Ryan. I teach them, they teach me, they teach each other, and we grow as a whole class as well as individuals. I would be interested in seeing research on a mixed socio-economic Head Start program and the resulting findings.
DeleteHead Start, as Zigler (2010) states, was started as a summer program to help provide low-income students with access to education prior to kindergarten. Currently, we have Kindergarten Jumpstart, which is a program aimed at letter recognition, letter sound, and writing letters, that runs during the summer and is a way for students who did not make significant gains in Pre-K or other preschool settings to access more intensive education in these areas. The program is showing great results for most students entering kindergarten, however I would be interested if, like Head Start, the results wane.
I have those same questions as well. I also think about the results in the Armor and Sousa (2014) article on Head start and what they suggest. They say that there is no favorable outcomes in first or third grades. Does this mean that these students that once were "at risk" are now average peers or does it mean that they are again "at risk" and head start had no influence on their lives except while enrolled? If students are no longer "at risk" I would say that something worked. I also wonder about what the article said about the schools that were taking these children in. I wonder if there programming was high quality and if not how that may have altered future outcomes for those children. If these children were still considered "at risk," I suggest we need to consider what else might make more dramatic changes such as starting intervention even earlier in life, like at the first signs of life.
DeleteThere is an extensive list of things that need to be considered when thinking of shifting to universal prekindergarten. For many people, funding is one of the first thing that comes to mind. Economists use three model programs, the HighScope Perry Preschool Project, Abecedarian Project, and Chicago Child-Parent Centers (Armor & Sousa 2014), as a guide to determine if early childhood programs are a good investment or not. Armor & Sousa (2014) pose the question of whether these studies, though great, are really a good basis to make predictions for the future based on the fact that they are small groups of children in one area and done many years ago. I can agree with their questioning and have to wonder if there should be more up-to-date studies conducted in order to determine if such programs are cost-effective or not. Though funding something to consider, I’m not sure this is the most important thing to think about when discussing a program that will be successful.
ReplyDeleteArmor & Sousa (2014) discussed Head Start programs and the effectiveness of them on low income families. Though these programs show positive effects while the children are in the program, there is a drop in these effects once the children leave the program and enter elementary school. As Zigler (2010) states, these programs cannot fix the poverty induced problems in society single-handedly. Head Start may not be perfect and certainly cannot be expected to change the entire lifestyle of families, however, such programs do help to provide educational enrichment to children that may not get otherwise, at a time when it is essential for them. I believe that the implementation of a universal preschool program must include a strong school-to-home relationship. This would include a trusting relationship between the parents and teachers, support for families that go beyond traditional teaching roles, and as Zigler (2010) insists, frequent home visits.
Schweinhart (2010) discusses the HighScope early childhood educational model as being based on the idea that children’s learning is enhanced when they are the ones who are doing the planning and implementing, with the support of teachers extending their play when appropriate. A successful preschool model needs to have a curriculum that allows children to explore and learn in a way that does not require 3 and 4 year olds to be sitting at a table for extended periods of time. The teachers in the classroom can set a guide for learning, but allow the children to develop their own ideas of implementation and exploration.
Universal prekindergarten has the potential to be a great asset to education, it is however a complex idea that has many components that need to be addressed before implementation.
Ashley - I agree with you in that funding seems to be the least of the worries when it comes to universal pre-k. I agree that students need to the freedom and flexibility to guide their own learning, while I also agree with Sara's statement above that students need the guidance and support of a qualified teacher. Through providing age appropriate and topic appropriate games, toys, and other tools, as well discussion, teachers can provide students with the freedom they need to guide their own learning, but will also achieve the outcomes that are desired. Determine what a high-quality universal pre-k program would look like is definitely a daunting task, and I still find myself weary of universal pre-k taking over family centers and quality day care centers as I feel some of these programs provide students with an amazing start to early learning.
Delete
ReplyDeleteAs we are moving forward thinking about Universal Pre-Kindergarten and the impacts of how this will change our current and previous Pre-kindergarten programs. We have to look at the current programs that this country has and how we can either make them better or create a program that will encompass all students and communities. As a Child Development Services (CDS) employee I have had the experience of working in multiple places with diverse types of programs including those who have head start. The main idea that I took away from the programs and the articles were that the funding for the programs are lacking or currently draining. Since the funds of the programs are draining there is lack of competent educators. Many head-start teachers do not have certifications or degrees which in my current educator’s mind sounds ridiculous. I wouldn’t trust a doctor who hasn’t been to medical school, or a lawyer who has not been to law school. As a future parent (long time down the road) and teacher how could I trust an adult with my future children. The answer is I would not. Since the teachers are not certified, there are arguments that programs such as head start are not high quality. There is much debate about universal pre-kindergarten and how to make this program universal and for all the students in classroom settings.
Unlike the Head-Start program a public universal program should include not only the poorest students but all students from diverse home-lives. In our current education system we are looking for school readiness, to make kindergarten more academic. If we only focus on one separate group the others suffer. Head Start, I feel is only doing our poorest citizens a disservice. It is very different from the world that Head Start was created to now. As stated from Zinger (2010), our face of poverty in this country is very diverse. Just like each student is different, I feel each circumstance is different as well. We either, give more funding to our current programs or we make an entire new system from scratch. If we choose to do a universal, all-inclusive program the curriculum should be focused on skill for students that they will need later in life. As stated from Armor and Sousa (2014) the universal programs should also close achievement gaps for our poorest to rich students and include the middle-class students who often are feeling the pressures to send their children to wealthy preschools.
Zinger also says that we need to create a bond between the teachers and the parents. In the early childhood programs that I have been apart of in the last two years there has been a great home-school connection. This will give support to families and the communities that need it.
The Universal programs could be a wonderful and new innovative resource to our citizens. We can really start early with students who need the extra support. Coming from the special education route, there is also potential to identify children early and be able develop skills. I feel that universal programs have a great idea but really need to expand on creating this idea.
Hi Veronica!
DeleteI too, feel that each region of our country has different challenges and needs based on the members that make up that particular community. How funding is to best be used, should be determined by each state. I am not a one-size fits all proponent.
Hi Veronica,
DeleteIt must be interesting for you to see how the quality differs between the various Head Starts that you have seen. When I taught Kindergarten on the Blackfoot Indian Reservation we would sometimes collaborate with the Head Start Staff and have professional development opportunities with them. It was amazing to see how even the different classrooms varied in quality within the same program. I think it very much had to do with the difference in the levels of education that the different teachers had. It really surprised me though!
Veronica,
DeleteI agree with you in that a universal program should include students from all economic backgrounds, as well as from all backgrounds. Our country is full of diversity, and this should be replicated in the classroom. My students are often using their peers as a resource far more than they are using me, and having a dynamic and diverse group of children would provide them with a lot more enriching opportunities for play and discussion. I have a student who is from Columbia this year and she has started teaching the other students very basic Spanish (hello, good bye, girl, boy, etc.) and they are LOVING it. I can count to 5 and say hello and thank you, but she will provide them with more insight into her culture than I will ever be able to. I am also a huge proponent of being able to identify students with possible disabilities and delays very early on so that they are able to access services and develop the skills that will help later on in life.
P.S. I can only imagine the differences, and challenges, that come with being in so many different programs! I also imagine that it must really help you in your decision making with your own children (in the future!) and their education.
I am still not sure what a model universal pre-k would look like. There are so many variables to consider. There are many regions in our country, each with its own unique needs. I think in order for a program to be successful, it would need to be tailored to fit the needs of each specific community. It cannot be a one-size fits all, as there are so many varying "sizes".
ReplyDeleteIt seems that where times have changed immensely since some of the research has occurred, that there should be new research completed that takes into account the needs of today's families, and the cost-benefits of programs being run today. Armor & Sousa (2014) feel that there is no need to do a cost-benefit analysis of Head Start, as it has been found that its effects are only short-term, and newer programs are too new to provide meaningful results. I feel that more research needs to be conducted across a varying groups of children. And, the research should include Early Head Start. Research indicates that Head Start only provides short-term, if any, benefits to children (Armor & Sousa, 2014). I have to say that I have personal experience with this. My brother attended Head Start at age four (in the mid seventies), and he ended up repeating the third grade. So much for his "head start". My sister and I did not attend any form of preschool, and we made out just experienced no grade retention.
My thinking lines up with that of Zigler (2014) who feels that early intervention, and high-quality programming that extends beyond kindergarten, will have the greatest impact on return. I also feel that a mixed socio-economic group of children in the classroom is best, as children learn from their peers. Zigler also feels that some type of home-visiting program prior to birth would be beneficial. Parent education is certainly important, across all socio-economic groups. Because I work in childcare, I have the luxury of face-to-face communication with parents on a daily basis. Keeping the lines of communication open, and providing support and continuity between home and school, definitely has benefits for the children. This is evidenced in positive changes in behavior and learning outcomes. If there was a way to incorporate this into public pre-k programs, and continue through the earlier grades, I feel that children would reap the rewards, and there would be improvements in human capital.
There is the debate about whether or not high-quality program and teacher education has an effect on learning outcomes. Armor & Sousa (2014) found that these had very low correlation with cognitive and social-emotional outcomes in preschool programs. They cited that teaching basic vocabulary or numeracy skills to this age group does not require years of formal study. However, Zigler (2014) feels that quality programming is important. Having worked in both low and high quality childcare, I feel that there is a marked difference. When teachers are trained and/or educated in the field of early childhood, they are better able to provide that quality programming. You can hand a teacher a standardized, canned curriculum, however, if they do not have an understanding of early childhood development, they are not going to be able to present it in a way that is meaningful, or has a lasting effect on the children. It is more than just teaching children their numbers and alphabet letters...it has to be age-appropriate, and you need to know when the child is ready for that next step. I am a strong proponent of early childhood education, so much so, that I feel that teachers working with children through grade three should have some classes in early childhood.
I do not know what the answer is in regards to universal pre-k. I do feel their needs to be some form of parent involvement/education, and that it should begin early and continue through the early grades. I also feel that, like Zigler (2014) there should be some form of coordinated programming through those early grades.
Julie - My siblings and I never attended any formal schooling prior to kindergarten, so it was interesting to read about your brother's early education vs. you and your sister. Perhaps if the curriculum was aligned through 3rd grade, as Zigler (2010) suggests, your brother would not have had the need to be retained. The research on Head Start continue to amaze me the more that I dive in. I also enjoyed your perspective on working in low and high quality childcare settings and the differences between the two. Having qualified, certified educators who have knowledge of the curriculum and can adequately and effectively plan their programming are definitely at an advantage, and this will only be beneficial to the students/children in their care. I also agree that having the training and education in early childhood really does assist teachers in noticing the signs of when a child is ready to take the step in their learning, and also when the step they have taken is too much and you need to take half a baby step back. It is also the ability to analyze and critique your efforts and programming and determine where you can change your own thinking and models to better suit the needs of the learners.
DeleteJulie,
DeleteI agree with you that there needs to be more research around Pre-K programs. I believe that within the grant I am currently apart of they are trying to conduct research and follow children's progress through the 3rd grade. We have only been apart of the grant for two years now. There is so much more work that needs to be done. Instead of funding programs that they think might work they need to be funding programs to do research. This way we can being to implement a program that can help all children succeed.
Julie,
DeleteI found the information you shared about your brother to be very interesting. I attended Head Start when I was 3 and 4, though none of my older siblings attended before me. I have no way of knowing officially if Head Start was the reason, but I was the "academic" in my family. I always kept my grades up and never struggled in school like my siblings did. No one in my family attended college before me, let alone finished it. My sister has since received her bachelors in education as well, but she chose to do so it after I had. Again, there is no way for me to say that Head Start contributed to this, but I have always been grateful I had the opportunity to attend and get that "head start" on my education.
I found that Zigler (2010) had some very interesting points that aligned to my frame of thinking in terms of Head Start and Universal PreK. He stated that policy makers have raised expectations that are impossible for any 1-2 year preschool to achieve in terms of closing the achievement gap between children living in poverty and those who are not. He stated that single- handedly Head Start can not fix the environmental impacts of the issues that children living in poverty face. Children who are exposed to various enriching experiences before coming to PreK have a major head start on those that do not. Zigler advocates for a home-visiting program from pregnancy- 3 years of age followed by 2 years of high-quality preschool. He also advocates for coordinated programming from Kindergarten- 3rd grade. He believes that this sort of intensity in programming is required to offset harmful developmental effects of poverty. I think that as we look to create guidelines for Universal Preschool, we need to consider these aspects. Programs should include a strong home-school connection as well a a high-quality program with Certified Teachers. When creating a Universal Preschool Model we can incorporate these ideas.
ReplyDeleteWhen I taught kindergarten on the Blackfoot Indian Reservation in Montana I saw first hand the effects that poverty had on a child's ability to grow and learn. When reading Schweinhart's (2010) article, I could connect to his description of the cycle of poverty and the intergenerational connection from families poverty to children's schooling. Children born in poverty often performed poorly in school and the drop-out rates are very high. While we would have 190 kindergarten students, we would only have on average 85 high school graduates. It was not because there was a decline in population (there was not), it was because over half of all students dropped out. There was a lot of pressure to achieve reading standards as the district wanted to ensure that students were at least literate (unlike many of their parents) before they dropped out.
Armour and Sousa (2014) point out the the wide variations in the quality of Head Start Programs. I know there are some excellent models out there, but it is very concerning that teachers do not have the same certification that Public School Teachers have. I have seen huge variations in terms of quality amongst different classrooms even within the same Head Start buildings. I think it had to do with the various levels of education that the different teachers had.
Even though I understand the arguments against Universal Preschool, I think I am leaning towards favoring it. I have a hard time with the income segregation that our current system has and I think that it is important to have mixed groups. I don't buy the argument that we shouldn't send government money on "untested" programs as we know what the issues are with the current system and we have the opportunity to fix them by creating a model of Universal PreK that uses what we know works, yet eliminates the problems that we have. It would also give access to preschool to all children and Early Childhood Educators would be valued and held to the same standard as Elementary Teachers.
Justina - One thing you mentioned that resonated with me, and has during the article readings, is that the government doesn't want to spend money on untested programs. If that is so, then how do we have any early education programs? All programs started out as essentially "wait and see" ideas that would hopefully produce grand results, and if those programs aren't working to produce the results desired, why not try something new? If research shows we are failing our youngest learners, while also not meeting the needs of all as you stated, it's time to find something new. You can't capture the flag if you stay on your side of the line for fear you won't succeed, you have to move forward.
DeleteI really agreed with what you said about universal Pre-K helping Early Childhood Educators be valued to the same standard as Elementary Teachers. Even working at a public Pre-K where I am paid on the same salary schedule as all Pre-K to grade 12 teachers, I still here comments from colleagues jokingly saying things like, "It must be nice to get to play all day!" I try to be a strong advocate for the importance of early childhood education and I feel that universal Pre-K would be a testament to the importance of quality preschool.
DeleteHi Melissa, Yes I agree , and don't really think that the untested program argument is justified at all. I am simply pointing out that it is a reason why some oppose Universal Preschool.
DeleteHi Marjorie, Yes, i have always gotten a kick out of that perspective as well. Most of those people that think that wouldn't last a day in a PreK setting!
DeleteCurrently I work in a classroom that is a collaboration between district and Head Start. In the article presented by Zigler (2010) he stated that Head Start programs have been oversold. It has been stated that these programs promote an end to poverty, higher IQ scores, and a decrease is crime rates by students who participate. The growth that children make during their time at Head Start does not follow them into the public school. My question is why? I think that having the district and Head Start collaboration in my program will help support this transition. Why is it that children are making growth and then it doesn’t carry over? Armor & Sousa (2014) discuss that Head Start programs are not “high quality” because teachers are not required to have a degree higher than an associates. In having this collaboration, the lead teacher is hired through the district, with a 081 certification. The co-teacher is employed through the local Head Start agency. Within our collaboration the teachers complete two home visits per year and our family service advocate, provided by the local Head Start agency, provides families two home visits per school year and two site visits. They are currently working on hiring a family services advocate for children and families in Kindergarten. The hope is that children will receive family services through the 3rd grade. I think their hope is to improve the gap between Pre-K and third grade.
ReplyDeleteAfter reviewing the article from Schweinhart (2010) they found it effective to have home visits be a part of their program. Having a low teacher to child ratio may have supported children’s development through programing as well. Currently our teacher to child ratio is 1:10 but next year it will be 1:8. The High Scope Perry Preschool Study yielded high results for children who participated in programing at ages 3 and 4. After reading the three articles having a model Pre-K program available to our students would need to be a half day program which also provided home visits for each participating family. The teacher to child ratio would need to be low, averaging at 5 to 6 children per one teacher, as stated in Schweinhart (2010). The expectation of what the children provides children and their family’s needs to be realistic and not oversold as Zigler (2010) commented on serval times in his article. Preschool also may not be for all children and families. These programs need to be offered to all families and not just those with low income. Teachers in these programs need to be highly qualified teachers which is not the case in Head Start programs as Armor & Sousa (2014) state. The Perry Preschool Study resulted in program success but this study was completed from 1962 through 1967. More research needs to be completed to assess what curriculum and program components are highly effective. I believe that the program I am currently a part of is using many of the components that have yielded high results. I hope the program continues past its estimated five years and they follow children through the 3rd grade to see if the program is providing results that transition with the children.
Brittany,
DeleteThat's great that your district is hoping to include family services through third grade. I wrote about this in my post as well. I love the idea of at least coordinating family services in kindergarten. I'm part of a Pre-K/K PLC in my school and I think I will bring this idea to the table at our next meeting. It will definitely help bridge the gap from Pre-K to Kindergarten. It must be challenging for families to go from Pre-K, which is generally much more family-oriented, to Kindergarten where family involvement is a much lesser priority.
Unfortunately I normally prepare families for this transition. In Pre-K parents are able to drop their children off in the classroom and stick around for several minutes. The majority of children in Kindergarten either take the bus or are dropped off in the car loop. Families are still able to volunteer in the classroom but because of the number of students and the different family involvement views Kindergarten is just different. There is not much of a home-school connection.
DeleteBrittany,
DeleteIt sounds as though the collaboration between the Head Start and local district is an amazing transition opportunity for the kids, families and teachers involved. I hope that more Head starts and local districts follow that model!