ED 406 001 AUTHOR Bridge, Connie; And Others INSTITUTION

2y ago
10 Views
2 Downloads
2.02 MB
119 Pages
Last View : 2m ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Axel Lin
Transcription

DOCUMENT RESUMEED 406 001AUTHORTITLEINSTITUTIONPUB DATENOTEPUB TYPEEDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORSIDENTIFIERSPS 025 209Bridge, Connie; And OthersThird Party Evaluation of the Kentucky EducationReform Act Preschool Programs.Kentucky Univ., Lexington. Coll. of Education.;Kentucky Univ., Lexington. Coll. of HumanEnvironmental Sciences.Sep 96129p.; For 1995 evaluation, see ED 394 628ReportsEvaluative/Feasibility (142)MF01/PC06 Plus Postage.Attendance; Blacks; Disabilities; *EducationalChange; *High Risk Students; InterpersonalCompetence; Literacy; *Outcomes of Education; ParentAttitudes; Preschool Education; ProgramEffectiveness; Program Evaluation; ProgramImplementation; Socioeconomic Status; Surveys;Teacher Expectations of StudentsAfrican Americans; Kentucky; *Kentucky EducationReform Act 1990ABSTRACTThis report details results of the 1995-96 study ofthe Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA) Preschool Programs, thefifth such evaluation of the state .;.1111th,ttl.; lo.rroJto,7,1 rrngrams ofat-risk 4-year-old children and 3- and 4-year-olds withFollowing an executive summary and explanation of the methodology forthe evaluation, this report details results for each of the fiveevaluation areas: (1) the nature and extent of implementation of thepreschool program; (2) gains achieved by 1995-96 preschoolparticipants; (3) the relationship between program quality andstudent outcomes; (4) performance of participants compared with thatof same-age eligible non-participants and non-eligible peers; and (5)the long-term effects of participation in the program for formerparticipants. Among the results noted are the following: (1) programquality appears to be fairly consistent across individual preschoolprograms around the state, and parents are generally pleased with theprogram; (2) at-risk children made more than one month gain for eachmonth in the program in the domains of personal, social, adaptive,gross motor, and fine motor skills; (3) while there were fewsignificant correlations between program quality and studentoutcomes, those programs with higher total scores on the"Configuration Map for Preschool Programs" also have students whoseProportional Change Index scores are higher in the areas of receptivecommunication, expression communication, and total communication; (4)kindergarten children who had attended the preschool program wereviewed by their teachers as being better prepared for kindergartenthan their eligible but non-participating peers, and as prepared as arandom group of their non-eligible peers; and (5) with only a fewexceptions, the state preschool participants continue to do as wellas a random group of peers through the fourth grade on most measuresof social skills and academic progress. (HTH)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and improvementEDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC))(This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating itO Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality.THIRD PARTY EVALUATIONOF THEKENTUCKY EDUCATION REFORM ACTPRESCHOOL PROGRAMSPoints of view or opinions stated in this docomerit do not necessarily represent officialOERI position or policy.College of EducationandCollege of Human Environmental SciencesUniversity of KentuckyLexington, KentuckySeptember, 1996For more information, contact:Connie Bridge, Ed.D.DirectorInstitute on Education Reform101 Taylor Education BuildingCollege of EducationN2Paul B. deMesquita, Ph.D.Department of Education &Counseling Psychology245 Dickey HallCollege of EducationMary Louise Hemmeter, Ph.D.Department of Special Education 229Taylor Education BuildingCollege of EducationKim F. Townley, Ph.D.Department of Family Studies305 Funkhouser BuildingCollege of Human Environmental SciencesStephan M. WilsonDirectorResearch for Families & Children107 Erikson HallCollege of Human Environmental SciencesPERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIALHAS BEEN GRANTED BY1.)Qk0 c),n5),\(.SC V\TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)BEST COPY AVAILABLE2

Table of ContentsACKNOWLEDGEMENTSviiEXECUTIVE SUMMARYviiiINTRODUCTION1PURPOSES OF THE 1995-1996 PROGRAM EVALUATION OFKENTUCKY PRESCHOOL PROGRAMSAssessments Administered to Each CohortEVALUATION QUESTION 1Sampling StrategyMethodologyInstrumentationData Collection TeamData AnalysisResultsEarly Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS)Configuration Map for Preschool ProgramsCorrelation of ECERS and Configuration MapParent SurveyFamily Resource Coordinator/Preschool Coordinator/Teacher46778991013151623EVALUATION OUESTION 2Methodology27InstrumentsBattelle Developmental Inventory2730Early Literacy MeasuresSocial Skills Rating System30Results31Developmental SkillsPretest/Posttest Developmental Gains of Economically At-RiskPreschoolers31Projected Year-Long Developmental Gains of EconomicallyAt-Risk Preschoolers33Proportional Change Index for Economically At-RiskPreschoolers35Pretest/Posttest Developmental Gains of Preschoolers withDisabilities38Projected Year-Long Developmental Gains for African-AmericanPreschoolers51Social SkillsPretest/Posttest Social Skills Gains for Economically At-RiskPreschoolersPage i6263

Pretest/Posttest Social Skills Gains for Preschoolers withDisabilitiesPretest/Posttest Social Skills Gains for African-AmericanPreschoolersEarly Literacy SkillsPretest/Posttest Early Literacy Skills of Economically At-RiskPreschoolersPretest/Posttest Early Literacy Skills of African-American EconomicallyAt-Risk PreschoolersEVALUATION QUESTION 3Configuration Map for Preschool Programs and Student GainsFarly Childhood Environment Rating Scale and Student GainsCorrelation Between Proportional Change Index and Total Score of EarlyChildhood Rating Scale and Preschool Configuration MapEVALUATION QUESTION 4PurposeMethods and Sampling StrategyResultsTransition from Preschool to PrimaryPupil Behavior InventoryEVALUATION QUESTION 5PurposeParticipantsMethodologyResultsPrimary Teacher SurveySocial Skills Rating SystemAttendanceReferral to 92959699APPENDIX 1100APPENDIX 2101APPENDIX 3102APPENDIX 4103Page ii

Figures in Executive SummaryFigure 1 Percentage of Parents Who Strongly Agree & Agree With Items inParent Survey of 1995-96 Preschool ProgramsFigure 2 Mean Scores of Projected Developmental Gains for 1995-96PreschoolersPage xiPage )diTables And Figures in ReportTable 1 Assessments Administered to Each CohortPage 6Table 2 Means for ECERS Items, Sub-Scores, and Total ScorePage 11Table 3 Means for Configuration Map for Preschool ProgramsPage 14Table 4 Type of Respondent for Parent SurveysPage 16Table 5 Number and Percentage of Parents Who Were Offered Activities by theSchool and the Number and Percentage of Parents who Indicated TheyHad Participated in the Activities in 94-95 and 95-96Page 18Table 6 The Extent to Which the Following Factors Prevented Parents FromBeing Involved in the Activities Offered by SchoolPage 20Table 7 Percent of Parents' Response to SurveyPage 22Table 8 Number of Children Sampled, Pre-Tested, Post-tested, and WithCompleted RecordsPage 27Table 9 Mean Developmental Age Equivalents on the Battelle DevelopmentalInventory Domains at Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains ofEconomically At-Risk Kentucky Preschoolers for 1995-96Page 32Table 10 Program Efficiency Index and Projected School Year DevelopmentalGains of Economically At-Risk Kentucky Preschoolers for 1995-96Page 34Table 11 Proportional Change Index for At-Risk Preschool Children on theBattelle Developmental Inventory for 1995-96 PreschoolersPage 37Table 12 Mean Developmental Age Equivalents on the Battelle DevelopmentalInventory at Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains ofDevelopmentally Delayed Kentucky Preschoolers for 1995-96Page 38Table 13 Program Efficiency Index and Projected School Year DevelopmentalGains of Developmentally Delayed Preschoolers for 1995-96Page 39Page iii

Table 14 Mean Developmental Age Equivalent on Battelle Developmental InventoryDomains at Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains for 1995-96Kentucky Preschoolers with Speech DelaysPage 40Table 15 Program Efficiency Index and Projected School Year DevelopmentalGains for 1995-96 Kentucky Preschoolers with Speech DelaysPage 41Table 16 Mean Developmental Age Equivalent on Battelle Developmental Inventoryat Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains for 1995-96Kentucky Preschoolers with Severe DisabilityPage 42Table 17 Program Efficiency Index and Projected School Year DevelopmentalGains for 1995-96 Kentucky Preschoolers with Severe DisabilitiesPage 43Table 18 Means and Standard Deviations of Proportional Change Index on theBattelle Developmental Inventory for 1995-96 KentuckyPreschoolers with DisabilitiesPage 44Figure 1 Mean Scores of Projected School Year Developmental Gains for1995-96 PreschoolersPage 46Figure 2 Mean Scores of Proportional Change Index (PCI) for 1995-96PreschoolersPage 48Figure 2a Mean Scores of Proportional Change Index (PCI) for 1995-96Preschoolers Based on Children's AttendancePage 48aTable 19 Mean Developmental Age Equivalent on the Battelle DevelopmentalInventory Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains for 1995-96At-Risk African-American Kentucky PreschoolersPage 50Table 20 Program Efficiency Index and Projected School Year DevelopmentalGains for 1995-96 Economically At-Risk African-American KentuckyPreschoolersPage 51Table 21 Mean Developmental Age Equivalent on the Battelle DevelopmentalInventory at Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains for 1995-96At-Risk African-American and Caucasian Kentucky PreschoolersPage 53Table 22 Means of Program Efficiency Index (PEI) and Projected School YearDevelopmental Gains for 1995-96 Economically At-RiskAfrican-American and Caucasian PreschoolersPage 55Table 23 Program Efficiency Index (PEI) of BDI Domains for 1995-96PreschoolersPage 57Page iv

Table 24 Program Efficiency Index (PEI) of BDI Domains for 1995-96 PreschoolersBased on Children's Present Days at SchoolPage 59Table 25 Proportional Change Index (PCI) of BDI Domains for 1995-96PreschoolersPage 61Table 26 Means and Standard Deviations of Social Skills and Problem BehaviorRated by Teachers and Parents for 1995-96 Economically At-RiskKentucky PreschoolersPage 63Table 27 Percentage of SSRS Sub-Scales Rated by Teachers as Being FewerThan Average, Average, or More Than Average for 1995-96Economically At-Risk PreschoolersPage 64Table 28 Percentage of SSRS Sub-Scales Rated by Parents as Being Fewer ThanAverage, Average, or More Than Average for 1995-96 EconomicallyAt-Risk PreschoolersPage 66Table 29 Means and Standard Deviations of Social Skills and Problem BehaviorRated by Teachers and Parents for 1995-96 Kentucky Preschoolerswith Developmental DelaysPage 67Table 30 Means and Standard Deviations of Social Skills and Problem BehaviorRated by Teachers and Parents for 1995-96 Kentucky Preschoolerswith Speech DelaysPage 68Table 31 Means and Standard Deviations of Social Skills and Problem BehaviorRated by Teachers and Parents for 1995-96 Kentucky Preschoolerswith Severe DisabilitiesPage 69Table 32 Means and Standard Deviations of Social Skills and Problem BehaviorRated by Teachers and Parents for 1995-96 African-American andCaucasian Economically At-Risk PreschoolersPage 70Table 33 Means and Standard Deviations of the Early Literacy Measures for1995-96 Economically At-Risk PreschoolersPage 72Table 34 Means and Standard Deviations of Early Literacy Measures for 1995-96African-American Economically At-Risk PreschoolersPage 74Table 35 Correlations Between Student Gains on BDI, SSRS, Early Literacy,and the Configuration Map for At-Risk PreschoolersPage 76Table 36 Correlations Between Student Gains on BDI, SSRS, Early Literacy,and the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale for At-RiskPreschoolersPage 77Page v

Table 37 Correlation Between Proportional Change Index (PCI) and Total Scoresof Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale and PreschoolConfiguration MapPage 78Figure 3 Means Scores on Transition Questionnaire for 1995-96 KindergartenReadiness CohortPage 81Table 38 Mean Scores of Questionnaire of Transition From Preschool to P1(Kindergarten) for 1995-96 Readiness CohortPage 83Figure 4 Pupil Behavior Inventory for 1995-96 Kindergarten Readiness Cohort Page 84Table 39 Mean. Scores of Five Factors in the Pupil Behavior Inventory Rated byKindergarten Teachers for 1995-96 Readiness CohortPage 85Table 40 Percentage of Participants and Comparison Groups Rated byTeachers as Doing Better Than and the Same as Most Children in TheirClassroom Across All CohortsPage 89Table 41 Kentucky Preschool Program Participants and Comparison Children'sRatings on the Social Skills Rating System by Teachers and ParentsAcross All CohortsPage 93Table 42 Average Attendance Information of Kentucky Preschool ProgramParticipants and Comparison Children of Cohorts 1 through 5 in1995-96 StudyPage 95Table 43 Percentage of Kentucky Preschool Participants and ComparisonChildren Referred to and Receiving Services in 1995-96 StudyPage 96Page vi

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project ReportAcknowledgmentsThe faculty of the KERA Preschool Evaluation project wish to thank the following peoplewho made the implementation of this project possible.First, and foremost, we wish to thank the preschool teachers, the district preschoolcoordinators, the principals, and the office staff in each of the 24 schools and in the 22districts in which data were collected. To protect the anonymity of the children and theteachers, we will not mention them by name, but without their time and cooperation, itwould have been impossible for us to collect the necessary data.We also want to thank three key people in the Kentucky Department of Education: DebbieSchumacher, Director of the Division of Preschool Programs; Barbara Singleton,Preschool Consultant; and Vicki Clark, Division of Primary Education. We appreciatedtheir advice and support throughout the project.We also appreciated the willingness of the staff at the Big Blue Bird Early ChildhoodCenter to allow the use of the center as an examiner validation center. They includeCamille Haggard, Director; Julia Eversole, Assistant Director; and the preschool teachers.Dr. Larry Schweinhart of the High/Scope Foundation has served as a consultant to thisproject for the past four years. His sage advice and wise council have helped us solvemany of the problems encountered in an evaluation of this size and complexity.The Project Staff of the Third Party Evaluation deserve extensive thanks for their hardwork: Kimberly Gorman, Lawrence E. Griesinger, Huyi Hines, Rachel Hood, BerylMcClure, Pat Millet, Diane Strangis, Johanna Sutherland, Angela Walker.Examiners traveled long distances and worked long hours to complete the testing in atimely manner: Constance Ard, Lara Berdine, Jeannie Stanfield Byrd, Christina Cowart,Tracy D. Draper, Melissa Foree, Carrie Glass, Diana Haleman, Paula R. Herndon, JenniferKyser, Kathy Gilliam, Jane Goins, Archana Parida, Jennifer Reece, Shannon Roberts,Jennifer Sherrow, Cheryl Wagner.The College of Education and the College of Human Environmental Sciences at theUniversity of Kentucky have provided space and faculty time for this project. We wouldlike to acknowledge the Institute on Education Reform for their continuous support forthe project. We specifically want to thank the home departments of the faculty;Departments of Curriculum and Instruction, Educational and Counseling Psychology,Family Studies, and Special Education and Rehabilitation Counseling.Connie BridgeMary Louise HemmeterPaul de MesquitaKim TownleyPage vii9Stephan M.Wilson

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project ReportEXECUTIVE SUMMARYA COMPREHENSIVE PRESCHOOL PROGRAMKentucky's legislators recognized that the best way to enhance children's chances forsuccess in school and their attainment of high levels of achievement is to ensure that theyget off to a good start in school. Thus, a tuition-free statewide preschool program wascreated in 1990 to help young at-risk children reach their full potential. The KentuckyPreschool Program is a comprehensive early childhood educational delivery system whichprovides developmentally appropriate programs for children, integrated services tofamilies, and interdisciplinary and interagency collaboration among organizations servingyoung children in Kentucky.EligibilityThe Kentucky Education Reform Act was created as a means of equalizing educationalopportunities for all children. The Kentucky Preschool Program targets four-year-oldchildren from low-income families and three- and four-year-old children with disabilities.Each school district is required to make services available to all eligible children, eitherthrough district-provided programs or through contracts with other public or privateservice providers (KRS 157.3175 and KRS 157.226). Local districts must collaboratewith Head Start to maximize use of federal funds available to serve eligible four-year-oldchildren. The implementation of the Kentucky Preschool Program was mandatory for alldistricts beginning in the 1991-1992 school year.Eligibility for the program is determined in two ways. First, four-year-old children whoqualify for free lunch under the national school lunch program are considered at-risk andthus are eligible for the program. Second, three and four-year-old children withdisabilities who qualify for services under Public Law 99-457 are eligible.Purposes of the 1995-96 Program Evaluation of Kentucky Preschool ProgramsThe 1995-1996 study of the Kentucky Preschool Programs constitutes the fifth year of thelongitudinal evaluation of the state mandated preschool programs for at-risk four-yearolds and three- and four-year-old children with disabilities. The five major questionsaddressed during this year's evaluation were:1. What is the nature and extent of implementation of the Kentucky PreschoolProgram?2. What developmental gains were achieved by the 1995-1996 KentuckyPreschool participants?Page viii

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project Report3. What is the relationship between program quality and student outcomes?4. In the first year of primary, how does the performance of the KentuckyPreschool participants compare with the performance of same-age eligiblenon-participants and non-eligible peers?5. What are the long-term effects of participation in the Kentucky PreschoolProgram on former participants and their comparisons in the five previouscohorts?METHODOLOGYSampling Procedure for District SelectionThirty-six districts (24 district with provided programs and 12 districts with blendedprograms) made up the initial sample. These districts were identified in the Fall of 1991using a stratified sampling strategy designed to yield a representative sample of geographicregions (east, west, central), economic development levels (high, low), and program type(district provided verses blended). These districts served as research sites for thepreschool children in cohorts 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. These districts continue to be involved inthe project as we collect follow-up data from teachers and parents on these children asthey progress through the primary program.This year, 22 districts were added to the sample. The 17 classrooms in districts withblended programs and the 7 district provided classrooms were randomly selected from theeight Service Center Regions. All children in these 24 sites were included in the studyunless their parents chose not to allow them to participate.Selection Procedure for the Readiness CohortKindergarten classrooms in the new 22 districts were recruited for participation in this partof the study. The groups were randomly selected for participation: a) children who hadparticipated in the Kentucky Preschool Program the previous year; b) children who wereeligible for the Kentucky Preschool Program the previous year, but who had notparticipated; and c) children who were not eligible for and did not participate in theKentucky Preschool Program the previous year.Instrumentation.A variety of measures were used to assess the developmental, social, and academic gainsof the Kentucky Preschool Program participants. The 1995-1996 Kentucky Preschoolparticipants received the Battelle Developmental Inventory and two Early LiteracyPage ix11

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project ReportMeasures in the fall (pretest) and the spring (posttest). Teachers and parents of thesechildren also completed the Social Skills Rating Scale in the fall (pretest) and the spring(posttest).Current teachers of children in cohorts 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 completed the Social Skills Rating cale, and a survey of the children's academic progress and projected future success inschool. Teachers also completed the Primary Teacher Survey which required them to ratechildren in three areas: a) attainment of Kentucky's Learning Goals; b) performance in thecurriculum domains; and c) expectations for future success. Parents also completed theSocial Skills Rating Scale and Parent Survey.Teachers of children in the readiness cohort completed an adapted version of the Pupilbehavior Inventory and the Transition From Preschool to PI (Kindergarten). TheTransition Questionnaire asked teachers to rate children's readiness for PI (Kindergarten).ResultsQuestion 1:What is the nature and extent of implementation of the Kentucky PreschoolProgram in Kentucky?Results indicate that there is a high correlation between the Early Childhood EnvironmentRating Scale and the Configuration Map for Preschool Programs (r .88, p .05).Programs that score well on the in-depth classroom measure (Early ChildhoodEnvironment Rating Scale) also score well on the more global program evaluation tool(Configuration Map for Preschool Programs). The data indicate that program qualityappears to be fairly consistent across individual preschool programs around the state forthe last several years. All 24 classrooms in the 1995-1996 study scored at or aboveaverage in all areas except one.Parents are generally pleased with the Kentucky Preschool Program. Figure 1 showsparent satisfaction with the Kentucky Preschool Program. In addition, the survey askedparents about the types of activities offered to them by the school. Parents reported thatthe most frequently offered activity was to help in the classroom. Parents most frequentlyparticipated in conferences with the teacher. Parents reported that schedule conflicts arethe largest barrier to their participation in activities offered by the school.

13Item IItem 2Item 3Item 4Item 5Item 6Item 7Item 8Item 9hem 10Item 11Item 12hem 13//A7 ,7"7,474/ A:4W A% Al,1 A' ///7.7 /7% .% /7-IL,1 A/ /7/0,11 ,17A7.,%/7.101.%,' 7/A7/7I30/1IA/20//%/A//7 /X/2/ // /fr/.7 7.,,Parents response tote is 41.2%.P'01/7,7Pt, ,//111/r/,11/7//1A7'',7 Ay2:7,7 77 /A72:7/7 /7 A/, ,, , 4.% //?%/7 A; //A/ 1,:;%7 A/ AV /7 /,'/07 /7 kW/7 /A% t% /7A? ,?7,,,,,,1//X/ A% .A:7,W7A"//776.0'%/1//::///%1 A/7A786.4/7A/ 71,// //,r//Page xiPercentageI50I4060I/57/;.-.7/:%/X/127///1 3.695.2Iz'7/// ///'/,90/ ///ti/r//4%/7//i/W/,,/ // /W;%%'');:a ';;;;';?//,76.893.692.093.691.288.8.,,,,r, ,, /Al'x'?",?//7Ag /7//'/7 AM/ /7 ///:,/ 4.7 // A/ /7/7)7 / /%0.07,/i/, r,0,7 /7,7"//!/:// /V' %)0/ ///i?/.:0/M7/ /7A"%,57 7/A7/i/./A,' //A7/./%7/,/7./ 7///:"/,,,/0; .47%0V7, 97,//7 //%1 // /7 /7 //7 A/A'A%/7/7,A.AM/ /7 "",,// // i/ // / / / 4.,,,/, , , ,,,./ ,, , , ,, ,7, : , r/P.,74:07 AZ%%/4.;AY/ 7 7//7Ir,,,r // ;/ y /// '///72,,1v/Figure 1Percentage of Parents Who Strongly Agree & Agree With Itemsin Parent Survey of 1995-96 Preschool Program (N 120)Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project Report

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project ReportQuestion 2:What developmental gains were achieved by the 1995-1996 KentuckyPreschool participants?Figure 2 presents a graphic summary of the projected developmental gains of four groupsof 1995-1996 Kentucky Preschool participants on the Battelle Developmental Inventory.The rates of gain for economically at-risk preschoolers range from a high of 12.75 monthsin gross motor skills to a low of 4.87 months in expressive communication skills. At-riskchildren made more than one month gain for each month in the program in the domains ofpersonal social, adaptive, gross motor, and fine motor.Page xii

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII91111111;,II minummummiiminommo\\\\\\ 111111riiiimiummmommuniummummumn

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project ReportPositive gains were observed across all groups of children with disabilities. The rates ofgain for children with developmental delays were relatively even across domains, thoughlower in the fine motor and expressive communication domains. Children with speechdelays made gains ranging from a high of 15.52 months in the personal social domain to alow of 7.02 months in fine motor skills. Children with severe disabilities made the mostprogress in the domains of gross motor, fine motor, and adaptive, all above one month ofgain per month in the program.Participation in the Kentucky Preschool Programs appears to enhance the skills necessaryfor children's successful functioning in the educational environment. Both parents andteachers note particular improvements in the children's development of self-control. Aschildren's social skills develop, the children's problem behaviors are observed less often.Significant gains were also made from pretest to posttest in important early literacy skills.Question 3:What is the relationship between program quality and student outcomes?While there are few significant correlations between program quality and studentoutcomes, it does appear that the programs which have a higher total score on theConfiguration Map For Preschool Programs also have students whose ProportionalChange Index scores are higher in the areas of receptive communication, expressivecommunication, and total communication.Question 4:In the first year of primary, how does the performance of the KentuckyPreschool participants compare with the performance of same-age eligiblenon-participants and non-eligible peers?Children in P1 (kindergarten) who attended the Kentucky Preschool Program were viewedby their teachers as being better prepared for kindergarten than their peers who wereeligible for but did not attend the Kentucky Preschool Program. In addition, theparticipants were viewed by their teachers as being as prepared as a random group of theirnon-eligible peers.Question 5:What are the long-term effects of participation in the Kentucky PreschoolProgram on former participants and their comparisons in the five previouscohorts?The data from the Primary Teacher Survey and the Social Skills Rating Scale indicate thatparticipation in the Kentucky Preschool Programs continue to have an impact on childrenas they move through the Primary Program. With only a few exceptions, the statepreschool children continue to do as well as a random group of peers through the fourthgrade on most measures of social skills and academic progress.Page xiv18

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project ReportSummaryResults indicate that the Kentucky Preschool Program is achieving the goal of reducingthe gap between at-risk children and the rest of the children in their classes. Results fromthe last four years reveal that former Kentucky Preschool participants are scoring as wellor better than a random sample of their peers on a number of measures of academicprogress and expectations for future success in school and life. However, children in theoldest cohort who participated in the Kentucky Preschool Program during the first year ofimplementation (1990-1991) are receiving lower ratings on several measures of academicprogress and social skills than a random sample of the peers. Whether this is due to a fadeout effect of initial positive results or to the fact that the program was in its first year ofimplementation can only be determined through continued study of children who haveparticipated in the programs during the first six years of implementation.Page xv1.9

Kentucky Preschool Evaluation Project Report Page 1INTRODUCTIONAlthough kindergartens have existed in this country since 1860, it has only been since the1920's that preschools or nursery schools have been in existence. By 1930 cooperativenursery schools had become popular with the total number of nursery schools growing toapproximately 260. In 1933 as a result of the Work Projects Administration endorsing aplan to employ out of work teachers to remediate the effects of the depression on youngchildren, the number of nursery schools grew to 1,700. The advent of World War IIresulted in women working outside their homes, which meant arrangements had to bemade for the care of their small children. In 1946, the Lanham Act was passed whichprovided federal funds to build and staff child care centers. The child care needs offamilies expanded the hours of operation and the ages of the children in the nursery schoolsetting (Braun .& Edwards, 1972).In the 1950's and 1960's pervasive concerns about the role of poor children and familiesin an affluent society spawned the "War of Poverty." The Head Start Program was part ofthe movement that directed federal funds to early childhood education for an impoverishedspectrum of the society, thus increasing the number of preschool/nursery school programs.Tuition-supported nursery schools also increased during this period, with enrollment ofthree-and four-year-olds rising from 800,000 in 1965 to 1,150,000 in 1970. At the sametime kindergartens expanded in almost all states, accommod

Battelle Developmental Inventory for 1995-96 Preschoolers Page 37. Table 12 Mean Developmental Age Equivalents on the Battelle Developmental. Inventory at Pre- and Posttest, and Developmental Gains of Developmentally Delayed Kentucky Preschoolers for 1995-96 Page 38. Table 13 Program Efficiency Index

Related Documents:

holux hxe-w01 hp 290483-b21 310798-b21 311314-001 311314-002 311315-b21 311340-001 311349-003 311949-001 343110-001 343117-001 350579-001 359498-001 35h00013-00 35h00014-00 35h00063-00m 377358-001 382877-001 382878-001 383745-001 383858-001 395780-001 398687-001 399858

Livingston Roundup (406) 237-1122 Indianapolis, IN (317) 536-5590 Lexington, KY (877) 427-7669 (406) 494-3803 (406) 322-4739 Great Falls (406) 727-7390 (406) 222-4806 (406) 323-1606 Red Lodge (406) 445-7245 Bulk Division (859) 744-3186 Thoroughbred Industrial Cylinder Exchange Support Silvertip Propane Retail AWG

001 10 001 055 dyson andrew pass 001 10 001 056 gomani only pass 001 10 001 057 jasten wonderful pass 001 10 001 058 jobo yona pass . 001 10 003 083 wanda kastom l pass 001 10 003 084 y

Weight kg Ways 1P 3P Ordering details Type Code Type No. GDMS312 MXFC GDMS318 MXFC GDMS324 MXFC GDMS330 MXFC GDMS336 MXFC GDMS348 MXFC GDMS360 MXFC GDMS372 MXFC 2CVB 106 001 M0001 2CVB 206 001 M0001 2CVB 306 001 M0001 2CVB 406 001 M0001 2CVB 506 001 M0001 2CVB 606 001 M0001 2CVB 706 001 M0001 2CVB 806 001 M0001 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 12 18 24 30 .

Abe, Genki 064 31798 001 039 230 86/05/05 Abendroth, Walter 100 325769 001 001 230 86/11/03 Aberg, Einar 105 009428 001 155 230 86/16/05 Abetz, Otto 100 004219 001 022 230 86/11/06 Abjanic, Theodore 105 253577 001 132 230 86/16/01 Abrey, Richard See Sovloot (100-382419) Abs, Hermann J. 105 056532 001 167 230 86/16/06 Abualy, Aldina 105 007801 001 183 230 86/17/02 Abwehr 065 37193 001 122 230 .

02 1 Waterslager/Kleur 02.005.001 2 002 02.005 02 1 Timbrado's/Kleur 02.006.001 2 002 02.006 02 1 Harzers/Postuur 02.007.001 2 002 02.007 02 1 Waterslagers/Postuur 02.008.002 2 002 02.008 02 1 Timbrado's/Postuur 02.009

A, Bozeman, MT 59717 406-994-3651 MSU - Billings 1500 University Dr., Billings, MT 59101 406-657-2278 MSU - Northern 300 West 11th Street, Havre, MT 59501 406-265-3568 Great Falls College - MSU 2100 16th Ave. S., Great Falls, MT 59405 406-268-3701 UM - Missoula 32 Campus Drive, LO 252, Missoula, MT 59812 406-243-6766

A, Bozeman, MT 59717 406-994-3651 MSU - Billings 1500 University Dr., Billings, MT 59101 406-657-2278 MSU - Northern 300 West 11th Street, Havre, MT 59501 406-265-3568 Great Falls College - MSU 2100 16th Ave. S., Great Falls, MT 59405 406-268-3701 UM - Missoula 32 Campus Drive, LO 252, Missoula, MT 59812 406-243-6766