Has 'Head Start' helped advance black education?
Head Start. You can't talk about early childhood education without mentioning the iconic government program designed to give disadvantaged preschoolers, well, a head start. But for many of us, we never think about the program until Congress, or more specifically political conservatives, threaten to either cut or eliminate the program. But what exactly is Head Start? Who created it and has it been an effective early education program for African-Americans?Head Start has its origins in the mid 1960s Great Society programs of the Lyndon Johnson administration. After declaring a War on Poverty, President Johnson created a series of domestic programs designed to eliminate systemic poverty in the United States. Out of these Great Society initiatives came Medicare, the Neighborhood Youth Corp, the Food Stamp program, and an early education program for economically disadvantaged five and 6-year-olds called Head Start.
Established under the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Head Start was one of the first federally funded educational programs, as education funding had traditionally been the responsibility of state governments. With half of the nation's poor being children, Johnson's emphasis on education was meant to break the cycle of poverty guaranteeing a poor education.To date, over 25 million children have participated in Head Start programs, with billions spent in over a thousand local cities and towns throughout the country. Usually the darling of liberal Democrats and education minded Republicans, Head Start is not without its critics.
Some critics of Head Start say that the program has been nothing more than a show pony program, contending that the educational gains that Head Start children receive, are temporary and ineffective. And with the proliferation of privately run pre-school programs, Head Start critics like the conservative Heritage Foundation argue that the Head Start program is "a sinkhole for taxpayer dollars and an ineffective education program for children".
Supporters counter that Head Start provides an invaluable education to children who would be otherwise either be not in school, or receiving an education with varying standards. And these supporters dispute that Head Start children don't retain their education by the third grade. So who is right?
The United States Health and Human Services released a January 2010 report, the Head Start Impact Study, which addressed both sides of the argument. And the results gave a little bit to both sides of the Head Start argument.The Head Start Impact Study looked at children who attended Head Start program, and those who attended childcare services and non-Head Start pre school classes from 2002-03. The non-Head Start kids provided the control group for the study, and the results were conclusive. Children who attended Head Start outperformed their non-Head Start peers in cognitive and emotional impacts. By the time they left the problem, they were ready for elementary school.
"Providing access to Head Start has a positive impact on children's preschool experiences," says the study. "There are statistically significant differences between the Head Start group and the control group on every measure of children's preschool experiences measured in this study."
So that's the good news. The bad news is that the study also finds that much of those educational gains are gone by not the third grade, but by the first grade. That appears on the surface to strengthen the conservative argument that Head Start isn't really effective. I have a different take.Even though Head Start is a federally funded program, it is administered locally, which means there are going to be variances in the quality of the programs. And as the study shows, most Head Start children enter schools more prepared than their peers. But what type of elementary schools are these young students entering? Based on what we know about inner city, impoverished schools in African-American community, they are typically without the resources to continue the momentum that Head Start provided. The achievement gap between black and white children can be mitigated by Head Start, but is only the beginning and not that end of solution. Source
27 comments:
Of course, anything is better than nothing. I worked as an "unqualified" social worker during Head Start's earliest years in Peoria.
At that time, I don't believe there were too many Head Start teachers or aides who actually held degrees in early childhood education. However, I do know some very dedicated people who worked Head Start in those early years.
I do find it hard to believe, however, that the elementary teachers in District 150- are less qualified or motivated than are the head start teachers (which I believe is what you are suggesting, Emerge). Quite honestly, though, I do not know what qualifications are required to teach head start today--hopefully, things have progressed since the time when the program was just getting off the ground.
I do contend, however, that no program is going to overcome what does not or "does" occur in the home environment of these children who need a head start for a reason.
The problem, of course, is that while these inner children are getting a "head" start, their more affluent counterparts are, also, getting a "head" start in more prestigious preschool programs and in homes where the parents are college educated. Therefore, the gap doesn't narrow; it probably widens.
Also, since socialization is the main goal of Head Start, the educational headway is probably not as great as in the preschools of the affluent--there socialization is probably already accomplished, so more learning can take place.
On paper, Head Start is a wonderful idea. Unfortunately, Head Start is nothing but a glorified baby sitting service. The teachers in public schools that take over at 1st grade and up are not to blame. What is to blame is the parents or parent in most cases. Look at the young mothers, who have babies. They enroll their child in Head Start and Early Childhood programs offered by the District. This frees up the mother who when the child reaches the ripe old age of 5 or 6 passes the care onto their mother. (ie the Grandmother) who ends up raising the child through their middle school years. By the time the kid hits high school, with no family support, an absent father, and a mother who rather have her nails and hair done then raise a child, the kid is screwed up. This is why Head Start is a failure and the only thing it provides is nice paying jobs for a select few. Look at the stats. In fact ask the teachers in our schools. If this program was even close to working, then someplace somewhere there would be an improvement in school scores. There are not. This program is ineffective and a waste of money. Like I said, a glorified baby sitting service.
While Sharon makes some points, her idea that affluent kids are getting a better head start is bull! Any child, poor, rich, or whatever, getting an early education is going to be better than the child that doesn't. The difference is that the affluent child is most likely to come from a stable family where the poor child isn't. That is the gap. Stop having teenage girls raising babies and make them responsible for the child they do have along with the father and you'll see an improvement. Otherwise, it's pass the kid off to grandma when the cuteness wears off. That means having another baby by a different father in most cases and the whole thing repeats itself until you have generation after generation expecting society to raise their kid.
I am sorry if I sound blunt and I wish the program worked because it is the poor kids that need this type of program. It sadly has been turned into a cash cow for those that work at Head Start.
As much as I would like to disagree with PAP, I can't. Much of what he describes is what I witness on a daily basis. The eager, wide-eyed 3 - 4 year old looses that spark when the continued support is not present in the home. I have seen too many of those little kids grow to be a parent at age 16 (and sometimes less) or become the look-out for drug dealers. No matter what the economic circumstance or ethnic background, a parent (or preferably parents) make the difference.
Randy, unfortunately I do agree. Also, I use the word "affluent" advisedly because statistics do seem to indicate that economic status does seem have to have much to do with a child's chances for academic success--not because of the money but because the more affluent parents more than likely are educated and recognize their responsibility in guiding their children's education--and have the capability of doing so.
There just is no getting around it--the home is the most important influence in a child's life. That is where the head start has to take place--there are no substitutes. Three or four hours a day in a head start classroom (where other children are just as needy) cannot overcome what doesn't happen in the home during all the hours in the evenings, on weekends, and in the summer. It's a bleak prognosis but it can't be discounted.
The Head Start Impact Study compared essentially two groups of kids that initially came from the SAME group. All of the kids in the study were eligible for Head Start (thus they were all at or below the poverty line). However, there was not enough funding for all kids to be given an opportunity for Head Start. The two groups being compared were, generally 1) those eligible AND given access to Head Start and 2) those eligible but NOT initially given access to Head Start.
(However, not all of Group 1 actually chose to use Head Start and some in Group 2 found a Head Start program elsewhere. About 90% of Group 1 had either Head Start or some other pre-school care whereas about 60% of Group 2 had pre-school/Head Start care.)
By the time they entered kindergarten, Group 1 was ahead of Group 2. (sure, the reason could simply be that more kids in Group 1 had SOME kind of pre-school/Head Start - but the point is at the beginning of kindergarten, there was a difference.
That difference was lost by the end of the first grade. Remember, since all of the kinds in Group 1 and 2 were eligible for Head Start - they're all poor and generally went to elementary schools with very high rates of low income students.
So the question is "Why were those original gains "lost" so quickly?" The possibilities as I see it:
1. What is learned in Head Start or, perhaps more appropriately, how it is learned, isn't lasting. (like cramming for a test at the last minute and doing relatively well on the exam but very little is retained).
2. The elementary schools that serve the Head Start population don't do enough to continue those gains. Perhaps they have to spend too much time bringing all of the other kids up to some minimum level - to the neglect of the kids who are more ready.
3. What is learned via Head Start (and I'm focusing on the educational aspects - not the admittedly related, but different, emotional and health gains) is really so simple, but the next level of gains are, by comparison, more difficult. (like coaching little league soccer that first year - some kids come in knowing the basics (run, kick, no hands, offense, defense) and others have no clue to even that stuff, but it's pretty easy to teach that part. By comparison, the next stuff, like dribbling, proper spacing, etc. generally takes more time to learn.)
In any event, there was a benefit gained by having access to Head Start, and then it was quickly lost. (and not because everybody got "up to level" - all of those poor kids still do much worse on average). Further, those initial gains were made in spite of all of the problems other commenters suggested, such as absent fathers and other lack of parental responsibility.
I am not a huge fan of Head Start. The people who run the Head Start program have the money to pull in parents and educate them. The 2009 Annual Report recommitted to that cause. If they know where they are lacking and can get the District to help close the gap. There is some hope.
Emerge - when you say "not a huge fan of Head Start", are you only or primarily talking about our LOCAL Head Start, or do you include the whole federal program in that assessment?
I will consult with Mr. Bragg, President/CEO of PCCEO, which operates Head Start in Peoria County, and see if he wants to respond to comments here. In addition to being CEO, Mr. Bragg also oversees Head Start, and has done so for at least 24 years.
I can tell you this: when Head Start received more funding a few years ago, 1 stipulation was that all Head Start teachers had to have a Bachelor's Degree by 2011. (Not sure if it's Jan. 1 or later)
You can give the parents all the tools they need to raise their child right. But once they leave our program, all you can do is hope they continue using them.
For more info on Head Start, go to this webpage: http://www.pcceo.org/headstart.html
For more info on Early Head Start, go to this webpage:
http://www.pcceo.org/ehs.html
If you desire a visit to a Head Start Center and see the great things that occur everyday, I will see if that can happen.
Jon, while I respect your opinion I have to wonder how you can equate the "education" 3, 4, and 5 year olds get at Head Start and lose it to "like coaching soccer"??
The way I see it pure and simple is this: Children of this young age going to school drawing and coloring and participating in projects with other children their age is a learning experience. They bring home their little projects to mom and they are hung on the ice box door.
Then the child grows and enters, most likely, a public school with many more children. The parent loses interest and simply packs the kid up and sends them to school. The parent's interest is lost on what the child is doing because most of these type of parents expect the schools to do it all from educate to feed. There is no re-enforcement at home.
Sadly that is in a lot of cases but not all. I am sure there are some successes because of Head Start but for the money spent, not even close enough. Emerge is right. Head Start should also make the parent(s) show up and teach them how to be parents and interactive in their child's education. Look at any student who is successful in high school and their parent or parents are behind them. It's the home life of the poor that wipe out a lot of children's futures and it's not because they are poor, it's because of the environment these kids live in and the ignorance of their parent. Of course it's easier to blame the schools.
Jon, I am referring to local.
Anti-Pundit, HeadStart does work with parents and the PCCEO offers opportunities for parents to learn and better themselves.
I think some of the difference is when the children enter a public school after Head Start, there is no on going effort to keep pulling those parents in.
We know they are likely at risk to loose interest and yes, they may even need to be coddled. But the district schools need to make them feel just as welcome as they did when they were participating with their children in the HeadStart program.
More than likely these parents have not had a good experience with school. Heck they probably don't know anybody that has had a good experience with a District 150 school. They may be cynical about the system and don't trust it from their own experiences. That is the District 150 legacy in Peoria's black community. Whose fault is that?
Emerge, you do have a tendency to blame all problems on District 150 (there's irony in that statement I know because I do the same). The difference is that you blame the teachers and I blame the administration.
That said, are you absolutely certain that the parents participate in Head Start more than they do in District 150 parent activities? I think you and I have different ideas of what is meant by parental involvement. The important parental involvement is done at home, not at school. Most parents of academically ready children (those who work, etc.)spend very little time at the school, but they spend time at home reinforcing what the child learns at school.
I think the importance of involvement of parents at school is quite overblown.
See Washington Post article "International test score data show U.S. firmly mid-pack."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/07/AR2010120701178.html?nav=mbot&sid=ST2010120701251
Looks like more U.S. students need a "head start" in order to catch up.
Dennis, I like the new requirement for the teachers to have degrees. I know that HeadStart is a warm and caring environment. The children who attend seem to love it and you can see the pride they have in HeadStart. I have heard lots of good things about HeadStart from parents who send their children there.
Sharon. Really?
What if parents felt like this...
I think the importance of enforcing what is taught at school at home is quite overblown.
and teachers [you] feel like this...
"I think the importance of involvement of parents at school is quite overblown."
Then what?
PAP - my comparison to "coaching soccer" was intended as an analogy - the key being that, as with many things, the first few "lessons" are perhaps quite easy to learn whereas the next ones become increasingly more difficult. (and this was just one of the possibilities I suggested). As such, those who come to kindergarten without having ever been taught the first few lessons, do start off behind but can quickly get up to speed and "catch" those who had a head start.
To get more bang for your buck, perhaps those with the head start should really be even FURTHER along (arguably at least to the level of the "average" kid across all socioeconomic levels). In other words, always set the bar higher.
You do bring up another possibility - that it is the parents (generally) who essentially lose interest from Head Start to public school. However, while I agree too many people expect their public school to do everything for them, I'd argue that those who think that way expect the same from Head Start, so I think it's more than just the entitlement philosophy (though, again, I agree that is a problem whether a child had a head start or not).
If parents are losing interest (meaning that they had at least some interest during the Head Start years), then why might that be? Maybe those early "lessons" the parents "learn" (putting a picture up on the fridge) are also relatively easy, but further "lessons" or steps (like reading to your child) are harder because they take more effort.
Emerge, I think we need to define parental involvement. Clearly, a classroom of 25 plus children would not benefit from 25 extra adults in the room every day.
I want to know what role you believe parents should play in a specific classroom every day. My friend Karen has four children in District 150. She is active in the PTO at one school and volunteers as a diving coach at Richwoods. She has very little to do with what happens in her children's classrooms, yet I would call her a very involved parent. If she thought something was going wrong for one of her children, I am sure she would become involved long enough to discover why the problem was occurring--that just hasn't happened yet. She and Jeff are very involved in their children's education, but they do entrust their children to the school each day.
You seem to imply that everyone you know distrusts District 150 teachers and has had bad experiences in the district. That is quite an indictment. I just never found that to be true at Manual--I think most parents trusted us and believed we were meeting the educational needs of their children. I don't know how to account for your bad experiences. Do you believe your child is receiving an inferior education and that she is being treated unfairly?
Jon, what's wrong--I agree with you. Ha! I've missed your input.
50 Ways Parents
Can Help Schools
The Center for School Change lists the following
ways that parents can become involved in schools:
Come to school to assist.
1. Share information with a student or class about a hobby.
2. Share information with a student or a class about a career.
3. Share information with students about a country you visited or lived in.
4. Tutor one or a small group of students in reading, math, or other area.
5. Help coach an athletic team.
6. Help check a student's written work.
7. Help put out a school or classroom newsletter (can also be done at home).
8. Help sew or paint a display.
9. Help build something (such as a loft in a classroom or new playground).
10. Help students work on a final exhibition or project (can also be done at home or workplace).
11. Help answer the schools' phone.
12. Help plan a new playground for the school.*
13. Help plan a theme-based presentation for students.*
14. Help present a theme-based program for students.*
15. Demonstrate cooking from a particular country or culture to students.*
16. Share a particular expertise with faculty (such as use of computers, dealing with disruptive students).
17. Help students plan and build an outdoor garden or other project to beautify the outside of the school.
18. Help coach students competing in an academic competition (such as Science Fair, Math Masters).
19. Help bring senior citizens to school to watch a student production.
Help arrange learning opportunities in the community.
20. Help set up an internship or apprenticeship for a student at your business, organization, or agency.*
21. Host a one-day 'shadow study' for one or a small group of students about your career in business or some other organization.
22. Go on a local field trip with a teacher and a group of students.
23. Go on an extended (3-5 day) cross-country field trip with a teacher & students.*
24. Contact a particular local business or organization regarding possible cooperation.*
25. Help to create a natural area outside the building where students can learn.
Serve on an advisory or decision-making committee.
26. Serve on the school-wide site council.
27. Serve on a school committee that reports to the site council.
28. Serve on a district committee representing the school.
29. Serve as an officer in the school's PTA.
30. Help organize a parent organization for the school.
31. Help design a parent and or student survey for the school.
32. Help conduct and or tabulate results of a parent survey regarding the school.
Share information or advocate for the school.
33. Serve as a member of a 'telephone tree' to distribute information quickly.
34. Write a letter to legislators about the school.
35. Write a letter to school board members about the school.
36. Go to a school board meeting to advocate for the school.
37. Go to another school to provide information about this school.
38. Help design a brochure or booklet about the school.
39. Help translate information from the school into a language other than English.
40. Help translate at a parent-teacher conference for people who don't speak English well.
41. Provide transportation to a parent-teacher conference for a parent who needs a ride.
42. Write an article for publication in a magazine about the school's activities.
43. Help arrange for a political leader (mayor, city council, state representative, member of Congress) to visit the school.
Increase financial resources available to the school.
44. Help write a proposal that would bring new resources to the school.
45. Donate materials to the school.
46. Arrange for a business or other organization to donate materials to the school.
47. Help with a fundraiser for the school.
Help other parents develop their parenting skills.
48. Help teach a class for parents on ways they can be stronger parents.
49. Help produce a videotape for parents on ways they can be more effective parents.
50. Help write, publish, and distribute a list of parenting tips."
Sharon, you are setting up scenarios about me that are not true and expecting me to argue them. Not going to do that. But I will tell you this…
You are correct, clearly a classroom of 25 plus children would not benefit from 25 extra adults in the room every day.
Exactly where did I “imply that parents should be “playing a specific role in the classroom every day”?
Your friend’s Karen and Jeff’s level of involvement is a good definition of parental involvement. But there is so much more that parents have to offer schools, as you can see from the post above.
I fail to see where I gave you the impression “that everyone I know distrusts District 150 teachers and has had bad experiences in the district”. That’s quite a broad, sweeping statement isn’t it?
I don’t dislike or distrust teachers. In all the years my children have been in school, we may have come across two teachers who should not have been in the classroom. If I didn’t trust my students to teachers each day, I would be home schooling them.
Your continuing efforts to sum up my experiences as “bad experiences” is starting to wear on me, could you stop? If my child was and/or had received an inferior education she would not be sitting at the top of the honor roll. I care about all children in the district every experience I may hint at is not my own.
Emerge, you are giving these parents way too much smarts. Maybe a few of the parents have the intelligence to get involved with their kids but very few in the Head Start program. This is a free program to them and to many it's a place to leave the kid for the day. (or half day) Nothing more. If they had to pay out of their pocket for this service, then things would be different. I paid through the nose for pre K care for my then 3 year old. You bet I was involved because my hard earned money was too. When it's handed to you, who cares, right?
Again, blame the District. My kids got an excellent education as did many of their classmates in their graduating classes from District 150. You know what the common denominator was? Parents were involved and they were in the schools and they backed up the teachers.
Again, why does the black society always have to blame someone or something for lack of progress?
It seems that when it comes to low-income parents, we expect them to be involved with their children as far as school activities...yet we also expect them to be going to school themselves to improve their education or be working part-time to full time so they can eventually get off welfare.
There's only so much a parent can do in one day, especially if you are a single low-income parent, trying to feed & shelter your kids, with probably no car for transportation. I know some parents can do it, but many can't.
I agree Dennis.
Most of these young parents are not evolved enough to do many of the volunteer activities identified on Emerge's list and if they are, their time would be better spent working on their own education, employment, and parenting responsibilities.
When you are a parent of a child that is not performing at grade level, IMO, in order to create an environment for academic success, parent involvement MUST BEGIN AT HOME at the most basic level --
1)understand what your child is studying in school,
2)make sure he or she is on task and turning in assignments,
3)communicate with the teacher whenever you have a concern, even if it is a little one,
4) provide healthy meals,
5) maintain a regular schedule in the home, particularly an early bedtime.
If a parent can't accomplish all this, begin with 4 & 5. Chaos is the killer of academic performance.
Emerge: I don't work with ONE teacher that "talks down their nose" at a parent but I have been yelled and cussed at by parents in front of their children in the middle of a hall because I called them to tell them their child was misbehaving (btw, it was their idea for me to call EVERYTIME their child misbehaved). I really am tired of hearing that worn out excuse, that parents don't come into the schools to help because they feel looked down upon. Please, we accept ANY parent (other than convicted child molesters) to come help out at ANY D150 school. They are welcome anytime.
I think many would be surprised how many parents who have something to contribute would actually be more involved if they felt comfortable.
...Okay, it's been established that a lot of parents don't know how to help thier children. It's past time to stop trying to lay blame. Frustrated's list is right on target.
We know the most important phase of a child’s development is between birth and five years old –before they start school. They say the ability to learn decreases after five years old. We know that if the child has not been read to, talked with, exposed to various learning patterns, there will be a deficit when they start school.
If teachers can build on previously learned knowledge and behaviors, they teach more effectively. If there is nothing to build on, teaching AND learning is less effective.
Local head start programs can help the District by concentrating more on how parents can prepare their children for learning before they enter a structured school setting.
The District has to be inovative in insuring that information is communicated properly to parents. It is possible to bring parents along (educate) with the children. The GED programs at the housing projects are a wonderful step in the right direction.
Let’s stop talking down our nose about it and focus on teaching our parents who don’t know, how they can make their children smarter; teach them how to contribute to the educational success of their children by doing simple things everyday.
Anonymous:
who said that a "teacher" "talks down their nose" to parents?
Emerge, I was responding to this statement of yours, "More than likely these parents have not had a good experience with school. Heck they probably don't know anybody that has had a good experience with a District 150 school. They may be cynical about the system and don't trust it from their own experiences. That is the District 150 legacy in Peoria's black community. Whose fault is that?"
I admit that I made the assumption that you were sharing your own views since you are part of the black community--but I'm assuming now that you were sharing what you feel is the attitude of many of the uninvolved parents.
Sorry for assuming you were expressing your own views.
Also, even if parents are distrustful of District 150, etc., that doesn't explain their lack of educational involvement with their own children at home.
Some of these parents of young children (who should be nutured at home) are the single mothers who are still in high school themselves. I was often keenly aware of how these children were being raised when I watched how their mothers themselves behaved in school.
I firmly believe that there are many women who have raised children alone. However, teen-age single mothers are, as a rule, not up to the task. Yes, and some of them often have their own problems with District 150.
My son had several teachers that should have had different employment.....he learned inspite of them. Please do not paint all teachers with the same brush. Oh, my son had ZERO preschool experience other than the babysitter. However, I taught him what he needed to know to be successful in school. I worked a full time job and found the time. Parents need to step up to the plate and quit expecting the community and school district to bankroll their babymaking abilities.
Post a Comment