Head Start (program)
[1] The program's services and resources are designed to foster stable family relationships, enhance children's physical and emotional well-being, and establish an environment to develop strong cognitive skills.
[6] Head Start began as part of President Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society campaign.
The murder shook the nation, and Johnson attempted to gain public trust by passing legacy legislation during the subsequent months.
The program was led by Dr. Robert Cooke, a pediatrician at Johns Hopkins University, and Dr. Edward Zigler, a professor of psychology and director of the Yale Child Study Center.
They designed a comprehensive child development program intended to help communities meet the needs of disadvantaged preschool children.
Rather than proceeding with a smaller pilot program, the decision was made to roll it out on a large scale with the enrollment of 500,000 children in 2,500 communities.
[citation needed] Head Start serves over 1 million children and their families each year in urban and rural areas in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. territories.
Meals and snacks are also provided, which can help ease financial pressure on families and improve children's diets.
Grants are awarded by the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) Regional Offices and the American Indian – Alaska Native and Migrant and Seasonal Program Branches directly to local public agencies, private organizations, Indian tribes and school systems.
[33] The authors of the study concluded, "these estimates imply sizable, long-term returns to investments in means-tested, public preschool programs.
"[33] A 2009 study, which compared siblings, found that those who attended Head Start showed stronger academic performance as shown on test scores for years afterward, were less likely to be diagnosed as learning-disabled, less likely to commit crime, more likely to graduate from high school and attend college, and less likely to suffer from poor health as an adult.
These results indicate that Head Start has a positive impact on the whole family, beyond the individual children who attend the program.
Regression discontinuity design was used to measure program impact without denying a control group the opportunity to attend Head Start.
This also eliminated the issue of selection bias because both groups chose to attend Head Start as three-year-olds.
[37] A randomized control study of the pre-k program serving socioeconomically disadvantaged children in Tennessee found short-term gains in language, literacy and math outcomes for pre-k participants compared with children who did not participate, which was also confirmed by a discontinuity analysis (Lip, Farran, Bilbrey, Hofer, & Dong, 2011).
Academic outcome measures in literacy, math and science were collected based on the Head Start and Early Childhood Program Observational Checklist rating on a 4-point scale (1—not yet to 4—excels.
Children in the high-risk group had significantly lower literacy, math, and science scores than those who had three or fewer risk factors.
[38] In 2002, Garces, Thomas and Currie used data from the Panel Survey of Income Dynamics to review outcomes for close to 4,000 participating adults followed from childhood and compared with non-participant siblings.
No significant impacts were found for oral comprehension, phonological awareness, or early mathematics skills for either age group.
The participants were low-income inner-city black children whose unemployed, economically disadvantaged parents were considered unskilled.
The Head Start children scored higher than the controls in both settings, which suggested preschool intervention programs may have influenced the result.
[42] A 2005 review of the literature by Barnett and Hustedt found "mixed, but generally positive, evidence regarding Head Start's long-term benefits.
Sustained increases in school achievement are sometimes found, but in other cases flawed research methods produce results that mimic fade-out.
Early Head Start demonstrated modest improvements in children's development and parent beliefs and behavior.
[45] Fryer and Levitt found no evidence that Head Start participation had lasting effect on test scores in the early years of school.
For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade, a potentially important finding for children's longer-term development.
"[49] In an op-ed piece in The New York Times, "Head Start Falls Further Behind", Besharov and Call discuss a 1998 evaluation that led to a national reevaluation of the program.
Klein wrote, "You take the million or so poorest 3- and 4-year-old children and give them a leg up on socialization and education by providing preschool for them; if it works, it saves money in the long run by producing fewer criminals and welfare recipients ... it is now 45 years later.
And finally there is indisputable evidence about the program's effectiveness, provided by the Department of Health and Human Services: Head Start simply does not work.
"[51] W. Steven Barnett, director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, rebutted Klein, "Weighing all of the evidence and not just that cited by partisans on one side or the other, the most accurate conclusion is that Head Start produces modest benefits including some long-term gains for children.
