Early Childhood Education

Early Childhood Education Handicapped Children

Last Updated Oct 5, 2008 01:01 PM

Early Childhood Education - Handicapped Children

Higher employment rates and better earnings and, correspondingly, a lower incidence of dependence on welfare (Berrueta-Clement, et al. 1985; Consortium for Longitudinal Studies 1983; Gray, et al. 1982; Illinois State Board of Education 1985; Irvine 1982; Lazar and Darlington 1982; Schweinhart 1985; Stallings and Stipek 1986).
Fewer arrests and antisocial acts (Berrueta-Clement, et al. 1985; Consortium for Longitudinal Studies 1983; Featherstone 1986; Irvine 1982; Lazar and Darlington 1982).
Better relationships with family members, a higher incidence of volunteer work, and more frequent church attendance (Berrueta-Clement, et al. 1985; Lazar and Darlington 1982).
While parents' reactions to their children's preschool experience is not a major focus of this report, it is well worth noting that some researchers have compared the attitudes of parents whose children attended preschool with those whose children did not. These researchers found that parents of preschool
graduates:

Had better attitudes towards their children's schooling (Illinois State Board of Education 1985; Lazar and Darlington 1982).
Had higher expectations for their children's learning and greater satisfaction with their children's achievements (Consortium for Longitudinal Studies 1983; Featherstone 1986).
Contacted teachers more often, even though their children had fewer school problems than children who had not been to preschool (Featherstone 1986).
Preschool attendance and finishing high school? Staying out of trouble with the law? Attending church! While the relationship between even very good preschool programs and these much later events may seem very tenuous, several of the researchers and reviewers in this area have posited causal models to explain such relationships. The general theme of these models is that good early experiences can set in motion a chain of events that pervades the child's life through high school and beyond, increasing the quality of his/her life experiences along the way. One such model is offered by Berrueta-Clement, et al. (1985), who summarize its workings as follows:

...the causal model confirms that preschool education provides poor children with a "head start" both intellectually and socially. It suggests that the initial effect of preschool on intellectual performance generates long-term effects through its intermediate effects on scholastic achievement directly, and on commitment to schooling and scholastic placement, which indirectly affect scholastic achievement. These intermediate effects are important in their own right-- increasing subjects' maturity, reducing their need for special education services, enhancing their scholastic achievement, and eventually helping them to stay in school longer. Finally, the effects of preschool have extended beyond school into the adult world as these young people have found more employment and have experienced less involvement in delinquent activities than their no-preschool counterparts. (p. 267)


EFFECTS ON DIFFERENT STUDENT POPULATIONS

As noted above, the majority of the preschool education research has been conducted with economically disadvantaged populations. The findings cited previously make clear that these children benefit greatly from preschool educational experiences. We also know that early childhood education is very beneficial for handicapped children (Casto and Mastropieri 1986), and educational literature abounds with stories of the positive effects of the early stimulation and learning opportunities offered to those we regard as gifted and talented.

What about middle class children? A 1985 review effort conducted by the Illinois State Board of Education included data on both low-income and middle class preschoolers. After noting that the youngsters from low-income homes benefited most from preschool participation, the reviewers stated that preschool may enhance the development and learning of middle class children as well. "There are some initial findings that socioeconomically advantaged children, although generally not considered at risk for educational and social failure, may nevertheless benefit from preschool education." (p. 17) Most investigators seem to agree that more research would be required to determine the effects of preschool experiences in the lives of these children.

Some investigators (Illinois State Board of Education 1985; Consortium for Longitudinal Studies 1983) have sought to determine whether preschool participation affects students differentially based on factors such as IQ, sex, birth order, one- or two-parent family composition, whether the mother works outside the home, etc. Most studies have found no differences, and the few studies which did note some differences did not find significant ones.

DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF PROGRAM
MODELS AND TEACHING PRACTICES

We have been discussing the effects of preschool experiences in general on the cognitive and noncognitive development of participants. Some investigators have taken this analysis a step further, asking whether some approaches to working with preschool children might be more beneficial than others. Findings are cited below, organized by the kind of inquiries made by various researchers.

The importance of health and social services. Bronson, et al. (1985), the Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (1983), Gray, et al. (1982), and others have found that health and social services for disadvantaged children and their families are an essential component of successful preschool programs. They remind us that the deficits experienced by these children extend beyond those that can be remediated in the classroom, and that these physical and social service needs must be met if educational services are to have significant impact.

Parent education and involvement. Virtually all successful programs have parent education and parent involvement components, and nearly all investigators cite these as critical to program success. Cotton and Green's 1988 review of the parent involvement research revealed the powerful effects of such involvement on children's learning and the learning of very young children in particular. The early childhood education research underscores the importance of parent participation, including the finding that the more intensively parents are involved, the greater are the cognitive and noncognitive benefits to their children (Bronfenbrenner 1974; Irvine 1982). As Bronson, et al. (1985) summarized,

Education and support services to parents of young children coupled with early education programs for the children should be recognized as an essential part of high quality elementary school curriculum. Early detection and prevention of learning difficulties is effective, and less expensive in the long run, than remediation. (p. 254)

Programs focusing on language development. McKey, et al. (1985), Chicago Public Schools (1985), Smothergill, et al. (1971), and others have found that disadvantaged children exhibit greater long-term achievement when the preschool programs they attend concentrate on language development activities.

Class size. Most investigators who have examined the discrete effects of different program elements have identified small class size (or, at any rate, a small student-teacher ratio) as vital to quality programs. While different ratios are cited, most researchers seem to agree that the student-teacher ratio should not go above 16:1, and many favor a 10:1 ratio for four-yearolds. A 1985 report by the Chicago Public Schools found that children performed better in a small halfday kindergarten class (16:1) than in an all-day class with a 28:1 ratio.

Like the general class size research (summarized in Robinson and Wittebols, 1986), the early childhood education research indicates that smaller class size benefits children by allowing for more individual attention and making possible teaching practices which are not feasible in larger groups.

Program continuity. Efforts made to increase program continuity also increase program effectiveness (Chicago Public Schools 1985; Irvine, et al. 1980; Illinois State Board of Education 1985; McKey, et al. 1985, Gray, et al. 1982). Careful sequencing of materials and activities, based on knowledge of early child development, is a key factor in program success. Investigators have also noted improvements in student outcomes when preschool, kindergarten, and first grade teachers work together to insure program continuity from year to year. As Irvine, et al. (1980) state, "If there is a concerted effort to build on the Pre K experience as the children progress through kindergarten and first grade, the positive effects of Pre K can be maintained." (p. 7)

Inservice for teachers. The general research on the effects of teacher inservice tells us that professional development for teachers pays off in terms of improved student outcomes. Irvine, et al. (1980), Chicago Public Schools (1985) and others have identified benefits when inservice for early childhood specialists focuses directly on early child development, ways to achieve program continuity, and ways to involve and work with parents.

Different curriculum models. Should young children receive instruction in school-related skills in the spirit of fostering familiarity with academic activities, or should attention to academic skill building be left for later in their school experience? Should they select most of their own activities or should these be teacher selected and directed?

This matter of the relative merits of different program models is probably the most controversial issue in the early childhood education field. Considerable research effort has been put forth to determine whether young children benefit more from programmed learning programs (such as Distar), open framework programs (such as High/Scope), child-centered programs (a traditional nursery school approach), or some other program model.

Some researchers have compared different preschool program approaches and found one or another of them to be superior to others. For example, Huston-Stein, et al. (1977) found that less-structured programs with more child-selected activities to be more beneficial than other approaches in fostering imagination, task persistence, and independence. Other investigators have found, not surprisingly, that more didactic, academically oriented programs produce greater shortterm cognitive gains than other models (Schweinhart, et al. 1986; Gersten 1986; Huston-Stein, et al. 1977). On the other hand, Schweinhart, et al. (1986) found that teenagers who had participated in didactic programs as small children engaged in far more negative social behavior when they grew older.

While these findings need to be considered, a more frequently drawn conclusion of the comparative research is that all of these approaches can be effective if they include the previously cited elements which seem critical to program success. Some researchers (Powell 1986; Miller and Dyer 1975) have identified differential effects of program models based on subject area and sex of participant, but most investigators have determined that the major preschool curriculum models can all confer cognitive and noncognitive benefits if they provide inservice for teachers and aides, involve parents, keep to small class size, and maintain program continuity. At the conclusion of their investigations of different approaches, Lazar and Darlington (1982) state

See also Early Childhood Education 466 1 - 12