2010-2011 sulzberger distinguished lecture...

FALL 2010

Four world-renowned social science

experts will be speaking as part

of the Center’s 2010-2011 Sulzberger

Distinguished Lecture Series. The

speakers include education expert John

Q. Easton; Kelly Brownell, a leader in

research on obesity and health policy;

early childhood expert Joan Lombardi;

and social epidemiologist Ichiro Kawachi.

Easton began the series September

22 with a talk entitled “Out of the

Tower, into the Schools: How Relevant

Research Can Transform School

Practice and Shape Education Policy.”

On October 28, Brownell presents

“Bold Actions to Reduce Childhood

Obesity.” The series continues in

2011 with Lombardi’s talk on March 1:

“Early Childhood 2011 - Policies for the

Next Generation.” Kawachi completes

the series on April 5 with his lecture

“Income Inequality and Population

Health. Dispatches from a Contested

Field of Research.”

The lectures are held from 3 to

4:30 p.m., with a reception following.

The events, which are free and open

to the public, take place in the Rhodes

Conference Room of the Sanford

School of Public Policy building, 201

Science Drive, on Duke’s West Campus.

The Center for Child and Family

Policy sponsors the Sulzberger

Distinguished Lecture Series to

enhance the intellectual community

not only for its own faculty, research

scientists and staff, but also for Duke

University broadly, Durham and the

entire region. All of the speakers are

world-renowned experts who have

demonstrated unrivaled excellence in

behavioral science and theory, as well

as in science-to-policy applications.

John Q. Easton is director of

the Institute of Education Sciences

(IES) at the U.S. Department of

Education. He began his six-year term

as director in June 2009. The IES is

the nation’s engine for educational

research, evaluation, assessment

and statistics, funding hundreds of

research studies on ways to improve

academic achievement, conducting

2010-2011 Sulzberger Distinguished Lecture Series by Erika Hanzely-Layko

2 Message from the Director_____________________________________

4 Research_____________________________________

5 Teaching_____________________________________

8 Policy_____________________________________

12 Service_____________________________________

13 Announcements_____________________________________

14 Faculty and Researcher News_____________________________________

16 Publications_____________________________________

18 Presentations

Continued on page 3

Donald Barringer, NCCU Teaching Fellows Program Director; Ethan Smith, Matthew West, Monique Smith, Dietrich EsDorn, Donovan Harbison – NCCU Junior and Senior Teaching Fellows – pictured with John Easton.

2 Fall 2010

From the Director

Dear Colleagues, Being a faculty member at Duke is a pretty wonderful lot in life. Each day brings us opportunities to interact with and learn from some of the most creative minds in all of child and family policy. This issue of Bridge focuses on education policy and reports just a few of the many faculty activities that we get to hear about on a regular basis.

We like to think that we have assembled the most outstanding group of scholars in education anywhere outside of a school of education. Being at a university that does not have a separate school of education might actually encourage the strong multi-disciplinary scholarship that our faculty members exemplify. Our contributions are directed toward solving difficult problems in contemporary education and schooling, rather than being driven and bound by professional constraints and interests.

One important problem concerns policies about the use of standardized achievement tests that are mandated by the federal No Child Left Behind Act. Do these test scores validly indicate progress toward important outcomes in human capital, such as high school graduation, post-secondary education, labor market participation, early child bearing, delinquency, and criminal activity? Although test scores modestly predict student outcomes, the impact is not as strong as current policies would suggest, and other factors play important roles in student development. Financial support from the Smith Richardson Foundation enables our faculty members to investigate these questions using data from the 1.4 million students and 100,000 teachers in North Carolina public schools that have been linked in various ways to other administrative data sets. These data sets have been archived at our Center for Child and Family Policy under the leadership of Clara Muschkin. Read about her in this issue.

The data sets for this faculty work group are managed with the expertise of Kara Bonneau, Dorothyjean Cratty, and Sharon Eatmon. The faculty group is led by Charlie Clotfelter, and Duke participants include Liz Ananat, Phil Cook, William “Sandy” Darity, myself, Anna Gassman-Pines, Christina Gibson-Davis, Helen “Sunny” Ladd, Clara Muschkin, Seth Sanders, and Jake Vigdor.

In this issue, a policy report co-authored by one of our senior faculty members, Ladd, is highlighted and addresses an important question: Should student test scores be used to evaluate teacher performance and effectiveness?

Another important problem concerns

suspension policies for student misconduct. With funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse, faculty members at the Center’s Transdisciplinary Prevention Research Center, directed by psychologists Phil Costanzo and Rick Hoyle, are examining basic questions about the causes and consequences of student misbehavior, such as: How do genes and early adverse environments interact to lead to antisocial behavior? (By the way, with Avshalom Caspi, Jane Costello, Ahmad Hariri, and Terrie Moffitt on board, the world’s leading group of scholars on this topic is here at Duke.) What role does early truancy play in the pathway toward ultimate school dropout? (With Phil Cook leading a group on this question, major headway is being made.) What interventions are efficacious in preventing student misbehavior? And what school policies about suspensions and expulsions are most effective? In this issue, we highlight the activities of Center staff members in bringing scientific knowledge about these questions to policy makers. Jenni Owen, Joel Rosch, Clara Muschkin, and Anne-Marie Iselin recently led the annual Family Impact Seminar on this topic for the North Carolina State Legislature, and Jenni Owen teamed up with a local elected member of the Durham Public Schools Board of Education, Heidi Carter, to produce an op-ed piece on this topic.

Unfortunately, this issue of Bridge has room enough to describe only a small sampling of the full activities of Center faculty members in education policy. We were not able to report the research by Nicholas School of the Environment economist Marie-Lynn Miranda on the effects of exposure to lead on student academic achievement… or the op-ed piece by Bill Wilson and Cindy Kuhn that ran in newspapers across North America on using health education curricula to help students “take care of their brain” … or research by David Rabiner documenting the use of pharmacologic stimulants by college students to improve their academic performance… or the research by Beth Gifford, Lisa Berlin, and Leslie Babinski evaluating the impact of the national group America’s Promise Alliance on stimulating policies to improve high school graduation rates… or evaluation of school-based interventions to improve academic success for learning disabled students by Christina Christopoulos, David Rabiner, Liz Snyder, and Nicole Lawrence, or… more later.

Philip Costanzo

Associate Director for Mentoring and Teaching

E. Jane Costello

Associate Director for Research

Rick Hoyle

Associate Director for Data Services

Clara Muschkin

Director of CCS Certificate Program

Jenni Owen

Associate Director for Policy and Translation

Barbara Black Pollock

Associate Director for Administration

David Rabiner

Associate Director for Program Evaluation Services

Kenneth A. Dodge

Director, Center for Child and Family PolicyWilliam McDougall Professor of Public Policy and

Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience

3www.childandfamilypolicy.duke.edu

2010-2011 Sulzberger Distinguished Lecture Series Continued from page 1

large-scale evaluations of federal

education programs, and reporting a

wide array of statistics on the condition

of education. Throughout his career,

Easton has directed rigorous projects

aimed at providing the best evidence

about what it takes to spark meaningful

policy debate and sustained change in

urban schools. In 1990, Easton was a

founding member of the Consortium

on Chicago School Research (CCSR)

at the University of Chicago, a

research organization whose mission

is to rigorously analyze the policies that

govern Chicago Public Schools. For two

decades, he was a key member, and

eventually director, of the consortium

as its research guided policies for

Chicago’s schools and districts around

the country. Easton is the author or

coauthor of numerous reports and

articles, and two books: Charting

Chicago School Reform: Democratic

Localism as a Lever for Change and

Organizing Schools for Improvement:

Lessons from Chicago.

Kelly Brownell is a professor in

the Department of Psychology at Yale

University, where he also serves as

professor of epidemiology and public

health and as director of the Rudd

Center for Food Policy and Obesity. His

research deals primarily with obesity

and the intersection of behavior,

environment and health with public

policy. In 2006 Time magazine listed

Brownell among “The World’s 100

Most Influential People” in its special

Time 100 issue featuring those “...

whose power, talent or moral example

is transforming the world.” He was

cited as a “moral entrepreneur” with

special influence on public discourse

in a history of the obesity field and was

cited as a leading “warrior” in the area

of nutrition and public policy. Brownell

has advised members of congress,

governors, world health and nutrition

organizations and media leaders on

issues of nutrition, obesity and public

policy. He has published 14 books,

including Food Fight: The Inside Story

of the Food Industry, America’s Obesity

Crisis, and What We Can Do about It,

which he wrote with Katherine Battle

Horgen, and more than 300 scientific

articles and chapters.

Joan Lombardi, a national and

international expert on early childhood,

is deputy assistant secretary and inter-

departmental liaison for Early Childhood

Development for the Administration

for Children and Families (ACF) under

the U.S. Department of Health and

Human Services. Lombardi was

founding chair of the Birth to Five

Policy Alliance and, prior to that,

served during the 1990s in ACF as

deputy assistant secretary for policy

and external affairs, the first associate

commissioner of the Child Care

Bureau, and the project director of the

Secretary’s Advisory Committee on

Head Start. She has been an advisor

on early childhood development to

a number of organizations, including

the Buffett Early Childhood Fund, the

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation

and UNICEF. Lombardi is the author of

Time to Care: Redesigning Child Care to

Promote Education, Support and Build

Communities, and co-editor of A Beacon

of Hope: The Promise of Early Head Start

for American’s Youngest Children.

Ichiro Kawachi is professor of

social epidemiology and chair of

the Department of Society, Human

Development, and Health at the

Harvard School of Public Health.

He is also the director of the Harvard

Center for Society and Health. Kawachi

has studied the social determinants

of population health and health

disparities. For the past decade he has

been conducting investigations on

the damaging health consequences

of growing inequality, summarized in

the book, The Health of Nations (with

Bruce Kennedy). Kawachi has taught

internationally, in Australia, Mexico,

Chile, Taiwan and New Zealand. He

is a member of the research advisory

committee of the Pan-American Health

Organization/WHO and serves as the

senior editor (Social Epidemiology) of

the journal Social Science & Medicine, as

well as Editor pro tem of the American

Journal of Epidemiology. t

_____________________________________

The Sulzberger Distinguished Lecture

Series, begun in 2006, is endowed by

the Arthur Sulzberger Family.

For more information or to register, call

(919) 613-9350, e-mail ehlayko@duke.

edu or visit www.childandfamilypolicy.

duke.edu.

Erika Hanzely-Layko is the Center’s

meeting and event coordinator.

BrownellEaston KawachiLombardi

4 Fall 2010

Student test scores are not reliable

indicators of teacher effectiveness,

even with the addition of value-added

modeling (VAM), according to a new

Economic Policy Institute report.

Though VAM methods have allowed

for more sophisticated comparisons

of teachers than were possible in

the past, they are still inaccurate, so

test scores should not dominate the

information used by school officials

in making high-stakes decisions

about the evaluation, discipline and

compensation of teachers.

Among the 10 co-authors of

the report, Problems with the Use

of Student Test Scores to Evaluate

Teachers, is Helen F. Ladd, Edgar T.

Thompson Distinguished Professor

at the Sanford School of Public Policy

and president-elect of the Association

for Public Policy Analysis and

Management.

The Obama administration has

encouraged states to adopt laws that

use student test scores as a significant

component in evaluating teachers, and

a number of states have done so. The

Los Angeles Times recently used value-

added methods to evaluate teachers in

the Los Angeles Unified School District

based on the test scores of its students,

and Secretary of Education Arne

Duncan supported the paper’s decision

to publicly release this information,

asserting that parents have a right to

know how effective their teachers are.

The conclusions of the EPI report

suggest that the Times’ analysis,

which attempts to analyze teacher

effectiveness, is unreliable and

inaccurate. The co-authors make clear

that accuracy and reliability of analyses

of student test scores, even in their

most sophisticated form, are highly

problematic.

Analyses of VAM results show that

they are often unstable across time,

classes and tests. Thus, test scores,

even with the addition of VAM, are

not accurate indicators of teacher

effectiveness. Student test scores

cannot fully account for the wide

range of factors that influence student

learning, particularly the backgrounds

of students, school supports and the

effects of summer learning loss. As a

result, teachers who teach students with

the greatest educational needs appear

to be less effective than they are.

Furthermore, VAM does not take into

account nonrandom sorting of teachers

to students across schools and students

to teachers within schools.

The authors point to other negative

consequences of using test scores

to evaluate teacher performance:

Teachers have an incentive to “teach

to the test;” incentives to collaborate

within schools are reduced; and

teacher morale can suffer.

The authors conclude that,

“Although standardized test scores of

students are one piece of information

that school leaders may use to make

judgments about teacher effectiveness,

test scores should be only a small

part of an overall comprehensive

evaluation.”

The report’s co-authors are:

Eva L. Baker, Paul E. Barton, Linda

Darling-Hammond, Edward Haertel,

Helen F. Ladd, Robert L. Linn, Diane

Ravitch, Richard Rothstein, Richard J.

Shavelson and Lorrie A. Shepard. t

___________________________________

Reprinted by permission. For complete

version see Education Policy Institute.

Contact: Phoebe Silag or Karen Conner,

[email protected], (202) 775-8810

Education Experts Caution Against Reliance on Test Scores in Teacher Evaluations

Student test scores cannot fully account for the wide

range of factors that influence student learning, particularly the

backgrounds of students, school supports and the effects of summer

learning loss. As a result, teachers who teach students with the

greatest educational needs appear to be less effective than they are.

RESEARCH

Ladd


Clara Muschkin, an Interdisciplinary Scholar by Nancy E. Oates

An interdisciplinary scholar, Muschkin appreciates the

cross-disciplinary nature of the certificate program . . .

TEACHING

Clara Muschkin sums up the

popularity of the cornerstone course

for the Children in Contemporary Society

certificate program this way: Everyone’s

been a child; many will have children;

all will go to school.

Add to that the increased scrutiny of

where scarce public sources are invested

in this tight economy, and it’s no wonder

the course she created and teaches fills

up so quickly each semester.

“Many Duke students are going to be

policymakers in one realm or another,”

Muschkin said. “At some point in their

future, this program or course will

make a difference.”

Muschkin, assistant research

professor of public policy at the

Sanford School of Public Policy,

took over in July as director of the

interdisciplinary certificate program

that began in 2007. She adds that

title to the directorships she already

holds in the undergraduate education

program at the Center for Child and

Family Policy and the North Carolina

Education Research Data Center.

“Duke is so fortunate to have

Professor Muschkin’s leadership in

undergraduate education. She is

crucial to the success of our students,”

said Ken Dodge, director of the Center

for Child and Family Policy.

In creating the program’s

cornerstone course (CCS 150/PubPol

124), Muschkin looked at the social/

institutional context in which children

live and how that influences their

lives. The class examines what defines

childhood across history and how

that definition varies in different parts

of the world. Participants debate the

cutoff age or maturity benchmark

in the transition from childhood to

adulthood and consider how the

economic value of children influences

children’s circumstances, family

formation and the resources a society

will invest in children.

An interdisciplinary scholar,

Muschkin appreciates the cross-

disciplinary nature of the certificate

program, as well as the program’s

opportunity to conduct in-depth

research, which many students

develop into their senior honors thesis.

The program draws students from

a variety of specializations, including

psychology, public policy, pre-med,

English, engineering and sciences.

Sarah Rabiner ’10 was one of the

10 students to earn the certificate

in May and now is a teaching fellow at

Citizen Schools, a national nonprofit

that provides a “second shift” of

educators targeting high-risk students

in low-income communities. Rabiner

was impressed by the breadth of

Muschkin’s knowledge behind her

gentle demeanor and her dedication

to her students’ success.

“For a while, while I was working

on my thesis, we met every week, and

I wasn’t even her student anymore,”

Rabiner said. “She always asked the

right questions. Her approach was to

steer you along the right path while

making you feel it was your doing.”

“She opened my eyes to what I

wanted to do,” Rabiner continued.

“You walk out of her class, and you’re

super-stimulated; you have a lot to

talk about on the walk to dinner.”

Muschkin’s Duke roots run

deep. Except for a couple of brief

forays elsewhere, she has been at

Duke since her days as a doctoral

student in sociology. She accepted

a postdoctoral fellowship at Duke’s

Center for Demographic Studies in the

epidemiology of aging, then a research

position in demographic studies. In

2002, she joined Duke’s Center for Child

and Family Policy and in 2008 joined the

Sanford School of Public Policy.

In her research, Muschkin uses

large administrative data files to

examine how policies can influence

individual student outcomes. She has

studied whether sixth grade should be

part of middle school or elementary

school and whether parents in North

Carolina schools react with white flight

to increased Hispanic immigration.

She has researched enrollment and

success in community colleges and

the relationship between school

experience and criminal convictions.

“The more educated people are about

the relationship between a policy and the

outcome on individuals,” Muschkin said,

“the more likely it is that resources will

be used efficiently.” t

Muschkin

6 Fall 2010

Youth, Crime and Public Policy (CCS 49S)Instructor: Joel Rosch, Senior Research Scholar

First-year seminar for students

interested in learning more

about public policies dealing

with crimes committed by

young people. This course uses

crimes as a focus to introduce

students to the variety of

issues involved in child and

family policy. Students will

learn about juvenile crime, the

criminal justice system, how public policy is made, what

different kinds of research tell us about juvenile crime, and

the role of research in the policy making process. Students

also learn about: 1) how juvenile crime policy is impacted

by different kinds of societal values; 2) how the nature and

“causes” of criminal behaviors are understood; and 3) the

kinds of resources and technologies different societies have

at their disposal. t

Children in Contemporary Society (CCS 150/PubPol 124)Instructor: Clara Muschkin, Assistant Research Professor of Public Policy Studies; Director, Children in Contemporary Society Certificate Program

What does it mean to be a child in the 21st century? Using an

interdisciplinary approach, this course provides an overview

of issues facing today’s youth, from childhood through

adolescence. Students begin by exploring social forces

that shape the definition of childhood across place and time

and review how different disciplines study children. They then

consider the many social contexts of childhood, including

the family, schools, the economy, the media and the

dynamics of race and gender. One of the objectives of this

course is to gain an understanding of issues of childhood

adversity—including poverty, violence, delinquency

and health inequities—and how some public policies

are addressing these issues. In fall 2010, students have the

opportunity to participate in a research service learning

component coordinated by the Hart Leadership Program.

Participation in the service learning component is optional.

This course is required for students working on the Children

in Contemporary Society certificate. t

Multidisciplinary Approaches to Contemporary Children’s Issues (CCS 210SA/PubPol 210SA/Psy 210SA)Instructor: Phil Costanzo, Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience

Two-semester course during which students will identify

a problem facing children in contemporary society and

learn how to analyze its historical, political, economic,

psychological and sociological contributions. They will

learn how to conduct a policy analysis and translate their

scholarship to policy solutions. In addition, students will

learn how to present their analyses in oral, academic and

lay-public forums. Capstone course required for the Children

in Contemporary Society Certificate program. t

Fall 2010 CoursesTEACHING

Rosch

Muschkin

Costanzo

“Our Center is committed to

involving Duke students in the

scholarly research it conducts,”

said Ken Dodge, director of the

Center for Child and Family Policy,

“and the students benefit by their

involvement in cutting-edge research.

We are fortunate to have such well-

qualified fellows this year.”

These fellowships are made

possible through generous donations

by the Sulzberger family, which has

made significant contributions to

society through publishing The New

York Times and is now contributing

to the development of outstanding

scholars in child and family policy,

and by Dan Levitan, a 1979 Duke

graduate and co-founder of Maveron,

a Washington State-based venture

capital firm. t

Sulzberger Family and Dan Levitan Social Policy Graduate Research Fellowships

TEACHING

The Center for Child and Family Policy selected five doctoral students as graduate

research fellows for 2010-11. The fellowships encourage the career development

of promising students who are interested in academic careers that blend basic social

science with public policy.

The 2010-2011 Sulzberger/Levitan Social Policy Graduate Research Fellows are: Erin Kim public policy studies Dimitri Putilin psychology and neuroscience Maeve Gearingpublic policy studies Kate Snyderpsychology and neuroscience Amy Sanchez (not pictured)psychology and neuroscience

Making Social Policy (CCS 270S/PubPol 234S/Soc 234S)

Instructor: Jenni Owen, Associate Director for Policy and Translation and Director of Policy Initiatives

Looking at a range of social

policy issues, this course

focuses on 1) the policymaking

process; 2) the role of different

sectors in policymaking (public,

non-profit, etc.); 3) when and

why policymakers use research – and when and why they

don’t; and 4) communicating with policymakers. The course

exposes students to current social policy challenges stemming

from health and human services, education and other

domains. Readings include research, policy and practice

articles and analyses from multiple disciplines. Experiential

and written exercises will help students develop skills for

using research to inform policy and practice. The course

includes visits from policymakers and visits to policymaking

“events,” student work that combines policy and research

considerations; and the potential for students to contribute

useable insights to policymakers and others. Students will

learn about the value of research in informing policy and

the constraints within which policymaking occurs. They will

complete independent and group assignments that combine

their knowledge from the readings with their observations

of “live” policy events. t

Owen


8 Fall 2010

“Stimulating” and “relevant”

best describe the 2010 North

Carolina Family Impact Seminar held

at the North Carolina legislature on

April 27. The seminar focused on

school suspension policy—an issue

that has recently received media

attention, in part due to North Carolina

having the third highest rate and

fourth highest number of K-12 school

suspensions in the nation. Addressing

the issue is a priority for legislators,

education leaders, and a range of

other stakeholders because of the

impact suspension has on academic

achievement and future employment.

Seminar attendees included legislators,

legislative staff, executive branch

officials, representatives of child- and

family-serving nonprofit agencies,

Department of Public Instruction

representatives, researchers, school

board members, legal experts, and

college students. Attendees were

highly invested in the topic and

engaged in a spirited discussion

about how they might address

the challenging issue of school

suspension. As with all N.C. Family

Impact Seminars, this one was in

response to policymaker interest and

sought to highlight what the research

says about a current issue, as well as

giving recommendations for possible

policy action.

Presenters provided participants

with research and policy evidence

on school suspension and offered

recommendations for possible

policy and practice enhancements.

Presentations covered:

• The importance of examining

school suspension

• The legal issues that frame

suspension policy

• The data on suspension policy

from 14 southern states

• The research evidence on

the effects of suspension and

alternatives to suspension

• North Carolina data on the nature

of suspension and its effects

• Possible policy approaches

for addressing the suspension

problem.

Before reviewing the seminar

highlights, it is useful to briefly review

the nature of suspension in North

Carolina. There are multiple types of

suspension, including short-term (up to

10 days), long-term (over 10 days), and

365-day suspension. Misbehaviors that

could lead to short-term suspension are

highly variable across districts, including

(but not limited to) repeated violations

of cell phone use, chronically disruptive

behaviors, gambling, distribution of

prescription or non-prescription drugs,

fighting, bullying, horseplay, and altering

report cards (i.e., falsifying information).

More serious and repeated misbehaviors

lead to long-term suspensions and

include such behaviors as physical

assault causing serious injury, theft,

breaking and entering, sexual activity,

alcohol or drug use, refusal to allow

a search of possessions, and gang

activity. Misbehaviors that lead to 365-day

suspension may include possession of a

firearm, physical assault causing serious

injury to a student or school personnel,

use of a controlled substance, and

communicating a bomb or terrorist threat.

Districts must have an appeals

policy and must have an alternative

education setting that may be used

for suspended students. Districts

decide whether a suspended student

will receive the alternative education

option. Some alternative education

programs include activities to

alleviate the misbehaviors that lead

to the suspension, in addition to

academically-focused activities. The

state has no figures on the percentage

of suspended students who receive

alternative placements.

Seminar Highlights

The seminar started with Jenni

Owen, director of policy initiatives

at the Center for Child and Family

Policy (CCFP), noting the importance

of examining school suspension

from both research and policy

perspectives. Owen highlighted the

2010 N.C. Family Impact Seminar School Suspension in North Carolina: Research and Policy Options by Anne-Marie Iselin

To contextualize the suspension policy and practices of North

Carolina, Joel Rosch, senior research scholar and policy liaison at

CCFP, discussed policies and practices from 14 southern states.

POLICY


challenges that policymakers face,

especially the challenges of meeting

the needs of students, schools, and

communities while also infusing

disciplinary approaches with evidence-

based practices. She noted that these

challenges are especially complex,

given that resources are limited and

that reconciling statewide standards

with desires to allow local control over

practices is a formidable task. Owen

suggested that suspension policies

should have minimum standards while

also being flexible, allowing for a range

of evidence-based options to address

individual student needs. To do this,

she recommended building on existing

community partnerships as well as

forging new ones.

Ann McColl, a practicing attorney

focusing on school law and a faculty

member at the UNC School of

Government, summarized the legal

aspects of suspension that frame

policy and practice. She gave details

on several key issues including the

responsibilities of maintaining safe

school environments, of ensuring the

accountability of school personnel in

maintaining school safety, of providing

professional development to school

personnel, and of providing an array

of mechanisms to address the unique

behavioral needs of students.

To contextualize the suspension

policy and practices of North Carolina,

Joel Rosch, senior research scholar

and policy liaison at CCFP, discussed

policies and practices from 14 southern

states. He emphasized that state and

local policy is crucial to understanding

the nature of suspension. Rosch noted

that some states require that alternative

learning opportunities be provided to

students while they are suspended.

After discussing the state of

suspension in North Carolina, Anne-

Marie Iselin, research scientist at CCFP,

reviewed the research evidence on

school suspension and alternatives

to suspension. She reported that the

evidence suggests that suspension

has more negative than positive

effects on students and schools. Iselin

commented that research suggests

that alternatives to suspension should

be used as frequently as possible.

She highlighted that suspension

rates are related to factors that cut

across and interact with student,

teacher, administrative, institutional,

and community characteristics. Iselin

concluded by saying that research

supports school-wide practices that are

positive, collaborative, consistent, and

sensitive to individual student needs.

Clara Muschkin, assistant research

professor of public policy studies,

followed with a discussion of data

from the North Carolina Education

Research Data Center, which she

directs. She commented that there

has been an increase in the use of

short-term suspension and a decrease

in the use of long-term suspension

over time. The use of suspension,

however, varies drastically across

school districts. Muschkin highlighted

that the increased use of suspension

is strongly related to (1) decreased

student achievement, (2) decreased

student progression within grade

level, and (3) increased probability

of dropping out of school. She

suggested that policies aimed at

reducing suspension should evaluate

both cross-school and cross-district

characteristics, in addition to

evaluating student characteristics.

She concluded by noting that academic

support is often a necessary component

of successful policy for reducing

suspension use.

The seminar concluded with a

lively discussion among presenters

and participants who asked important

questions about a range of suspension

issues, such as tracking suspension

data across the state, and whether there

are models of promising alternatives

to suspension that could be replicated

district- or state-wide. The briefing

materials that accompanied the

seminar and address some of the

issues raised are available at http://

www.childandfamilypolicy.duke.edu/

engagement/ncfis_2010.php t

___________________________________

Special thanks to all who helped with or participated in the event: Kara Bonneau, D.J. Cratty, Anne Fletcher, Muping Gan, Jonah Garson, Tamie Harbison, Anne-Marie Iselin, Erika Layko, Ann McColl, Clara Muschkin, Jenni Owen, Joel Rosch and Shannon Smith. Anne-Marie Iselin is a clinical psychologist and research scientist in the Center for Child and Family Policy.

The seminar concluded with a lively discussion among presenters

and participants who asked important questions about a range

of suspension issues, such as tracking suspension data across

the state, and whether there are models of promising alternatives

to suspension that could be replicated district- or state-wide.

10 Fall 2010

“School’s out for the summer”

was the happy refrain for most

K-12 students across North Carolina last

June. But for students suspended for

disciplinary infractions, school ended

days, weeks, even months earlier.Research shows that suspended

students are more likely to drop out of school, to exhibit behavioral problems and to be involved with crime. Social deviance, isolation, poor academic achievement and unemployment are also more likely, making this everyone’s problem —taxpayers, employers and the public at large.

Recent data show North Carolina with the third-highest rate and fourth-highest number of suspensions in the nation. In 2008-09, more than 150,000 students in our state received short-term (up to 10 days) suspensions. Nearly 2,500 received suspensions of over 10 days. That’s a minimum of two weeks of school. In many cases, the same student received multiple suspensions.

With a new school year about to begin, the suspension problem deserves attention. Consider these two hypothetical but realistic scenarios: Scenario 1: Three students are each suspended for 25 days. As part of the suspension, one is required to spend two hours per day at a tutoring center. The second student must attend a full-time alternative school. And the third student is not required to do any educational activity while suspended.

This scenario highlights two challenges with the current suspension landscape. First, while school districts in North Carolina must have alternatives for suspended students, they are not required to offer those alternatives to every suspended student. Second, following current reporting practices, while all three students would be logged as long-term suspended students, the dramatic differences among their suspension requirements would not be reported.

Scenario 2: Two classrooms each have 10 girls. In classroom A, five girls were suspended one time during the school year. In classroom B, one girl was suspended five times. The problem this scenario illustrates is that in both cases, the suspension rate for girls is reported as 50 percent, even though one classroom had five out of 10 girls suspended, and the other had only one.

Policymakers and education leaders are grappling with what to do about the “suspension problem.” But how can they develop sound policy when scenarios like these lose their differences when officially reported? Strategies might focus on an entire class when the problem involves only a few students. Conversely, one might assume from reports that a few students are responsible for most of the bad behavior, when in fact it involves many students.

Policies and strategies for addressing high rates of suspension can be misguided because of misinterpreted data.

What should education and policy leaders do?

At the state policy level, revised reporting guidelines could include details of infractions and their consequences to differentiate among them more specifically, thereby painting a more realistic picture of the suspension problem from which policy can be developed.

At the school level, innovative alternatives to suspension are possible.

In Durham, Southwest Elementary is using a new strategy that had a huge impact in its first year. As an alternative to suspension, students continue to attend class but serve after-school detention for as many days as they would have been suspended. If parents decline this alternative, the student is suspended.

Parents have opted for suspension over detention only twice. Southwest has seen a 75 percent drop in suspensions and roughly a 50 percent decrease in the

number of students committing offenses that would merit suspension. As principal Ari Cohen says, “The best thing for children is to stay in school, not to be at home missing days of instruction. The detention alternative is not only keeping students in school, but we think it is also preventing many behavioral infractions from occurring in the first place.”

Ideally, schools, families and communities work together to prevent suspension through strong partnerships, effective positive behavior support programs and services for students and families. We endorse consequences that are appropriate and reformative for problem behaviors, but we believe alternatives exist that could decrease suspensions and the negative outcomes associated with them.

Cohen’s approach is one alternative. Another is a sanction where students perform a needed service to the school or the community at-large. Business and nonprofit leaders —students’ future employers —could be enlisted to offer other settings for productive and educational “punishments.”

A district may not have enough alternative education opportunities for every suspended student. But with a new school year about to begin, one thing is clear: suspension to idleness —forced truancy —should not be an option. With innovative alternatives to suspension, more students will truly be able to say, “School’s out for the summer.” t

___________________________________

Heidi Carter is vice chair of the Durham Public Schools Board of Education; Jenni Owen is the director of policy initiatives at Duke’s Center for Child and Family Policy. Both are parents of students in the Durham Public Schools.

This op-ed originally appeared in the August 19, 2010, issue of the News and Observer and the September 4, 2010, issue of the Durham Herald-Sun.

Getting a Handle on Suspension by Jenni Owen and Heidi Carter

POLICY


Last spring, Elizabeth Ananat, assistant professor of public policy and economics

and faculty fellow of the Center for Child and Family Policy, was in the middle of her yearlong sabbatical at the Brookings Institution when an unexpected call came. She was asked to serve as a senior economist for the White House Council of Economic Advisers for three months.

The council’s three members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, and they are supported by six senior economists and a group of junior staffers. The senior economists usually serve for a year; however, the early departure of an economist left a three-month gap that needed to be filled. A common expression among White House employees, Ananat reports, is that each agency is running “a relay race where we’re always looking for fresh legs.”

Beginning on April 15, 2010, Ananat stepped into the relay carrying the portfolio for labor, education and welfare. By her third day, she was preparing a briefing for the president. “It was a steep learning curve,” Ananat said.

Among her responsibilities was working with the chair of the council, Christy Romer, and others to prepare the monthly employment memo, which reports the growth in the number of jobs in the U.S. since the previous month. The day before release of the memo all communication about it had to be done on secure lines, so that no information would leak and affect the stock market. A hard copy would be delivered to the president in the evening, prior to the release of the data to the media the next morning.

Ananat also helped prepare other memos to the president, including the DEB, or daily economic briefing, a one-page of bullet points designed to “give the president everything he needs to know about the day’s economic news, without anything extra.” The high point of her service was seeing a briefing she had drafted circulate with President Obama’s handwritten note in the margin, stating, “We need to get this up to the Hill.” The data she had included helped support the creation of the teachers’ jobs bill that passed in August.

Ananat also vetted drafts of presidential speeches and publications on issues including immigration, domestic, civil and legal affairs that touched on labor and education. “One of my jobs was to be ‘the economist in the room’ for many of the discussions around those issues,” Ananat said.

Ananat also represented the White House in an interdepartmental working group tasked with developing a new set of questions for the Current Population Survey about “nontraditional education,” such as classes required by employers, certification programs, and training conducted by community colleges and for-profit colleges.

“We don’t know much about these programs, what’s out there and what is effective in helping people increase their employability and their wages,” she said. Collecting this data will allow researchers to

examine how such programs help with economic mobility. Council member Cecilia Rouse pushed to establish the group, which is led by the Department of Education’s Institute of Educational Sciences and involves IES Director John Easton. (Easton gave the Center’s Sulzberger Distinguished Lecture on September 22.)

The pace of the job was intense. When a question came to her, Ananat often had only a few hours to provide the answer. She rarely left the office before 7 p.m., and then would continue to work on her Blackberry during her Metro commute and after she arrived home. In spite of the demanding schedule, Ananat found the job rewarding.

“It was a very satisfying feeling that you are changing the conversation, that the things you know matter,” she said. “This is the most evidence-based administration ever seen in D.C. People care about having the best possible information. It’s a great environment for policy researchers.”

The experience will inform her teaching this fall. She can now say to her students, “Here’s why you need this tool.” For instance, when she needed to discover how many jobs proposed funding would save, the programming language Stata, which is taught in Sanford’s statistics courses, helped her analyze the data. Data memo writing and documentation skills are crucial, “so you can explain your conclusions clearly to an audience that doesn’t have economic training.” It also provides fresh motivation for her own research, she said. Now she knows that “for every topic I study there are people waiting to hear the answer.” t

_________________________________________________________

Jackie Ogburn is a communications specialist in the Sanford School of Public Policy.

Ananat Serves Stint on White House Council of Economic Advisers by Jackie Ogburn

Ananat

POLICY

12 Fall 2010

Three years ago, Jenni Owen found

herself in Wentworth, South Africa, a

small community outside of Durban, on

a day visit as part of a larger trip through

South Africa as an Eisenhower Fellow.

The community of Wentworth and the

nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)

and families Owen met during her visit

remained in her thoughts after returning

to Duke and her position as director of

policy initiatives and associate director

for policy and translation at the Center

for Child and Family Policy. Through funding from DukeEngage,

Owen has developed a program for Duke students in Wentworth that ties some aspects of the Center’s work to on-the-ground service and learning. This past summer marks Owen’s first year as director of the DukeEngage program in Wentworth, South Africa. Under Owen’s lead, nine Duke students spent eight weeks living with families, serving with local organizations, and immersing themselves in the community.

For many reasons, the community of Wentworth faces unique challenges, which were evident to Owen during her first visit. Pollution associated with local industry has had a significant impact on residents’ health. As an economically diverse community, there are areas where residents live comfortably but also areas of extreme poverty. Wentworth is also distinct as it was initially populated almost exclusively by “coloured” South Africans. Owen identified multiple community partners that welcomed additional support to address the many pressing and diverse issues facing the area.

DukeEngage seemed the perfect vehicle for putting that support into place. The program empowers students to address critical human needs through immersive service, in the process transforming students,

advancing the University’s educational mission, and providing meaningful assistance to communities in the U.S. and abroad.

The Wentworth program focuses on child and family issues, and Owen hopes to connect the program more directly with the Center’s work in the future. During this first year, students worked with a variety of community partners on issues such as domestic violence, education and youth leadership. Although students were in Wentworth for only a short time, they contributed meaningfully to the community. The students’ many projects included:

• Succeeding with the request for one organization’s first computer donation from a local corporation

• Assisting with direct service activities in children’s homes and local schools

• Writing grant proposals

• Aiding the development of a new awards program to highlight the good work of local nongovernmental organizations and businesses.

In addition, students participated in group service projects, including preparing and transforming a trash-strewn plot of land into a productive garden for community members who were seeking assistance through a domestic violence initiative.

Participating in a DukeEngage program is more than just an opportunity for students to engage and serve communities. Over the course of the program, Owen observed that students became better at viewing challenges that arose as part of the cultural learning experience rather than seeing these differences as inconveniences. In addition to learning about and contributing to the Wentworth community,

multiple students expressed that the DukeEngage experience had a significant impact on their lives, whether influencing their cultural perceptions and understanding, their future coursework and involvement at Duke or their long-term professional plans.

Owen intends to run the program again next year. She remarked, “I’m hopeful that we will continue to grow the relationships with the Wentworth community leaders and local NGOs and that this will yield possibilities for additional engagement and collaborative research with the Center and possibly elsewhere at Duke.” Owen acknowledges that without the generosity of the Wentworth community, the DukeEngage program there would not have been possible. To learn more about DukeEngage or this program, please visit http://dukeengage.duke.edu/immersion-programs/international-programs/south-africa-durban. t

___________________________________

Emily Durham is a program coordinator in the DukeEngage office.

Engaging Directly with Children and Families: DukeEngage in Durban, South Africa by Emily Durham

SERVICE

The members of the University-based Child and Family Policy Consortium consist of centers and programs housed

in universities across the country that represent the social, behavioral and health sciences fields, including anthropology, economics, human development, nursing, pediatrics, political science, psychology, public health and sociology. The consortium, which began in 2002, fosters scientific collaboration around child and family policy issues, cross-disciplinary undergraduate and graduate training, and effective translation between research, practice and policy issues.

Although Jenni Owen, the Center’s director of policy initiatives, has been the part-time director of the consortium since 2008, Deborah Phillips of the psychology department and Public Policy Institute at Georgetown has, until recently, managed the administration of consortium membership and finances. On July 1, the administrative and financial management of the consortium moved to Duke’s Center for Child and Family Policy.

“The Consortium brings together over 30 leading university centers for child and family policy. It is an honor, a responsibility and a reflection of the strong leadership provided by Jenni Owen to have it based at Duke,” commented Ken Dodge, director of the Center. Center staff working with Owen in managing activities includes Barbara Pollock who oversees finances, Shannon Smith who handles administrative duties such as correspondence and scheduling, and Joy Stutts, who assists with the Web site - http://www.childpolicyuniversityconsortium.com/.

Says Consortium steering committee member Phillips, “As one of the founders, with Professor Dodge, of the Consortium, I’ve been thrilled to see the growth in its capacity to have a substantive and lasting impact, not only on the field of child development and social policy but also for the state and federal policymakers who make decisions every day that affect the well-being of our nation’s children and families.” t

Administration of the University-Based Child and Family Policy Consortium Moved to Duke

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Research Scientist Ben Goodman is working with Center Director Ken Dodge on the Durham Family Initiative (funded by The Duke Endowment), as well as the NIDA-funded project entitled “The Development and Prevention of Substance Use Problems.” His primary responsibilities involve leading research examining the implementation of the Durham Connects program, as well as subsequent evaluations of its impact on Durham families. Prior to joining the Center for Child and Family Policy, Goodman was a postdoctoral scholar at Penn State’s Prevention Research Center, working with Dr. Mark Greenberg on a longitudinal study of child development among families living in predominantly low-income, rural communities. Goodman completed his Ph.D. in human development and family studies at Penn State in December 2009. His research focuses broadly on the influence of stress and support on the quality of parent-child relationships and parents’ own well-being, including the factors that contribute to fathers’ relationships with their infants and young children; the study of family processes among low-income and underrepresented populations; and the use of person-oriented methodologies to examine patterns of family dynamics and parent-child relationships. t Amy Schulting is a newly hired research scientist working with Ken Dodge and Phil Cook on the TPRC-funded pilot project entitled “Truancy: Social costs, causes, and prevention.” The truancy pilot project has been utilizing Fast Track data to better understand both the patterns and correlates of school truancy over time, with a particular emphasis on understanding early elementary truancy. In addition to earning her Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Duke in May 2010, Schulting also earned the child development certificate. Her dissertation was entitled “The Kindergarten Home Visit Project: A Kindergarten Transition Intervention Study.” She will be working from her home office in Minnesota. t

New Researchers Join Center on July 1, 2010

FACULTY AND RESEARCHER NEWS

Goodman

Schulting


14 Fall 2010

Two Duke faculty members have joined the TPRC executive committee: CCFP Faculty Fellow Phil Cook, who is senior associate dean for faculty and research, ITT/Sanford Professor of Public Policy, professor of economics and sociology; and Kathy Sikkema, professor of psychology and neuroscience, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences and director of the Duke Center for AIDS Research, Social and Behavioral Sciences Core. Cook and Sikkema join current executive committee members Phil Costanzo, Jane Costello, Ken Dodge, Rick Hoyle and Tim Strauman. Committee members Linda Burton and Terrie Moffitt are on sabbatical this year. t

New Transdisciplinary Prevention Research Center (TPRC) Executive Committee Members Named


Congratulations to Center Faculty

Fellow Elizabeth Ananat who was

recently named a William T. Grant

Scholar. Ananat is an assistant

professor of public policy and

economics. The William T. Grant

Scholars Program supports promising

early-career researchers from diverse

disciplines who have demonstrated

success in conducting high-quality

research and are seeking to further

develop and broaden their expertise.

Four to six scholars are named each

year. Ananat received $350,000 for her

five-year project entitled, “Economic and

Social Determinents of the Educational,

Occupational, and Residential Choices

of Young Adults.” t

The Parenting Across Cultures project

(PI Jennifer Lansford, Investigator

Ken Dodge, Research Coordinator

Ann Skinner) recently received funding

from the Jacobs Foundation via a

research prize awarded to Laurence

Steinberg, Ph.D. of Temple University.

These new funds will be used to conduct

an assessment of judgment, decision-

making and psychosocial development

in China, Colombia, India, Italy, Jordan,

Kenya, the Philippines, Sweden, Thailand

and the United States. The assessment

includes questions about several

aspects of development that affect the

choices young people make, including

choices to engage in risky and antisocial

behavior. These aspects of development

include impulsivity, foresight, sensation-

seeking, planning and reward salience.

The results will have important policy

implications with respect to issues such

as making judgments about the criminal

responsibility of juvenile offenders

and understanding the age at which

individuals develop the capacities to be

held fully responsible for their actions. t

Funding Awards

Lansford Dodge Skinner

Cook Sikkema



Avshalom Caspi and Terrie Moffitt,

Center faculty fellows and professors of

psychology and neuroscience at Duke,

received $488,916 for a project funded

by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National

Institute of Child Health and Human

Development (NICHD). The major goal

of the four-year project entitled “Social

Inequality and Children’s Mental Health

(The E-risk Longitudinal Twin Study)”

is to explore how social inequalities

influence children’s development. The

research is being conducted on three

levels of analysis: neighborhood, family

and individual. t

Investigators Desiree Murray, CCFP

faculty fellow and assistant professor

of psychiatry and behavioral sciences,

and CCFP Associate Director and

Research Professor of Psychology and

Neuroscience David Rabiner received

$933,878 (direct costs) from the Institute

of Educational Sciences/Department of

Education for a project entitled “Effects

of Classroom Management Training on

Early Learning Skills.” This four-year

project, which began in July 2009, is

a randomized, controlled evaluation of

the Incredible Years Teacher Training

Program on K-2 students’ reading and

math skills and social and emotional

competence. t

Desiree Murray also is implementing

the Incredible Years Teacher Training

Program in one of the inner-city Durham

schools. Funding for her consultant

work comes from Communities

in Schools. t

Clinical psychology graduate student

Shelley Alonso-Marsden, who is

mentored by Center Director Ken

Dodge, recently received four years of

funding for a diversity supplement on

Dodge’s award entitled “Development

and Prevention of Substance Abuse

Problems.” Alonso-Marsden will conduct

studies of the processes through

which early social experiences lead

to healthy or maladaptive outcomes

for children, using the data sets from

the Child Development Project and the

Fast Track Project. The funding also will

support her training in developmental

psychopathology toward the goal of

leading an academic research career. t

Murray Rabiner

Funding AwardsContinued

Psychology graduate student Sandra Nay McCourt has been selected for a one-year appointment as a predoctoral fellow of the Carolina Consortium on Human Development (CCHD). Sandra is mentored by Center Director Ken Dodge and is studying developmental processes that underlie maladjustment or resilience in response to early traumatic experiences. The predoctoral fellowship program is unique in that it provides formal support (i.e., NICHD- sponsored

fellowships) for one year in the final years of doctoral training. This is an optimal point for involvement in the program because, after several years of study, graduate students are well prepared for the undertaking, and they have time for the intense participation of CCHD’s demanding program. t

Grad Student Selected for Fellowship at Carolina Consortium on Human Development

Nay McCourt


Caspi Moffitt

Bowes, L., Maughan, B., Caspi, A., Moffitt, T.E., & Arseneault, L. (2010). Families promote emotional and behavioural resilience to bullying: Evidence of an environmental effect. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51, 809-817.

Caspi, A., Holmes, A., Uher, R., Hariri, A., & Moffitt, T.E., (2010). Genetic sensitivity to the environment: The case of the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTT), and its implications for studying complex diseases and traits. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 509-527.

Danese, A., Caspi, A., Williams, B., Ambler, A., Sugden, K., Mika J., Werts, H., Freeman, J., Pariante, C., Moffitt, T.E., & Arseneault, L. (2010). Biological embedding of stress through inflammation processes in childhood. Molecular Psychiatry advance online publication, 16 February 2010; doi: 10.1038/mp.2010.5. PMID: 20157309.

Houts, R.M., Caspi, A., Pianta, R.C., Arseneault, L., & Moffitt, T.E. (in press). The challenging pupil in the classroom: Child effects on teachers. Psychological Science.

Polanczyk, G., Caspi, A., Houts, R., Kollins, S., Rhode, L.A., Moffitt, T.E. (2010). Extending the ADHD age of onset criterion to 12 years of age: Impact on prevalence and correlates evaluated in a prospectively studied birth cohort. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 49(3), 210-216.

Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (Ken Dodge, member). (2010). The Effects of a Multi-Year Universal Social-Emotional Learning Program: The Role of Student and School Characteristics. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(2), 156-168.

Dodge, K.A., & McCourt, S.N. (2010). Translating models of antisocial behavioral development into efficacious intervention policy to prevent adolescent violence. Developmental Psychobiology, 52(3), 277-285.

Edwards, A.C., Dodge, K.A., Latendresse, S.J., Lansford, J.E., Bates, J.E., Pettit, G.S., Budde, J.P., Goate, A.M., & Dick, D.M. (2010). MAOA-uVNTR and Early Physical Discipline Interact to Influence Delinquent Behavior. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(6), 679-687.

Gibson-Davis, C.M. & Gassman-Pines, A. (2010). Early childhood family structure and mother-child interactions: Variation by race and ethnicity. Developmental Psychology, 46, 151-164.

Lansford, J.E., Dishion, T.J., & Dodge, K.A. (2010). Deviant peer clustering and influence within public school settings: Inadvertent negative outcomes from traditional professional practices. In M.R. Shinn, H.M. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior in a three-tier model including response to intervention. Bethesda, MD: National Association for School Psychologists Press.

Lansford, J.E., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. (2010). Does physical abuse in early childhood predict substance use in adolescence and early adulthood? Child Maltreatment, 15, 190-194.

Yu, T., Pettit, G.S., Lansford, J.E., Dodge, K.A., & Bates, J.E. (2010). The interactive effects of marital conflict and divorce on parent-adult children’s relationships. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 282-292.

Lansford, J.E., Malone, P.S., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. (2010). Developmental cascades of peer rejection, social information processing biases, and aggression during middle school. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 593-602.

Lansford, J.E., Malone, P.S., Dodge, K.A., Chang, L., Chaudhary, N., Tapanya, S., Oburu, P., & Deater-Deckard, K. (2010). Children’s perceptions of maternal hostility as a mediator of the link between discipline and children’s adjustment in four countries. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34, 452–461.

Recent Publications

PUBLICATIONS

16 Fall 2010

Belsky, D., Moffitt, T.E., Arseneault, L., Melchior, M., Caspi, A. (in press). Context and consequences of food insecurity in children’s development. American Journal of Epidemiology.

Moffitt, T.E., Caspi, A., Taylor, A., Kokaua, J., Milne, B.J., Polanczyk, G., & Poulton, R. (2010). How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment. Psychological Medicine, 40, 899-910.

Polanczyk, G., Moffitt, T.E., Arseneault, L., Cannon, M., Ambler, A., Keefe, R.S.E., Houts, R., Odgers, C.L., & Caspi, A. (2010). Childhood psychotic symptoms share etiological and clinical features with adult schizophrenia: Results from a representative birth cohort. Archives of General Psychiatry, 67, 328-338.

Poulton, R., & Moffitt, T.E. (2010). The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study: tips and traps from a 40-year longitudinal study. International Society for the Study of Behavioural Development Newsletter, 57(1).

Reichenberg, A., Caspi, A., Harrington, H.L., Houts, R., Keefe, R.S.E., Murray, R.M., Poulton, R., & Moffitt, T.E. (2010). Static and dynamic cognitive deficits in childhood precede adult schizophrenia: A 30-year study. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167, 160-169.

Rutter, M., Griffiths, S., Belsky, J., Brown, G., Dunn, J., D’Onofrio, B., Eekelaar, J., Ermisch, J., Moffitt, T.E., Gardner, F., Weale, A., & Witherspoon, S. (2010). Social Science and Family Policies. London: The British Academy Press.

Sugden, K., Arseneault, L., Harrington, H.L., Moffitt, T.E., Williams, B.S., Caspi, A. (2010). The serotonin transporter gene moderates the development of emotional problems among children following bullying victimization. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.01.024.

Wong, C.C.Y., Caspi, A., Willliams, B., Craig, I., Houts, R., Ambler, A., Moffitt, T.E., & Mill, J. (2010). A longitudinal study of epigenetic variation in twins. Epigenetics, 5(6), 1-11.

Murray, D.W., Rabiner, D.L., Hardy, K. (accepted with revisions). Teacher Management Questionnaire (TMQ): Development of a self-report measure for at-risk elementary students. Journal of Attention Disorders.

Murray, D.W., Jensen, P.S., Hinshaw, S.P., Wells, K., Wigal, T., & Weisner, T. for the MTA Group (Nov., 2010). Mining the Meanings of ADHD, Treatment, and Substance Use/Abuse: The MTA Turning Points Study. Symposium accepted to the annual meeting of AACAP, New York, NY.

Gallagher, R., Abikoff, H., Wells, K., Murray, D.W. (Nov., 2010). Pushing the Envelope in ADHD Treatment: Testing Promising Psychosocial Interventions for Organizational Skills and Social Behavior. Symposium accepted to the annual meeting of the Association of Behavior and Cognitive Therapy, San Francisco, CA.

Rabiner, D.L., Murray, D.W., Rosen, L., Hardy, K., Skinner, A., Underwood, M. (2010). Instability in teacher ratings of children’s inattentive symptoms: Implications for the assessment of ADHD. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 31(3).

Rabiner, D.L., Murray, D.W., Skinner, A.T., & Malone, P. (2010). A randomized trial of two promising computer-based interventions for students with attention difficulties. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38(1), 131-42.

Fontaine, R.G., Tanha, M., Yang, C., Dodge, K.A., Bates, J.E., & Pettit, G.S. (2010). Does response evaluation and decision (RED) mediate the relation between hostile attributional style and antisocial behavior in adolescence? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 615–626.


Anna Gassman-Pines, professor of public policy and Center faculty fellow, made a presentation at UNC-Greensboro, Department of Human Development and Family Studies, on March 26. The presentation was entitled, “Daily associations between low-income mothers’ nonstandard work schedules and family outcomes.” The study investigated low-income mothers’ daily, nighttime and weekend work and family outcomes. Sixty-one mothers of preschool-aged children reported daily on work hours, mood, mother-child interaction and child behavior for two weeks (N = 724 person-days). Although nighttime and weekend work are both nonstandard schedules, results showed adverse associations of working nighttime hours on family outcomes – more negative mood and mother-child interactions; less positive child behavior – but no relationship between weekend work and family outcomes. The study is currently in press in Family Relations.

In April, CCFP Faculty Fellow Jennifer Lansford delivered a keynote address, “Managing Behavior Problems in Today’s Schools,” at a conference called “Education in a Changing World” in Zarqa, Jordan. Lansford’s address focused on risks associated with aggregating high-risk youth in education settings and promising alternatives that do not aggregate high-risk youth. The conference brought together scholars, practitioners and policymakers from throughout the Middle East to discuss evidence-based best practices in education. In July 2003, Jordan became a leader in education reform in the Middle East when the Ministry of Education launched a major initiative called Education Reform for the Knowledge Economy to achieve sustainable learning outcomes relevant to a knowledge economy. Four major components are part of this broad reform: (1) Reorienting education policy objectives and strategies and reforming governance and administrative systems; (2) Transforming education programs and practices to achieve learning outcomes relevant to a knowledge economy; (3) Supporting the provision of quality physical learning environments; and (4) Promoting school readiness through expanded early childhood education.

CCFP Faculty Fellow and Assistant Research Professor of Public Policy Studies Clara Muschkin attended the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, held in Denver, Colorado, April 30-May 4. She presented a paper (co-authored with Audrey Beck) entitled “Changing Contours of the North Carolina Public Schools: The

Influence of Immigration on Enrollments of Non-Hispanic White Students” in the paper session entitled “Immigration, Migration and Language Policies: Issues in the Education of Latino Students.” The paper focused on the fact that researchers, policymakers and parents share a perception that school composition is a major influence on school quality. An important source of change in school populations is the withdrawal of white and more affluent families in reaction to perceived reallocation of resources toward limited English speakers and a general devaluation of social capital in schools. This study focused on North Carolina, which experienced an increase of over 66 percent in the school-age population of Latino origin between 2000 and 2006, as well as large increases in the proportion of students from poor families, many of whom are Latino. Longitudinal administrative data are used to estimate the impact of immigration on racial, ethnic and socioeconomic composition within and across schools.

The Duke University School Research Partnership Office held an end-of-semester dinner on May 4 during which poster presentations were made by Duke undergraduates on their consultation work during the 2009-10 academic year with Durham Public Schools (DPS) administrators, principals and board members. Other highlights of the evening included a presentation by William (Sandy) Darity on racialized tracking in schools; a discussion of current research priorities by Heidi Coleman and Jeanette Avery of DPS, including areas of potential collaboration with Duke researchers; and remarks by Durham Board of Education member Heidi Carter regarding future DPS-Duke partnership possibilities.

On May 6, Research Scientist Lisa Berlin was an invited discussant at the Frank Porter Graham Institute’s meeting to launch its infant/toddler child care initiative, where she spoke on “Regulating the Hothouse or Applying What We Know about Child Characteristics to the Development of a Model for Center-Based Infant/Toddler Care.” Berlin’s remarks followed those of Jack Bates (University of Indiana), who stressed the importance of child care providers using information about infant temperament to tailor their caregiving behaviors. In addition to agreeing with Bates’ points, Berlin emphasized the importance of understanding caregivers’ characteristics, which may influence their flexibility and receptivity to different infant qualities. Some caregivers, that is, may be more able than

Recent Presentations

PRESENTATIONS

18 Fall 2010

others to tailor their caregiving behaviors to various infant temperaments. Berlin also discussed her own, related, work on maternal characteristics affecting their responsiveness to Early Head Start services. Berlin found that mothers’ initial attachment styles (orientations about forming close relationships) influenced the effects of the Early Head Start program on their parenting behaviors, such that there were more positive program effects for mothers who began the program with less initial attachment avoidance or attachment anxiety. This research is forthcoming in a special issue of the journal, Attachment and Human Development, on “Attachment Processes in Early Head Start Families,” guest-edited by Berlin.

Center Faculty Fellow Jennifer Lansford made a presentation entitled “The Role of Personality in Pathways of Peer Relationships from Childhood to Young Adulthood” at the biennial meeting of the International Society for the Study of Behavioral Development (ISSBD), held in July 2010 in Lusaka, Zambia. This presentation was authored by Lansford, Ken Dodge, Tianyi Yu, Greg Pettit, and Jack Bates and addressed the question of how personality characteristics interact with cultural factors in leading to behavioral development. Lansford also presented an invited paper entitled “Parents’ discipline strategies and cognition about discipline in nine countries” that used data from the Parenting Across Cultures project to describe links among parents’ use of different discipline techniques, parents’ and children’s beliefs related to discipline, and children’s adjustment. The meeting was attended by child development researchers from across the world. Other Duke attendees included Center Faculty Fellows Avshalom Caspi and Terrie Moffitt.

Arsiwalla, D. D., Pettit, G. S., Lansford, J. E., Bates, J. E., & Dodge, K. A. (2010, March). The interplay of positive parenting and positive social information processing in the prediction of adolescent social adjustment. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Philadelphia, Pa.

Criss, M. M., Pettit, G. S., Shaw, D., Lansford, J. E., & Laird, R. D. (2010, March). Reciprocal associations between negative parenting and child antisocial behavior. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Philadelphia, Pa.

Erath, S. A., Pettit, G. S., Lansford, J. E., Dodge, K. A., & Bates, J. E. (2010, March). Childhood mutual disliking predicts adolescent aggression and relationship conflict. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Philadelphia, Pa.

Lansford, J. E., Deater-Deckard, K., & Malone, P. S. (2010, March). Relations between parental warmth and control in nine cultural groups. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Philadelphia, Pa.

Di Giunta, L., Miranda, M., Uribe Tirado, L., Bacchini, D., Bombi, A. S., Pastorelli, C., & Lansford, J. E. (2010, July). The association between parenting practices and parental warmth in a sample of Italian families. Paper presented at the International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection, Padua, Italy.

Miranda, M., Di Giunta, L., Bacchini, D., & Lansford, J. E. (2010, July). Relations of maternal acceptance-rejection and psychological adjustment in childhood. Poster presented at the International Congress on Interpersonal Acceptance and Rejection, Padua, Italy.

Murray, D.W., Rabiner, D., Malone, P., Skinner, A. (2010, May). Evaluation of a computerized attention training intervention in schools. Symposium presentation at the annual meeting of the Association for Psychological Science (APS), Boston, Mass.

Murray, D.W., Rabiner, D., Malone, P., Skinner, A. (2010, June). Computerized attention training for young children: Results of a randomized controlled trial and considerations for future research. Symposium presentation at the Fifth Annual Institute for Educational Sciences National Research Conference, National Harbor, Md.

Skinner, A. T., & Lansford, J. E. (2010, March). Parenting correlates of relational, physical, and nonphysical aggression in an international sample. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research on Adolescence, Philadelphia, Pa.


Mission Bridging the gap between research and public policy to improve the lives of children and families.

Vision The Center for Child and Family Policy is working to solve problems facing children in contemporary society by bringing together scholars from various disciplines with policy makers and practitioners, in an effort to improve the lives of children and families. We are dedicated to teaching, research and policy engagement and focused on the areas of early childhood education, education policy and adolescent problem behavior.

2010-2011 sulzberger distinguished lecture...

Documents