program evaluation aÇev hamburg-february 2007. ‘aÇep’: mother-child education program...
TRANSCRIPT
‘AÇEP’: Mother-Child Education Program
Beneficiaries: 200,000 mothers and children in 78
provinces of Turkey 900 teachers trained Yearly target 45,000 mothers and
children
Aim of Program:
To empower mothers by supporting them in their parenting roles and providing the tools necessary for fostering the cognitive development of their children before they enter school.
Target Group:
Socio-economically disadvantaged mothers of 6 year olds who do not go to preschool.
Main Components and Duration:
Mother Support Program—25 weeks-long Implemented in the form of weekly 3
hour group discussion meetings, facilitated by an ACEV trained group leader
Cognitive Training Program (for the child)—25 weeks-long
Implemented at home daily by mother and child using worksheets, storybooks and other materials
Home visits—3-4 times during the 25 weeks
Conducted by group leader to ensure quality and provide one-on-one support to mother at home
AÇEV’s scientifically-proven, home-based, low-cost preschool and parent education program implemented since 1993
OVÇEP: Preschool Parent-Child Education Program
Beneficiaries: 18,000 mothers and children in 26
provinces of Turkey 102 teachers trained Yearly target 5,000 mothers and
children
Aim of Program:
To support the preschooler’s literacy and numeracy skills and to ensure the educational support provided to the child is continuous and complementary, through strengthening the school-family collaboration.
Target Group:
Children attending state-run preschools and their parents.
Main Components and Duration:
Cognitive Training Program (for the classroom)—28 weeks-long
Implemented in class daily by teacher and preschoolers using worksheets, storybooks and other materials
Cognitive Training Program (for the home)—25 weeks-long
Implemented in the home daily by the parent and the child using a second set of worksheets, storybooks and other materials
Parent Support Program—9 sessions Implemented in the form of monthly 3
hour group discussion meetings, facilitated by the ACEV trained preschool teacher
AÇEV’s scientifically-proven, center-based preschool education program which brings the preschool and the parent together, implemented since 1999
Why do we evaluate our programs?
• to evaluate how far the program has achieved its goals.
• to determine the short and long term impacts of the program.
• to have regular recording and monitoring system in order to
gather information from the field which we implement the
program.
Ongoing Evaluation
Data Collected
From
Data Collected
ByTarget Instrument Aim
Mother Trainer Mother •Pre-Post Evaluation Forms•Home Visit Observation Form
•To obtain information from the participant mothers’, how they perceive and evaluate the program,•If the program information has been received by the mothers, to see the impact of the program on them.
Trainer Observer Trainer •Group meeting evaluation form
•To evaluate how efficient the program is implemented by the group leader.
Child Trainer Child •CEP Evaluation Form
•To measure the cognitive impact of the program on children.
Trainer Program •Trainer Evaluation Form
•To evaluate the program by trainer’s perspective.•To obtain teacher’s suggestions about the program.
Ongoing Evaluation
• We evaluate all the participant mothers per year.
• We use pluralistic perspective evaluation (Group leader, Mother,
Child)
• Qualitative ve quantitative research methods used together
• All componants of the program is evaluated (Group meetings,
Cognitive training program implementation, Home visits)
Impact Evaluation
• Effects on children
• Pre-literacy and pre-numeracy skills
• Environmental differences
• Gender differences
• School success
• Teachers’ perception of the child
• Effects on mother child interaction
• Effects on mothers
Impact Evaluation
Data Collected
FromInstrument Aim
Mother •The Self Esteem scale •The Woman’s Status in the Family scale •The Mother’s Perception of the Child scale
To evaluate the effects on mothers
Child •Pre-literacy Skills, Pre-numeracy skills instrument•Pictorial Scale on Perceived Competence and Acceptance for Young Children (Harter)
To evaluate the effects on children
Teacher •Teachers Evaluation of the Child’s Cognitive Skills scale•Teachers’ Evaluation of the Child’s Personality Characteristics scale
To evaluate the effects on children’s school successTo assess the teachers’ perception of child
Impact Evaluation
• Quasi experimental design is used.
• The duration for preparation phase of the research took nearly 1 year.
• Short and long term impacts have been assessed.
• Sample was constituted of 177 children (85 experiment group, 92 control
group)
• Control group was matched with the experimental group on certain
characteristics.
• Research has been carried out in four different regions, in four different
provinces.
• Pluralistic perspective evaluation has been carried out (mother, teacher,
child)
• Trainer seminars are also regularly evaluated per year.
MOTHER-TRAINED
NON-TRAINED
AT THE BEGININGOF MOCEP
•PRE-LITERACY and PRE-NUMERACY SKILLS INSTRUMENT
•SELF CONCEPT
•MOTHER INTERVIEW
AT THE ENDOF MOCEP
•PRE-LITERACY and PRE-NUMERACY SKILLS INSTRUMENT
•SELF CONCEPT
•MOTHER INTERVIEW
AT THE ENDOF PRIMARY SCHOOL
•LITERACY and NUMERACY SKILLS INSTRUMENT
•SELF CONCEPT
•MOTHER INTERVIEW
•TEACHER INTERVIEW
DESIGN OF THE EVALUATION RESEARCH
LIST OF SKILLS IN BOTH INSTRUMENTS
• Pre Literacy Skills– Visual Recognition– Visual Discrimination– Sequential Knowledge– Ability to follow verbal direction– Pencil Control– Capacity to copy letter– Visual attention– Recognition of letter– Visual retrieval– Syntax memory– Spatial concepts– Knowledge of prepositions– Visual memory– Discrimination by category– Listening comprehension
• Pre Numeracy Skills– Recognition of Shapes– Counting – Visual Matching– Awareness of
Correspondence– Auditory attention– Visual Counting– Sequential Counting– Knowledge of
numbers– Visual Recognition
and Discrimination of numbers
– Addition– Subtraction
CH
AN
GE
SC
OR
ES
PRE-LITERACY0
10
20
30
40
50
60
PRE-NUMERACY
GIRLSBOYS
SEX DIFFERENCES IN THE MOTHER-TRAINED GROUP
CH
AN
GE
SC
OR
ES
PRE-LITERACY PRE-NUMERACY0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
GIRLSBOYS
SEX DIFFERENCES FOR THE NON-TRAINED GROUP
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
STIMULATINGENVIRONMENT
NON-STIMULATINGENVIRONMENT
LITERACY NUMERACY LITERACY NUMERACY
MOTHER-TRAINED NON-TRAINED
ME
AN
SC
OR
ES
DIFFERENCES ACCORDING TO ENVIRONMENTAL STIMULATION INDEX
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
SUITABLEENVIRONMENT
NON SUITABLEENVIRONMENT
LITERACY NUMERACY LITERACY NUMERACY
MOTHER-TRAINED NON-TRAINED
ME
AN
SC
OR
ES
DIFFERENCES ACCORDING TO STUDY ENVIRONMENT AT HOME
0
5
10
15
20
25
NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR
TRAINED NON-TRAINED
NU
MB
ER
OF
CH
ILD
RE
NDATE CHILD BEGAN TO READ
72%
MOTHER-TRAINED NON-TRAINED
NOTREADY
READY28%
NOTREADY
0%
READY100%
SCHOOL READINESS OF CHILD ACCORDING TO MOTHER
MOTHER-TRAINED NON-TRAINED
YES89%
NO11%
NO41%
YES59%
MOTHER SHOWED AN EXTRA EFFORTFOR HER CHILD’S SUCCESS AT SCHOOL
COGNITIVE SOCIAL3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
MOTHER-TRAINED NON-TRAINED
ME
AN
S
TEACHERS EVALUATION on SCHOOL READINESS
APPROPRIATEBEHAVIORS
ATTENTIVE CREATIVE CURIOUS0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
MOTHER-TRAINED NON-TRAINED
ME
AN
S
TEACHER’S EVALUATION OF CHILDREN