School Readiness Initiatives:

Assessing Their YieldCraig T. Ramey, Ph.D. & Sharon L. Ramey, Ph.D.

Georgetown University Center on Health and Education

National Governors AssociationOrlando, FL

December 16, 2003 www.che.georgetown.edu

Why states have a stake in early childhood education

Children’s school readiness and academic performance are strongly predicted by school entry skills (language, pre-literacy, math)

Majority of children experience non-parental care prior to K (majority of which is non-optimal)

Evidence that high quality early childhood education can increase school readiness skills of “at risk” children

Independent economic analyses confirm positive return on investments (from 1:4 to 1:7)

Defining features of high quality, early childhood education programs

Adults who are highly responsive and interactive with children

Age-appropriate ratios of adults:children

Adults who stimulate children’s language development and actively teach new skills

Frequent monitoring and assessment of adults and children used to inform program decisions

The Abecedarian (ABC) Program(1971 – 2003)

Designed to test whether a high quality, early education program could significantly improve school readiness and achievement

Provided to families with extremely low economic and educational resources

Provided continuously from infancy through kindergarten via a randomized controlled trial (RCT)

Supports and Services for the Abecedarian (ABC) Program

Comparison Families & Children received: Nutritional Supplements Quality Pediatric Care Social Services Referral & Treatment forDevelopmental Problems

ABC Families & Children received: Nutritional Supplements Quality Pediatric Care Social Services Referral & Treatment for Developmental ProblemsCenter-based Childhood

Education: Full day, Year round for 5 years

Plus Parent Program

Quality Assurance Proceduresincluded in the ABC Program

Intensive Pre-Service and In-Service Training for Teachers, Assistants, and Education Directors

Structured Curriculum with Lesson Plans and Individualization for Each Child

“Open classrooms” with Videotape Monitoring and Frequent Classroom Observations

Daily Documentation of Educational Curriculum Activities for Each Child

Individual Child Assessments (linked to curriculum) by Teachers every 2 weeks to Inform Individualized Educational Plans (plus independent assessments by trained assessors to evaluate program impact)

Key Findings from Child Assessments in the ABC Program: 18 mos. – 21 yrs.

Higher performance on standardized tests of intelligence and cognition at all ages

Superior learning in experimental settings

More advanced language skills (receptive and expressive) at all ages

Higher reading achievement at all ages

Higher math achievement at all ages

Improved social responsiveness

Documented Benefits of Increased Skills for Children in ABC Program Grade Repetition declined 46.5%

(from 56% to 30% by age 15) Special Education Placement reduced 75%

(from 48% to 12%) 4-Year College Attendance increased 300%

(from 12% to 36%) Age at Birth of First Child significantly delayed Tobacco and Drug Use (self-report) decreased Adult Academic Skills for Work Force increased

Findings from ABC Program Replicated in Other RCT* Studies

Project CARE: for very low income, multi-risk children, using same ABC program

Note: an intensive, 5 yr. home visiting program using the same curriculum did not yield child benefits

The Infant Health and Development Program:

for low birthweight, premature infants in 8 cities, using adaptation of the ABC early childhood education curriculum from infancy – 3 years

*Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)

Example of Recent Success in a State-led Early Childhood Education Initiative

Louisiana Pre-K Program – legislative initiative with administrative authority in Dept. of Education

Launched in 2000 with free tuition to children below poverty All teachers have certification in Early Childhood Education Assessments of classroom environment (very high: 5.7 out of 7)

and children on Developmental Skills Checklist (major gains from fall to spring, with largest benefits to children from families with lowest parental education)

Fall Scores: 82%, 82%, and 90% scored in the lowest quartile (national norms) in language, print awareness, and math

Spring Scores: only 17%, 16%, and 25% respectively scored in the lowest quartile

LA 4 Students Statewide Scoring in theLowest Quartile on the Developing Skills Checklist,

2002-2003 (n = 3,711)

26%

16%

17%

82%

82%

90%

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Math

PrintAwareness

Language

Spring Fall

Why Direct Assessment of Children and Programs is Essential for States

To demonstrate accountability for public investments

To link program objectives to measurable gains To protect children and families from poor

quality and/or ineffective programs For monitoring and individualization of

educational activities for children For estimating cost:benefit ratios and

conducting comparative cost:efficiency analyses

Safeguards for Responsible Direct Assessment of Children and Programs

Outcomes to be measured are clearly linked to important program goals

Assessment procedures (tests, tools, observations) are reliable and valid indicators; sources of bias minimized

Purpose of assessment and data analysis plans are made public in advance

Independent, ongoing checks on accuracy of data collection, entry, and analyses

Recognition of limits of assessment and ongoing plans for quality improvement in assessment

Recommendations Engage multiple, diverse stakeholders in timely,

comprehensive, and open review of current efforts and evidence for quality and benefits

Build upon scientific findings of what produces positive, large gains for “at risk” children

Consider innovative ways to coordinate, consolidate, and/or enhance multiple early childhood initiatives to realize immediate benefits for children and their families

For information and references about effective early childhood education Go to www.che.georgetown.edu Contact us at 202-687-2874 (Georgetown

University Center on Health and Education) See Ramey & Ramey, 2000, Securing the Future See Ramey et al, 2000, Applied Developmental

Science Campbell et al, 2002, Applied Developmental

Science