Finally, Obama administration is putting Head Start to the test

[babylonsister]

Finally, Obama administration is putting Head Start to the test

By Ron Haskins and W. Steven Barnett
Monday, October 11, 2010


Head Start, the nation's most important education program for 3- and 4-year-olds, is failing too many poor students. Although no program can completely compensate for the negative effects of poverty and family background, a substantial number of Head Start programs are so ineffective that they do little or nothing to boost child development and learning. A recent evaluation sponsored by the Department of Health and Human Services confirmed that at the end of the first year of school, children who had attended Head Start did no better than similar children who did not attend Head Start. The bottom line is that taxpayers get little for their annual investment of $8 billion in Head Start.

No wonder, then, that last month the Obama administration took the strongest action in the history of the Head Start program to force improvements. The administration decided to follow the recommendation of a panel of experts appointed at Congress's behest in 2007 to propose a system for improving or shutting down failing Head Start programs. The panel reported its recommendation to HHS at the end of the Bush administration. Now, the Obama administration has shaken the dust off the report and is proposing a system, even better than the one recommended by the panel, to shut down failing programs.

Here's how it would work: Each of the nation's local Head Start programs would be reviewed over the next three years. They would be evaluated by HHS based on seven criteria that measure program performance, fiscal integrity, and licensing standards and operations. By far the most important and telling part of the evaluation would be the use of a well-known rating instrument in which professional observers watch the teachers in Head Start classrooms and, based on reliable and well-defined ratings, gauge teachers' ability to provide emotional support and instruction to students. What happens between teachers and students in the classroom is the key ingredient in student learning. Thus, the administration's choice of this reliable and widely used teacher rating scale, developed by researchers at the University of Virginia, will provide the most important measure of quality.

snip//

Numerous evaluations provide strong evidence that high-quality preschool programs can affect children's development in ways that radiate throughout childhood and even into adulthood. Yet the single biggest source of government investment in helping poor and minority children reap the advantages of preschool has been allowed to nurture mediocrity. Now, with both Democrats and Republicans, Congress and two administrations playing lead roles, the potential for change is finally at hand. It's almost enough to restore a person's faith in the federal government.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/10/AR2010101003044.html?sub=AR

[DURHAM D]

1. oh great - we know where this is going... nt

[babylonsister]

3. What does that mean? Do you embrace mediocrity for

young kids? :shrug:

[TBF]

8. Let's get them all ready for Harvard at 18 mos.

:eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

2. Another reform! Good. I want my taxpayer dollars funding effective programs, not money pits.

[TBF]

7. Clue: take a look at DEPT of DEFENSE in the budget. Oy. nt

[Xithras]

4. Head Start, in many areas, is simply government sponsored daycare.

My wife started out as a Head Start teacher long ago, while she was still working on her credentials. She had kids as young as two in her "class"...kids who were still in diapers.

She worked in one of the poorest neighborhoods of our city, and half of her students spoke no English. Not poor English, but NO English. The program didn't have the funds to hire secondary teachers for these kids, and only a small portion of the teachers were bilingual, so you literally had two, three, and four year old kids being dropped into a classroom with a teacher and a para who weren't even capable of talking to them.

Needless to say, a huge percentage of her classes didn't learn a single thing.

So what function did Head Start serve? Most of the younger hispanic kids were the children of fieldworkers. Before Head Start began accepting them, they just hung out in the sun on the edges of the fields while their parents worked. Head Start provided them with a safe environment where they could interact with other children and, hopefully, pick up enough working English to survive any American kindergarten they might be enrolled in a year or two later.

You cannot hold Head Start up to the same academic yardsticks that you use for K-12, because the program goals are different. It isn't simply an academic program, but a nutritional, social readiness, and health program. Heck, my wife was required to visit the homes of the children in her classroom at least once a year, assess their living situation, and refer them to any other social services that might help to improve their health or their living situation. Head Start isn't about learning your ABC's and Colors, but it about raising the overall health and quality of life of children living in poverty. These aren't things that can be rated on a "test".

This is just another privatization sellout by the Obama misAdministration.

[vaberella]

9. HS is now under reform and some communities try to teach.

Your wife's experience is not the end all be all.

[Xithras]

15. My wife STILL subs HS from time to time.

She teaches K now, but sometimes subs during the summer for extra $$. Her experience with having her own classroom may be about a decade out of date, but it's only been a few months since she's been in one. Things haven't changed all that much over the past 10 years.

And the fact that some communities are now trying to teach changes nothing about my point. Head Start is a general development program (education, behavioral health, nutrition, etc) for children living in poverty. Education is just one part of the program. To judge the program by purely academic standards...or WORSE, to compare it academically to private companies that specialize in pre-K academics...is stupid and counterproductive.

It's sacrificing the health and safety of a child on the altar of a test score.

On Edit:

If there IS a real problem with Head Start, it is largely attributable to the high teacher turnover rates. Most Head Start teachers use it for the same thing my wife did...it's a temporary stop on your way to a "real" teaching job. It looks good on a resume.

The average fully accredited Head Start teacher makes about $22,000 a year, which is about HALF of what the average K-12 teacher makes. One of the great ironies about Head Start is the fact that the average Head Start teacher with a family makes so little money that they will actually QUALIFY for Head Start themselves...because they'll be below the federal poverty level.

Most HS teachers bolt to K-12 at their first opportunity. This means that HS tends to be saddled with unerqualified, inexperienced teachers. My wife was still a college student when she started teaching HS.

[jpgray]

16. This is exactly right.

Thanks for sharing your wife's experience.

[Tatiana]

19. You are absolutely correct.

This was my experience as a HS teacher as well. IIRC, I only made around 18,500. At least half of my kids spoke Spanish only (which was fine, because I speak Spanish). Head Start was never intended to be a strictly academic program. It was designed to take a holistic approach to the child and his/her family; providing nutritional, medical, dental, and social services because we all know that poverty and home environment have a lot to do with a child's success in school.

We did have a formal curriculum utilizing the Project Approach for our pre-K (4-5 year olds) to ensure they were ready for kindergarten. However, most three year-olds are not ready for such formal education. They need to learn how to socialize, learning through dramatic play and the like.

[LisaM]

5. Ugh.

Great, force an already-stressed program with beleagured teachers to "compete" against rival private pre-schools.

Pretty soon we'll have every school and pre-school in the country pitted against each other. That'll be just lovely.

[vaberella]

10. Where did you read that?

this is reformation based on a panel on how head start can work properly. You realize many are not working and horribly under funded?!

[babylonsister]

14. Look who wrote this and applauded the reform...

he might know a little something about what he's talking about.

Ron Haskins is a senior fellow at and co-director of the Brookings Institution's Center on Children and Families; he was appointed to the Advisory Committee on Re-Designation of Head Start Grantees. W. Steven Barnett is a professor of education, economics and public policy, and director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University.

[TBF]

6. Those 3-yr olds better get their #2 pencils ready for their standardized tests ... nt

[vaberella]

11. What's up wth the negativity towards this post?! This is good news.

:shrug:

[Hekate]

21. See my post #20 below. FFS I do not know what is wrong with people.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[cornermouse]

12. I'm just grateful my kids graduated college

I'm very worried about my grandkids though. I don't approve of what Obama's done/doing to the education system at all.

[LisaM]

13. He's (in my opinion) got the wrong advisors

He needs to talk to teachers, not administrators. Public school teachers. I don't think he is unmoveable on these issues.

[glitch]

17. This reads like propaganda, far too many unbacked up assumptions. Head Start WAS one of the most

successful Federal programs, before Bush cut if off at the knees by slashing its funding. Now it looks like this admin is coming along to shoot in the head for not being able to run.

And it gets posted here like its apple pie. :thumbsdown:

[DURHAM D]

18. Amen. nt

[Hekate]

20. WHEN Head Start is adequately funded and staffed,IT'S BEEN PROVEN TO WORK. What is the problem here?

We actually have some good news -- again. And it's being dismissed in this thread as bad news -- again.

Of COURSE it's a day care program with 2-year olds in it. It's when they should start pre-school, and if mommy is working all day, you want her to drop the kids off at an unlicensed babysitter's house to be plunked in front of the boob tube?

Christ on a trailer hitch, this is good news. Obama is giving them money. He's demanding reforms of the very things people in this thread are complaining were wrong when they or their spouse or whoever used to work in the program. HE'S TRYING TO FIX IT. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

Hekate

[JTFrog]

22. There is much about the need for drama that we do not understand.

Like many illnesses, it is mysterious.

[babylonsister]

23. ...

:hug: I don't get it either, but the usual suspects remain...usual.