Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-669899f699-ggqkh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T14:59:04.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Program Quality, Intensity, and Duration in Preschool Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Edward Zigler ,
Walter S. Gilliam  and
Stephanie M. Jones
Edward Zigler
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Walter S. Gilliam
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Stephanie M. Jones
Affiliation:
Yale University, Connecticut
Get access

Summary

Up to this point, we have described the growing national momentum toward universal preschool, as well as the developmental and economic rationales for early education and its role in the lives of children across the income spectrum. In the next several chapters, we turn our attention to issues regarding the content of effective preschool services. In this chapter we discuss issues of program intensity and duration. We also focus on the various components of quality associated with lasting benefits and strategies for how programmatic quality can be facilitated and maintained during large-scale implementation.

The effectiveness of any preschool program is related directly to the quality of that program and the amount of the program that is actually received. Beneficial impacts are most appreciable when services are delivered at reasonably high levels of quality and received in sufficient quantity by those who need the services (Brooks-Gunn, 2003; Ramey & Ramey, 1998). Aspects of program delivery can be described as program duration, intensity, and quality. An analogous description is used in medicine: when describing medication effects physicians often refer to how long the patient receives the medication, how often the patient receives it, and the amount of active ingredient it contains. Although everyone in the medical community would agree that these components are of paramount importance to good medical care, decision makers and administrators responsible for implementing social and educational programs often seem to skimp on these features and end up with a ghost of the originally planned intervention.

Type
Chapter
Information
A Vision for Universal Preschool Education , pp. 107 - 129
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Barnett, W. S., Robin, K. B., Hustedt, J. T., & Schulman, K. L. (2003). The state of preschool: 2003 state preschool yearbook. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.Google Scholar
Barnett, W. S., Tarr, J. E., Lamy, C. E., & Frede, E. C. (2002). Fragile lives, shattered dreams: A report on implementation of preschool education in New Jersey's Abbott districts. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute for Early Education Research.Google Scholar
Bellm, D., Burton, A., Whitebook, M., Broatch, L., & Young, M. P. (2002). Inside the pre-k classroom: A study of staffing and stability in state-funded prekindergarten programs. Washington, DC: Center for the Child Care Workforce. http://www.ccw.org/pubs/ccw_pre-k-10.4.02.pdf. Accessed October 27, 2003.Google Scholar
Berlin, L. J., Neal, C. R., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1998). What makes early intervention programs work? The program, its participants, and their interaction. Zero to Three, 18(4), 4–15.Google Scholar
Blau, D. M. (1992). The child care labor market. Journal of Human Resources, 27(2), 9–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blau, D. M. (2001). The child care problem: An economic analysis. New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
Bowman, B. T., Donovan, M. S., & Burns, M. S. (Eds.). (2001). Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
Broberg, A. G., Wessels, H. R.., & Hwang, C. P. (1998). Effects of day care on the development of cognitive abilities in 8-year-olds: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33, 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks-Gunn, J. (2003). Do you believe in magic? What we can expect from early childhood intervention programs. Social Policy Report, 17, 3–14.Google Scholar
Bryant, D. M., Burchinal, M., Lau, L. B., & Sparling, J. J. (1994). Family and classroom correlates of Head Start children's developmental outcomes. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9, 289–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, F. A., & Ramey, C. T. (1994). Effects of early intervention on intellectual and academic achievement: A follow-up study of children from low-income families. Child Development, 65, 684–698.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clarke-Stewart, K. A., & Allhusen, V. (2002). Nonparental caregiving. In Bornstein, M. (Ed.), Handbook of parenting. Vol. 3: Being and becoming a parent (2nd ed., pp. 215–252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Clarke-Stewart, K. A., Vandell, D. L., Burchinal, M., Brien, M., & McCartney, K. (2002). Do regulable features of child-care homes affect children's development? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 52–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Cost, quality and child outcomes in child care centers (Public Report, 2nd ed.). Denver: Economics Department, University of Colorado.
Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1999). The children of the cost, quality, and outcomes study go to school: Technical report. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.
Council for Early Childhood Professional Recognition. (1996). The Child Development Associate assessment system and competency standards: Preschool caregivers in center-based programs. Washington, DC: Author.
Cryer, D. (2003). Defining program quality. In Cryer, D. & Clifford, R. (Eds.), Early childhood education and care in the USA (pp. 31–46). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Duncan, G. J., & Magnuson, K. (2004). Can society profit from investing in early education programs? Northwestern University, Evanston, IL. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Elicker, J., & Mathur, S. (1997). What do they do all day? Comprehensive evaluation of a full-day kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 459–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frede, E. C. (1998). Preschool program quality in programs for children in poverty. In Barnett, W. S. & Boocock, S. S. (Eds.), Early care and education for children in poverty: Promises, programs, and long-term outcomes (pp. 77–98). Buffalo, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Gallagher, J. J., Clayton, J. R., & Heinemeier, S. E. (2001). Education for four-year-olds: State initiatives. Technical report #2. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Center, National Center for Early Development & Learning.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S. (2000). The School Readiness Initiative in South-Central Connecticut: Classroom quality, teacher training, and service provision. Final report of findings for fiscal year 1999. New Haven, CT: Yale University Child Study Center. http://nieer.org/resources/research/CSRI1999.pdf.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., & Ripple, C. H. (2004). What can be learned from state-funded prekindergarten initiatives? A data-based approach to the Head Start devolution debate. In Zigler, E. & Styfco, S. J. (Eds.), The Head Start debates (pp. 477–497). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., Ripple, C. H., Zigler, E. F., & Leiter, V. (2000). Evaluating child and family demonstration initiatives: Lessons from the Comprehensive Child Development Program. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 41–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., & Zigler, E. F. (2000). A critical meta-analysis of all evaluations of state-funded preschool from 1977 to 1998: Implications for policy, service delivery and program evaluation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 441–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilliam, W. S., & Zigler, E. F. (2004). State efforts to evaluate the effects of prekindergarten: 1977 to 2003. Yale University, New Haven, CT. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Gormley, W. T. (2002). Differential reimbursement policies and child care accreditation. Georgetown University, Washington, DC. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Gormley, W. T., & Lucas, J. K. (2000). Money, accreditation, and child care center quality. Working Paper Series, Foundation for Child Development, New York.Google Scholar
Howes, C. (2000). Social-emotional classroom climate in childcare, child-teacher relationships and children's second grade peer relations. Social Development, 9, 191–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howes, C., Smith, E., & Galinsky, E. (1995). The Florida Child Care Improvement Study: Interim report. New York: Families and Work Institute.Google Scholar
Jacobson, L. (2004, April 24). Early childhood education: States moving toward universal coverage. Education Reform. Washington, DC: Education Writers Association. www.ewa.org/offers/publications/earlychildhoodreform.pdf. Accessed August 5, 2004.Google Scholar
Love, J. M., Schochet, P. Z., & Meckstroth, A. L. (1996). Are they in any real danger? What research does – and doesn't – tell us about child care quality and children's well-being. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica.Google Scholar
Merrow, J. (2002, September 25). The “failure” of Head Start. Education Week, 22(4), 52.Google Scholar
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. (2005). Child care and child development: Results from the NICHD Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development. New York: Guilford Press.
Olsen, L. (2002). Georgia, New York, and Oklahoma move toward “universal” preschool. Quality counts 2002: Building blocks for success. Education Week, 21(17), 14.Google Scholar
Peisner-Feinberg, E. S., & Burchinal, M. R. (1997). Relations between preschool children's child-care experiences and concurrent development: The Cost, Quality, and Outcomes Study. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43, 451–477.Google Scholar
Peisner-Feinberg, E. S., Burchinal, M. R., Clifford, R. M., Culkin, M. L., Howes, C., Kagan, S. L., & Yazejian, N. (2001). The relation of preschool child-care quality to children's cognitive and social developmental trajectories through second grade. Psychological Science, 13, 1534–1553.Google Scholar
Peth-Pierce, R. (1998). NICHD Study of Early Child Care. Washington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.Google Scholar
Phillips, D., & Howes, C. (1987). Indicators of quality in child care: Review of research. In D. Phillips (Ed.), Quality in child care: What does research tell us? (pp. 1–19). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Phillips, D., Mekos, D., Scarr, S., McCartney, K., & Abbott-Shinn, M. (2000). Within and beyond the classroom door: Assessing quality in child-care centers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 475–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillipsen, L. C., Burchinal, M. R., Howes, C., & Cryer, D. (1997). The prediction of process quality from structural features of child care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 281–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramey, C. T., & Ramey, S. L. (1998). Early intervention and early experience. American Psychologist, 53, 109–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raver, C. C., & Knitzer, J. (2002). Ready to enter: What research tells policymakers about strategies to promote social and emotional school readiness among three- and four-year-old children. New York: National Center for Children in Poverty.Google Scholar
Reynolds, A. J. (1995). One year of preschool or two: Does it matter? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10, 1–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reynolds, A. J. (2003). The added value of continuing early intervention into the primary grades. In A. J. Reynolds, M. C. Wang, & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Early childhood programs for a new century (pp. 163–196). Washington, DC: CWLA Press.
Reynolds, A. J. (2004). Dosage-response effects and mechanisms of change in public and model programs. In Zigler, E. & Styfco, S. J. (Eds.), The Head Start debates (pp. 379–396). Batlimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Roseman, M. J. (1999). Quality child care: At whose expense? Early Childhood Education Journal, 27(1), 5–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sachs, J. (2000). Inequities in early care and education: What is America buying? Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 5, 383–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1995). Early childhood programs: Services to prepare children for school often limited. Washington, DC: Author. (Report N, 95-21)
Vandell, D. L., & Wilson, K. S. (1988). A longitudinal study of children with day-care experiences of varying quality. Child Development, 59, 1286–1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, C. M. (2002). A longitudinal investigation of preschoolers' Head Start experience and subsequent school readiness (Doctoral dissertation, Yale University). Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(03), 1592B.Google Scholar
Whitebook, M., Sakai, L., Gerber, E., & Howes, C. (2001). Then & now: Changes in child care staffing, 1994–2000. Washington, DC: Center for the Child Care Workforce.Google Scholar
Whitebook, M., Sakai, L., & Howes, C. (1997). NAEYC accreditation as a strategy for improving child care quality: An assessment – Final report. Washington, DC: Center for the Child Care Workforce.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×