PEDIATRICS Vol. 114 No. 3 September 2004, pp. 858-859 (doi:10.1542/peds.2004-0707)
COMMENTARY |
Head Start's National Reporting System: A Work in Progress
Yale Center in Child Development and Social Policy,
Yale University,
New Haven, CT 06511
Abbreviations: NRS, National Reporting System
Head Start is the nation's largest school-readiness program for young children considered at risk of poor academic outcomes. Since opening in 1965, the program has served >22 million children and their families. The majority of participants are 3- and 4-year-olds, and almost all live below the federal poverty level. Head Start delivers comprehensive services to meet the needs of the "whole child": physical and mental health, preschool education, social and emotional growth opportunities, social services for children and families, and parental and community involvement.
A research-and-evaluation component was part of the design of the program, making it a national laboratory for planning and testing a variety of early childhood services. Over the decades, thousands of studies on Head Start and other comprehensive programs have established that early intervention does boost school readiness, although investigations of long-term effects are relatively sparse.
Certainly a major deterrent to productive evaluation is the range of Head Start's objectives and the historical lack of appropriate assessment tools. The problem was addressed most recently by the Head Start Program Performance Measures Initiative.1 Specific goals were identified in the areas of health, social and emotional development, cognition, and family involvement. Measures then were developed and field-tested in the Family and Children Experiences Survey.2 The Advisory Committee on Head Start Research and Evaluation3 built on this work in constructing a framework for studying the effects of Head Start. Their recommendations resulted in the Head Start National Impact Study, an ongoing longitudinal investigation of 5000 children using random assignment and a range of standardized measures.
At the center level, numerous evaluation procedures are required. The Program Information Reports are completed annually by each grantee and yield census and operations data. Programs are also required to collect data on children's progress and accomplishments along a range of developmental indicators. Called the Head Start Child Outcomes Framework, the purpose is program self-assessment and improvement. In the fall of 2003, the National Reporting System (NRS) was imposed. The system involves tests of vocabulary, letter recognition, and math skills administered to every kindergarten-bound child at the start and end of the Head Start year.
NRS became an instant controversy. The test instrument was designed hurriedly by appointed contractors who did not have time to establish reliability and validity using accepted procedures. In the field, personnel quickly raised questions about culture fairness and age appropriateness of test items. Huge variations in the abilities and training of test administrators became evident. Fears were expressed about the impact of the testing experience itself on such young children early in their transition to school.
Beyond the psychometric and practical issues, trepidation over the NRS arose because the purpose of the evaluation was never made clear. The difficulty level of the test and the lack of funding for examiners and even postage to return the results led many to see the NRS as an effort to label centers as poor performers and stop their grants. Another unfortunate consequence is that many teachers began to rewrite lesson plans to "teach to the test," reducing time spent on health, nutrition, and social learning because these areas were not covered by the NRS. In essence, they thought that Head Start's mission had been changed without anyone telling them. Additionally, there was no hint how the NRS fit into the numerous other local and national assessments underway. The established protocols were in place to monitor and improve program quality and child outcomes. There was no explanation of value added by test scores of individual children on a narrow slice of skills targeted by Head Start.
Opposition to the NRS snowballed. Editorials denouncing the program appeared all over the country. More than 250 scholars signed a letter to US Senators questioning the structure, fairness, and purpose of the test. Our own responses focused on the fact that the NRS does not begin to assess the program known as Head Start. The Head Start that is delivered in nearly 50000 classrooms in the states, territories, and tribal nations consists of comprehensive, two-generation services designed to promote physical, cognitive, and socioemotional development, all necessary elements of school readiness. The NRS is concerned only with cognitive achievements and skills, as if they alone define what it means to be prepared for school.
No reasoned criticism of the NRS has denied the need for accountability. Head Start consumes billions of public dollars annually and should demonstrate that participants get what they came for: the skills that make them ready for school. The National Impact Study and the Child Outcomes Framework are both underway for this very purpose. To their credit, Head Start's administrators have listened to the concerns of their critics and input that has poured in from the field. We sense that they now consider the NRS a work in progress.
The first nationwide administration of the NRS alerted Head Start officials to what they need to do differently. They have discovered that there are pitfalls in attempting to test hundreds of thousands of young children and train tens of thousands of examiners and that it is important to work with Head Start providers to launch a new directive. Wade Horn, the current Assistant Secretary of the Administration for Children and Families, has now stated that the NRS is "incomplete" and must be redesigned to incorporate measures of social and emotional development.4 Tommy Thompson, current Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, announced plans to appoint an independent panel of experts to review the first implementation of the NRS and recommend improvements.
We are confident that if Head Start officials rely on the expertise that already exists in this area and build on the considerable work that has been done already to develop scientifically based protocols, the NRS can become a credible, useful means of helping Head Start providers deliver better services that enable Head Start children to be better prepared for school.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Accepted Apr 7, 2004.
Address correspondence to Edward Zigler, PhD, Yale University, 310 Prospect St, New Haven, CT 06511-2187. E-mail: edward.zigler{at}yale.edu
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
 TOP REFERENCES |
|---|
1. Head Start Bureau. Charting Our Progress: Development of the Head Start Program Performance Measures. Washington, DC: Administration on Children, Youth and Families; 1995
2. Administration for Children and Families. Head Start FACES 2000: A Whole-Child Perspective on Program Performance. Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families; 2003
3. Advisory Committee on Head Start Research and Evaluation. Evaluating Head Start: A Recommended Framework for Studying the Impact of the Head Start Program. Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services; 1999
4. Jacobson, L. Debate continues over Head Start assessment. Editorial Proj Educ Educ Week. 2004;23(26) :10
PEDIATRICS (ISSN 1098-4275). ©2004 by the American Academy of Pediatrics
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Facebook 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
