Long-Term Educational Outcomes of Children in the Positive Education Program - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Long-Term Educational Outcomes of Children in the Positive Education Program PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 7fbf7f-OTQ3M



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Long-Term Educational Outcomes of Children in the Positive Education Program

Description:

... who were asked to select a representative cross-section of individuals Effects of the Program Improved child ... 1.60 1.00 2.80 28.00 2.00 2.00 Multiracial. – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:45
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 53
Provided by: ESSI9
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Long-Term Educational Outcomes of Children in the Positive Education Program


1
Long-Term Educational Outcomes of Children in the
Positive Education Programs Early Childhood
Centers
  • Kimberly T. Kendziora
  • American Institutes for Research
  • Presented September 28, 2005 to the
  • Advisory Board for the
  • Long Term Outcomes for Children Receiving
    Preschool Intervention for Behavioral and
    Developmental Concerns Project
  • Cleveland, OH

2
Acknowledgements
  • Funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of
    Educations Office for Special Education Programs
  • Performed in collaboration with Early Childhood
    staff from the Positive Education Program
  • David Osher, Principal Investigator
  • Elizabeth Spier, Bridget Goosby, Yen Chau, and
    Fiona Helsel, Co-Investigators

3
Background
  • Behavior plays an important role in the education
    of children with disabilities
  • Young children with undercontrolled, challenging
    behavior are at risk for poor long-term outcomes
  • Emerging behavior problems can be successfully
    addressed before school entry

4
The Regional Intervention Program Study
  • This was previously the only long-term study of
    children who received early intervention for
    behavioral concerns
  • at a 3-9 year follow-up, RIP children worked,
    complied, and played at school very much like
    their typical peers, and complied 82 of the time
    at home

5
The RIP Study, continued
  • At a 25 year follow-up
  • 39 out of 40 had graduated high school
  • None received special education services for
    emotional or behavioral disturbances
  • 39 out of 40 were employed
  • Source Strain, Steele, Ellis, Timm, 1981
    Strain Timm, 2001

6
About the Early Childhood Centers
  • Previously known as the EIC program
  • Founded in 1976, the ECCs offer a professionally
    administered, parent-operated therapeutic program
    for children
  • Parents receive an experiential, coached training
    program to improve their relationships with
    their children and to enhance their childrens
    growth and development
  • Parents are trained to teach and work with their
    own children, and later work with new families
    entering the program

7
ECC Population
  • Two thirds of the children are preschool children
    with a disability (PCD)
  • Of the remaining third, half of these are under 3
    years of age and eligible for an IFSP
  • The other half of the remaining third, or 1/6 of
    the children are age 3 or older and at risk
  • May have significant problems at home or in the
    community but do not qualify as PCD in the
    schools
  • Parenting concerns (DCFS referrals)

8
ECC Essential Components
  • Daily classroom/small group experience
  • Daily parent-child play/training sessions
  • Development of home programming
  • Consultation with other care/service providers
  • Weekly theory classes
  • Support from parents who have received services
    at ECC
  • Strength based, ecological focus
  • Team based staff with both education and mental
    health orientation

9
ECC Critical Attitudes
  • Parent implementation
  • No reject
  • Re-EDucation principles
  • Celebrate strengths and small steps
  • Focus on What do we do now? not Why?
  • Appropriate referral to other services
  • Lifetime commitment

10
Research Questions
  • What important school outcomes, such as grades,
    achievement test scores, attendance, grade
    retention, disciplinary removals, special
    education service use, and high school
    graduation, occur within four groups of children
    matched at first grade

11
Matched Child Design Four Children in Each Set
Child 1 Enrolled in the PEP EIC program
Child 3 Began receiving special education
services for emotional/ behavioral problems in
first grade
Question What are long-term academic outcomes
for children receiving different amounts of a
parent-driven preschool behavioral intervention?
Question Does the timing of intervention
(preschool vs. first grade) matter?
Child 4 Typical school mate
Child 2 Enrolled in a school district-based early
intervention program
Question What are local norms for academic
development for children like this?
Question What are long-term academic outcomes
for children receiving typical district-sponsored
preschool intervention?
12
Research Questions, continued
  • What were the observed effects of the Early
    Childhood Center program, and how were these
    achieved?
  • How cost-effective is parent-driven preschool
    intervention?
  • Data are still being collected for this analysis

13
Research Participants
  • All children ever enrolled in an ECC were
    eligible to participate approximately 2,400
  • We were able to locate about 800 families, and of
    these more than half returned consent forms.
  • Our consented sample of 389 was submitted to the
    Cleveland Municipal School District for matching
  • 103 students had at least some matches, resulting
    in a Cleveland sample of 249 students
  • Of the 249, 241 had elementary school data 180
    had middle school data 118 had high school data

14
Limitations of the Research Design
  • Intervening variables what matters more for
    long-term outcome a long-ago intervention, or
    the accumulation of experiences since that
    intervention?
  • Biased group membership how are ECC families
    different from those in the other matched groups?

15
ECC Service Data
  • Children with information about their services at
    ECC

 
 
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
(No Transcript)
20
(No Transcript)
21
Attendance, Truancy, and Suspensions Across Study
Groups
22
Procedure
  • Only Cleveland Municipal School District had the
    capacity to identify matches for the comparison
    study.
  • Privacy, consent issues proved overwhelming when
    only paper student records were available
  • District-level attendance records and school
    transcripts were obtained and reviewed for
    participants and their matched peers.

23
Who Are the Children in this Analysis?
24
Who Are the Children in this Analysis?
25
Who Are the Children in this Analysis?
26
Importance of Attendance
  • On average, the higher a students attendance
    rate in grades 19
  • the more high school credits they attempted each
    year
  • r .23, p lt .01
  • the more high school credits they completed each
    year
  • r .72, p lt .001
  • the better their yearly high school GPA
  • r .73, p lt .001

27
Attendance Results
School Grade
28
Attendance Results
  • Across grades 1 through 9, ECC children had
    significantly better attendance than all other
    groups, averaging 93.
  • At 90, children receiving district-based
    preschool services had significantly higher
    attendance rates than those receiving initial
    services in first grade or typically developing
    peers
  • The latter two groups had the lowest attendance
    rates, at 84 and 87 respectively.

29
Importance of Early Truancy
  • Even in the first grade, students who later
    dropped out of high school had significantly more
    unexcused absences than those who went on to
    graduate
  • t (42.90) 3.75, p lt .01

30
Unexcused Absences/Truancy
School Grade
31
Truancy Results
  • ECC children had significantly less truancy than
    the other groups, averaging 2.1
  • Across grades 1 through 9, children initially
    receiving services in first grade had
    significantly more truancy than the other groups,
    averaging 7.6.
  • Children receiving district-based preschool and
    typically developing children had truancy rates
    at 4.0 and 4.9 respectively.

32
Suspensions
School Grade
33
Suspension Results
  • Although all four groups had low levels of
    suspension, children receiving any early
    interventioneither ECC or district-based had
    the fewest average days suspended at 0.13 and
    0.28, respectively.
  • Children initially receiving services in first
    grade and typically developing peers spent
    significantly more days suspended, averaging
    0.47 and 0.77 respectively.

34
Attendance Study Discussion
  • Attendance is about both a childs willingness to
    go to school and a caregivers ability to get
    them there.
  • Children who received ECC services had better
    attendance than matched children both with and
    without identified special needs.
  • Truancy is not just a high school problem it can
    emerge early in elementary school.

35
Emerging Results GPA Study
  • Same sample analysis of high school GPA over
    time (63 children had high school data)
  • No differences in how GPAs change over time, but
    significant differences in GPA by group
  • ECC children 2.55
  • District Preschool children 2.51
  • Service at 1st grade children 1.83
  • Typically developing children 1.96
  • ECC groups GPAs are significantly higher than
    those in the latter two groups not different
    than district-based preschool group

36
Emerging Results Dropout Study
  • Same sample as previous
  • No statistically significant results

37
Effects of ECC Dosage on Educational Outcomes
38
Dosage Study Sample
  • 309 ECC children
  • 103 who attended Cleveland Municipal schools
  • 206 who attended any other district
  • Dosage __actual days__
  • scheduled days
  • Median dosage .73
  • Sample split into high and low groups

39
Ohio Proficiency Exam Scores 4th grade
Note all group differences are statistically
significant
40
Ohio Proficiency Exam Scores 6th grade
Note all group differences are statistically
significant
41
Ohio Proficiency Exam Scores 9th grade
Note no group differences are statistically
significant
42
Educational Outcomes Elementary
Effect B Chi-Square R2
Logistic Regression Results  
-Repeated Grade -0.711 2.859
-Special Ed. Services 0.539 5.138
-Restrictiveness of Special Ed. Services 1.553
- Fully mainstreamed -0.321
- Partially mainstreamed -0.255
OLS Regression Results
-Number of Days Attended 9.252 0.036
-Number of Days Tardy -1.604 0.028
-Number of Unexcused Absences -1.048 0.024
-Number of Days Suspended -0.014 0.003
-Average Grade in English 0.580 0.129
-Average Grade in Math 0.214     0.017
plt.05, plt.01 positive numbers mean higher values for the high dosage group negative numbers mean higher values for the low dosage group
43
Educational Outcomes Middle School
Effect B   Chi-Square R2
Logistic Regression Results
-Repeated Grade 1.227 2.979
-Special Ed. Services 0.122 0.111
-Restrictiveness of Special Ed. Services 0.808
- Fully mainstreamed -0.427
- Partially mainstreamed -0.318
OLS Regression Results
-Number of Days Attended 3.904 0.005
-Number of Days Tardy 1.755 0.014
-Number of Unexcused Absences 1.203 0.001
-Number of Days Suspended -0.59 0.031
- Average Grade in English 0.031 0.000
- Average Grade in Math -0.062     0.001
plt.05, plt.01 positive numbers mean higher values for the high dosage group negative numbers mean higher values for the low dosage group
44
Educational Outcomes High School
Effect B   Chi-Square R2
Logistic Regression Results
-Repeated Grade 0.383 0.325
-Special Ed. Services -0.177 0.379
-Restrictiveness of Special Ed. Services 1.604
- Fully mainstreamed -0.226
- Partially mainstreamed 0.214
OLS Regression Results
-Number of Days Attended 14.295 0.044
-Number of Days Tardy -2.699 0.061
-Number of Unexcused Absences -0.535 0.000
-Number of Days Suspended -0.175 0.003
- Average Grade in English 0.47 0.044
- Average Grade in Math 0.144     0.004
plt.05, plt.01 positive numbers mean higher values for the high dosage group negative numbers mean higher values for the low dosage group
45
Dosage Study Discussion
  • Results of group comparison study for attendance
    are replicated with this alternative methodology
  • Results may be strongest in elementary school
  • Children of families who attended ECC more
    faithfully did better on 4th and 6th grade Ohio
    Proficiency Exams than low ECC attenders did

46
Focus Study How Does ECC Work?
47
Participants and Procedures
  • Conducted 90 minute focus groups with
  • 10 Parents (2 groups)
  • 7 Professional staff
  • 2 Paraprofessionals
  • Conducted 30 minute interviews with 9 former
    participants
  • Participants were identified by ECC staff, who
    were asked to select a representative
    cross-section of individuals

48
Effects of the Program
  • Improved child behavior and skills
  • Getting your kids literacy level up, getting a
    kid an ability to communicate, getting them able
    to read, when they cant function on a more basic
    a level, the social skill building that happens
    for the kids is enormous.
  • Improved parenting skills
  • I was better able to deal with the kids and
    enjoyed that time at home more.
  • When my mom was coming over and giving incorrect
    parenting Id have to correct her. Id have to
    share the skills with her and share the skills
    with the teacher in kindergarten.

49
Effects of the Program
  • Sense of community
  • In PEP everyone had the same problem and
    everyone was equal and they didnt judge, they
    just helped.
  • The power of community, because people spent a
    significant amount of time there, relationships
    were formed that I think were tremendously
    supportive and healing. And I think these
    continue to this day. I think this is a healing
    community and an important dynamic.
  • They learn to advocate by meeting parents and
    families and making friendships. To have that
    supportive network is an essential component.
  • EIC is the first place where people come and
    arent told that theyre bad parents.

50
Why Does ECC Work?
  • Knowledge and Skill
  • I learned to give positives, you always will
    love him, but this he did and these are the
    consequences
  • Also the practice, the guided practice, they do
    it we give them feedback, and its not like a
    workshop. You go to a workshop and its not
    interactive, but at PEP its the instruction, the
    practice, the feedback about the practice, and a
    big piece too is the sense of confidence.
  • Empowerment
  • I felt more empowered because staff was telling
    me that I had skills.I was then able to go into
    my childs other settings and be very assertive
    and aggressiveI was able to go in and advocate
    in a positive, professional way. I could
    demonstrate my skills and I could advocate and
    get changes made.
  • When you leave EIC you know what your rights
    are. I wasnt afraid to ask for them because I
    knew I was entitled to them.

51
Why Does ECC Work?
  • Demystifying Systems
  • They get that practice, theyre a part of a
    team. They get to watch somebody who knows how to
    talk with a school district and just seeing that
    they absorb a model.
  • Role of Paraprofessionals
  • Theyre so credible. I can say one thing as a
    professional, but Im not going home with the
    kid. My saying, Research shows is undermined
    by the fact I dont put him to bed at night. The
    paraprofessional says I do go home at night. The
    paraprofessional can say the tough things.
  • Parent to Parent
  • The key to the success is the parent helping
    parent under the guidance of professionals. The
    parent to parent component is the core of the
    program.

52
For Further Information
  • Kimberly Kendziora
  • American Institutes for Research
  • kkendziora_at_air.org
  • (202) 403-5391
About PowerShow.com