Head Start, founded with the best of intentions, is a pre-school program that is supposed to rescue disadvantaged toddlers and help prepare them for schools. Problem is, according to the federal government, when Head Start youth enter the first grade, they still lag behind the other students, so the government wants to begin administering tests to these 4- and 5-year-olds.
Does that decision generate some controversy? Does the sun rise in the mornings?
The Head Start test is already drawing some of the same criticism as other standardized tests, such as the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test. Critics say a more informal, year-round assessment that includes discussions with parents is a more valid way to assess preschoolers.
Others say the new test could stress out kids and pressure teachers to replace play activities with a more structured curriculum, narrowing the purpose of Head Start, established in 1965 for economically disadvantaged families.
The problem is, the efficicacy of Head Start seems to vary wildly depending on who's doing the talking, and what the speaker expects Head Start to be doing. The government seems to be concerned that Head Start is not bringing kids up to speed quickly enough on reading skills - but defenders of Head Start say that's not true:
Children who have graduated from Head Start are less likely to repeat a grade or require special education and more likely to graduate from high school, according to the Florida Children's Forum, a child advocacy group. Local Head Start directors in Florida point to the results of a broad state test that showed at least 80 percent of Head Start children having the motor, cognitive and language skills they needed to begin school, slightly more than their peers who were not in Head Start.
It seems to me that Head Start teachers and administrators don't want the government to determine how well children are progressing, which is an iffy stand to take, given that Head Start is a government program:
Head Start teachers have always charted the progress of their students, they say, but by their own methods - and without having to report their measurements to the government. Much like private preschool providers, they measure student performance by talking to parents, by observing students playing with other children and by observing their knowledge of the alphabet, shapes and numbers.
The suggested test, though, sounds rather innocuous (and is 20 minutes really too long to expect a four-year-old to concentrate? I wouldn't know). The real issue here seems to be that the government-based test measures only reading and math, while Head Start teachers believe that Head Start is designed to focus on social skills and fine motor skills.
So who's right? I don't know. It depends on what the focus of Head Start is, and whether the government is willing to incorporate research suggesting that basic standardized tests might not be the best way to assess preschoolers, or to assess whatever it is Head Start is supposed to accomplish. Perhaps some of you out there with more familiarity with this program can clue me in.
Posted by kswygert at September 24, 2003 12:39 PM