Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
CHAPTER II
Social Skills and Problem Behavior of Head Start Children and Their Adjustment to Kindergarten
The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) provides information about desirable and undesirable social behavior that children who attend Head Start display when they enter the program, at the end of the program year, and at the end of the first year of elementary school. The information is obtained through behavior ratings provided by parents, Head Start teachers, and kindergarten teachers. Desirable behavior includes cooperation with adults, friendly play, and caring for and sharing with other children. Undesirable behaviors include disruptive or overly aggressive behavior toward other children or defiant behavior toward adults, hyperactivity, excessive shyness, lack of self-confidence, and social withdrawal.
Information about children’s social behavior is important because children’s academic achievement and adjustment once they get to school depend not only on their mastery of basic intellectual skills, but also on their acquisition of social skills and positive approaches to learning. They also depend on the amelioration of negative behavior patterns they may have acquired that are likely to be disruptive or counterproductive in the school setting (Pianta & McCoy, 1997; Zill & West, 2001). Thus, data on behavioral changes that occur during and after program participation are helpful in evaluating how well the Head Start program is performing in preparing children for school, and what changes and reforms may be needed to improve program performance.9
FINDINGS
Children who entered Head Start in the fall of 2000 showed gains in cooperative classroom behavior over the course of the program year. These gains were similar to but significantly larger than those shown by Head Start children in the 1997-1998 program year. Children who entered Head Start with lower levels of social skill made greater gains than those who entered with higher skill levels did. This was also the case in the first round of FACES. According to Head Start teachers, children showed small but significant declines in hyperactive behavior during the program year. They did not show significant declines in overall problem behavior, aggressive behavior, or withdrawn behavior. However, children who entered the program with high levels of problem behavior showed significant improvement, and this was true in all areas of problem behavior. According to Head Start parents, children showed significant improvement in overall problem behavior, aggressive behavior, and hyperactive behavior during the program year. Those who displayed high levels of problem behavior at the start of the year showed greater improvement than those who entered with average or lower levels of undesirable behavior did.
A. Cooperative Classroom Behavior of Head Start Children
Lead teachers in the FACES 2000 national sample of Head Start classes were asked to rate the cooperative classroom behavior of children in their classes. These ratings were obtained early in the program year (October-November) and toward the end of the year (April-June). The scale was partly composed of items dealing with helpful and compliant behavior like, “Follows the teacher’s directions,” “Joins an activity or group without being told to do so,” and “Helps in putting work materials or center property away.” Other items dealt with the child’s maturity and skill in interacting with other children. Examples include, “Invites others to join in activities,” “Waits her or his turn in games or other activities,” and “Accepts classmates’ ideas for sharing and playing.” For each item, the teacher was asked to judge whether the child behaved in the indicated way, “never,” “sometimes,” or “very often.”There were 12 rating items in all, and the scale score could range from zero (all items marked “never”) to 24 (all items marked “very often”).
Head Start Children Show Gain
in Cooperative Behavior From Fall to Spring
The mean score on the cooperative classroom behavior scale for children
in the fall of 2000 was 14.6. This meant that the typical Head Start
child engaged in most of the specified forms of cooperative behavior
at least “sometimes,” and a few forms, “very often.”
By the spring of 2001, the mean score on the scale had risen to 16.6.
This was a statistically significant gain of two scale score points
(p < .001), or 41 percent of a standard deviation. It
meant that the typical child was engaging in two additional forms
of cooperative behavior “very often.” The fall-spring
gain was slightly larger (by .56 points, p = .0001) than
the comparable gain (1.41 points, p <.001) found among
Head Start children in the 1997–1998 program year (Figure 2.1).
[D] |
Children Who Show Less Cooperative
Behavior Initially Make Larger Gains
There was considerable diversity in the cooperative behavior levels
with which Head Start children entered Head Start. Children in the
lowest quartile of the scale score distribution, for example, had
a mean score in the fall of 8.6. This implied that these children “never” engaged in several types of cooperative behavior.
Children in the highest quartile of the scale score distribution,
on the other hand, had a mean score in the fall of 20.5. This implied
that, even in the fall, those children engaged in most of the specified
forms of cooperative behavior “very often.” By the spring,
the children in the lowest quartile received a mean score on the cooperative
behavior scale of 13.3, whereas the children in the highest quartile
had a mean score of 19.8. The gain shown by the children in the lowest
quartile in the fall—4.7 points, or nearly a full standard deviation—was
more than double that shown by the average Head Start child. It was
significantly larger than the gain shown by the average child (difference
= 2.7, p <.001) or by children in the highest quartile
of the fall distribution (difference = 5.4, p <.001).
Despite the larger gain shown by children in the lowest quartile in the fall, their mean score remained below the overall spring mean. Likewise, children in the highest quartile in the fall had a mean score in the spring that was significantly higher than the overall mean. This occurred despite a lack of progress (in fact, a slight decline) in their scale scores from fall to spring. Thus, while the gaps between these groups narrowed during the program year, they did not completely close.
The larger gain shown by children who entered Head Start with lower levels of cooperative behavior — and the decline shown by children who entered with higher levels of cooperative behavior — may be at least partly attributable to the statistical phenomenon of “regression to the mean.” Note however, that the gain shown by children in the lowest quartile was substantially larger than the decline shown by children in the highest quartile, whereas if only regression to the mean was operating, one would expect both changes to be of roughly equal magnitude. The reliability of the teacher rating scale was sufficient (see Appendix) to give us confidence that the larger gain shown by children who entered with lower social skills was not merely a statistical artifact. The larger gain may indicate that Head Start is having a “compensatory” influence on children who entered with lower social skills. In the absence of a control group, however, we cannot say whether the larger gain is attributable to participation in the program or represents a growth spurt that would have occurred among these children whether or not they participated in the program.
B. Problem Behavior of Head Start Children
Lead teachers in the FACES 2000 national sample of Head Start classes were asked to rate the undesirable or problem behavior of children in their classes. These ratings were obtained early in the program year (October-November) and toward the end of the year (April-June). The Behavior Problems scale was partly composed of items dealing with aggressive or defiant behavior like, “Hits or fights with others,” “Disrupts ongoing activities,” and “Has temper tantrums or hot temper.” Other items dealt with inattentive or hyperactive behavior. Examples include, “Can’t concentrate, can’t pay attention for long,” and “Is very restless, fidgets all the time, can’t sit still.” A third set of items dealt with shy, withdrawn, or depressed behavior. Examples of this set include, “Keeps to herself or himself, tends to withdraw,” “Lacks confidence in learning new things or trying new activities,” and “Often seems unhappy, sad, or depressed.” For each item, the teacher was asked to judge whether the behavioral description was “not true,” “somewhat or sometimes true,” or “very true or often true” of the child. There were 14 rating items in all and the total scale score could range from zero (all items marked “not true”) to 28 (all items marked “very true or often true”).
The teacher ratings were also used to calculate three subscale scores. The Aggressive Behavior subscale contained 4 items and could range in value from zero to 8.The Hyperactive Behavior subscale was composed of three items and could range in value from zero to 6. And the Withdrawn Behavior subscale contained seven items and could range in value from zero to 14.
 [D] |
Children Show Reductions in Hyperactive
Behavior During Program Year
The mean score on the Total Behavior Problems scale for children in
the fall of 2000 was 5.6. This meant that the typical Head Start child
engaged in several of the specified forms of aggressive, hyperactive,
or withdrawn behavior at least “somewhat or sometimes,”
or one or two forms of undesirable behavior, “often.” By the spring of 2001, the mean score on the scale was 5.2. This was
not a statistically significant change (-.37, p =.071) (Figure
2.2). The fall and spring levels of problem behavior were similar
to those found among Head Start children in the 1997-1998 program
year. (The mean in the spring of 1998 was 5.2, a difference of .02,
p = .91.) The lack of statistically significant change in
Total Behavior Problems was also indistinguishable from the change
picture found in the earlier cohort (difference in differences = -.08,
p =.57) (Figure 2.3).
There was, however, a small but statistically significant change in mean scores on the Hyperactive Behavior subscale. These went from a mean of 1.36 in the fall to a mean of 1.20 in the spring. This was a change of -.16 scale points (p = .008), or 10 percent of a standard deviation. There was a similar decline in Hyperactive Behavior noted in the 1997-1998 program year. (The difference in differences was -.003, p = .94.)
Mean scores on the Aggressive Behavior subscale did not change significantly from (mean = 1.76) to spring (mean = 1.71) of the program year (difference = -0.05, p =.492). An apparent decline in mean scores on the Withdrawn Behavior subscale from fall (mean = 2.50) to spring (mean = 2.32) was of only marginal statistical significance (difference = -0.18, p =.06). The subscale scores and change patterns were similar to those found in the 1997-1998 program year.
[D] |
Children Who Display More Problem
Behavior Initially Show Improvement
There was substantial diversity in the frequency and severity of problem
behavior that children displayed on entry to Head Start. For example,
children in the highest quartile of the Total Behavior Problems scale
score distribution, for example, had a mean score in the fall of 11.9.
This meant that these children displayed nearly a dozen of the specific
types of problem behavior covered in the scale at least “somewhat
or sometimes.” Or they displayed about half a dozen forms of
such behavior “often.” By contrast, children in the lowest
quartile of the scale score distribution had a mean score in the fall
of 0.80. Similar diversity was found for the Aggressive, Hyperactive,
and Withdrawn Behavior subscales.
Children who entered the program with relatively high levels of problem behavior showed significant declines in their behavior scores from fall to spring. For children in the highest quartile in the fall, the mean score on the Total Behavior Problems scale declined by more than three points (-3.23. p <.001), or two thirds of a standard deviation.The mean score on the Withdrawn Behavior subscale declined by nearly two points (-1.88, p <.001), while mean scores on the Aggressive (-1.02, p <.001) and Hyperactive (-0.94, p <.001) subscales declined by about one point each (Figure 2.4). On the other hand, children in the lowest quartile of the problem behavior distribution in the fall showed slight increases in their mean scores from fall to spring. For example, children in the lowest quartile on the Total Behavior Problems scale showed an increase of 1.53 points from fall to spring (p <.001).
 [D] |
Despite the larger declines shown by children in the highest quartile in the fall, their mean scores remained above overall spring means. Likewise, children in the lowest quartile in the fall had mean scores in the spring that were significantly lower than the overall means. This despite the slight increases they showed in rated problem behavior. Thus, as with cooperative behavior, gaps between high, average, and low problem behavior groups narrowed during the program year, but did not completely close.
The significant declines in problem behavior shown by children who enter with higher levels of such behavior may indicate that Head Start is having a “compensatory” influence on these children, as the program was intended to have. In the absence of a control group, however, we cannot say whether the larger declines are attributable to participation in the program or represent maturation processes that would have occurred among these children whether or not they participated in the program. Also, the changes that were found in the high and low behavior problem groups may at least partly reflect measurement error and “regression to the mean,” as noted in connection with the cooperative behavior ratings. Once again, however, we note that the changes were much larger in the group that showed initial difficulties than in the group that was relatively problem-free at program entry.
Parents Report Improvements in
Children’s Problem Behavior During Head Start
Parents of children studied in FACES 2000 were asked to rate the problem
behavior of their children, using scales similar to those completed
by teachers. The fall and spring behavior ratings completed by parents
showed significant improvements in overall problem behavior.They showed
improvements in the Aggressive as well as the Hyperactive subscale.
Significant declines were found not just among children who entered
the program with high levels of problem behavior, but in overall mean
scores as well (Figure 2.5).
Scores on the Total Behavior Problem scale completed by parents could range from zero to 24. Mean scores went from 6.17 in the fall to 5.64 in the spring. The decline of 0.52 points was statistically significant (p < .001) and represented a change of 14 percent of a standard deviation. Scores on the Aggressive Behavior subscale could range from zero to 8. Mean scores went from 3.15 in the fall to 2.85 in the spring (difference = -0.31, p < .001). Scores on the Hyperactive Behavior subscale could range from zero to 6. Mean scores went from 1.87 in the fall to 1.66 in the spring (difference = -0.22, p < .001). Scores on the Withdrawn Behavior subscale could range from zero to 6. Mean scores were 0.61 in the fall and 0.63 in the spring (difference = 0.02, p = .539).
Parent behavior ratings in the 2000-2001 FACES sample showed lower levels of problem behavior in their children at the end of the program year than had parents in the 1997-1998 FACES study. This was the case for Total Behavior Problems (p = .023),Aggressive Behavior (p = .025), and Withdrawn Behavior (p < .001). The FACES 2000 parents also reported larger declines in problem behavior from fall to spring than did the FACES 1997 parents. This was the case for Total Behavior Problems (p < .002) and Aggressive Behavior (p < .001), but not for Hyperactive or Withdrawn Behavior.
[D] |
Parent Ratings Show Greater Improvement
for Children With Higher Initial Levels of Problem Behavior
As found with the behavior ratings completed by teachers, parent behavior
ratings indicated that children who began Head Start with higher levels
of problem behavior showed significant and significantly larger declines
in such behavior during the program year than children who entered
with average or lower levels of problem behavior. For children in
the highest quartile of Total Behavior Problem ratings, mean scores
declined more than two points from fall to spring (difference = -2.27,
p < .001). This was significantly larger than the mean
decline (difference of differences = 1.74, p < .001) and
than the change shown by the lowest quartile children (difference
of differences = 3.03, p < .001). Children in the highest
quartile of Aggressive Behavior or Hyperactive Behavior showed declines
of more than one rating point. Children in the highest quartile of
Withdrawn Behavior showed declines of 0.61 of a rating point. All
of these changes were significantly larger than the corresponding
changes for all children or for the lowest quartile of children (all p < .001) (Figure 2.6).
The parent ratings of problem behavior produced results that were generally consistent with the results from teacher ratings of problem behavior. Both sets of ratings support the conclusion that children show significant improvement in undesirable behavior, and that this improvement is more pronounced for children who enter Head Start with higher levels of problem behavior. Parents were also asked to rate social skills and positive approaches to learning in their children. Social skills items were similar to those presented to teachers (e.g., “Makes friends easily,” “Comforts or helps others,” and “Accepts friends’ ideas in sharing and playing”). Examples of the approaches to learning items included, “Enjoys learning,” “Likes to try new things,” and “Shows imagination in work and play.” There were seven items in this scale, and scores could range from zero (meaning all the items were rated “not true” of the child) to 14 (meaning all the items were rated “very true or often true” of the child).
On this scale, parent ratings did not show overall change from fall to spring of the program year. Part of the reason for this may be that, even in the fall, parents tended to rate their children as exhibiting most or all of these positive behaviors “very often.” Average scores were so high that there was not much room for further improvement. Mean scores were 12.1 in the fall and 12.1 in the spring (difference = .004; p = .958). There was significant improvement, however, for those children who received relatively low Social Skills and Positive Approaches to Learning ratings from their parents. Children in the lowest quartile of the distribution in the fall showed a gain of 1.2 scale points, going from 9.98 in the fall to 11.18 in the spring (p < .001). This change was significantly greater than that for the overall mean (p < .001) and that for the highest quartile (difference = 2.22, p < .001). Children in the highest quartile showed a slight decline in their mean scores, going from a perfect mean score of 14.0 in the fall to a near perfect mean score of 12.98 in the spring (difference = -1.02, p < .001).
C. Behavior and Adjustment in Kindergarten
Teacher ratings data are not yet available from FACES 2000 on the cooperative behavior and problem behavior of Head Start graduates by the time they reach the end of kindergarten. But the data reveal something about the kindergarten experiences of Head Start graduates from longitudinal follow-ups to FACES 1997. Behavioral ratings by kindergarten teachers were obtained for 955 children who participated in Head Start during the 1997-1998 and 1998-1999 program years. (The latter children were those, usually aged three at program entry, who participated in Head Start for two years.) The kindergarten teachers rated the behavior of these children on the same Cooperative Classroom Behavior and Problem Behavior scales used by Head Start teachers.
[D] |
The picture that these ratings provided was generally consistent with that provided by Head Start teachers at the end of the child’s last year in Head Start. For example, the subset of children for whom kindergarten ratings were obtained had a mean score on the Cooperative Behavior scale of 17.7 at the end of Head Start.10 These same children received a mean score from their kindergarten teachers of 18.8. This implies that the Head Start graduates displayed a majority of the cooperative behaviors “sometimes” or “often.” The 1.2 scale-point increase in the mean scores from Head Start to kindergarten was statistically significant (p < .001).
The mean score on the Total Behavior Problems scale was 4.27 at the end of Head Start, and 4.57 at the end of kindergarten. The difference in means (0.30) was not statistically significant (p = .208). This implies that Head Start graduates in kindergarten displayed between four and five kinds of problem behavior at least “sometimes,” or one or two types “often.” The frequency of problem behavior was similar at the end of Head Start and kindergarten. The one type of behavior that showed a slight but significant increase from the Head Start teacher ratings to the kindergarten teacher ratings was Hyperactive Behavior. Mean scores on this subscale went from 0.88 at the end of Head Start to 1.20 at the end of kindergarten (difference = .31, p < .001). Mean scores on the Aggressive Behavior subscale were not significantly different (1.38 in Head Start, 1.30 in kindergarten, difference = -.08, p = .318). Nor were means on the Withdrawn Behavior subscale (1.99 in Head Start, 2.05 in kindergarten, difference = .06, p = .208).
As shown in greater detail in Chapter VII of this report, behavior ratings by Head Start teachers and parents were predictive of children’s behavior and adjustment in kindergarten. When teacher and parent ratings at the end of Head Start were combined in a multiple regression equation, they related moderately well (R = .42) to Cooperative Behavior ratings by kindergarten teachers. Teacher ratings of aggressive behavior and cooperative behavior were the scales that showed the strongest relationship with cooperative behavior in kindergarten. A similar result was obtained with respect to problem behavior in kindergarten. When the Head Start rating scales were put into a regression model, they also related moderately well (R = .49) to Total Behavior Problems as rated by kindergarten teachers. The individual scales or subscales that related most strongly to kindergarten behavior problems were Head Start teachers’ ratings of aggressive behavior, withdrawn behavior, and cooperative classroom behavior.
These findings show the importance of children’s behavioral adjustment in preschool as a foreshadowing of how they will adjust and perform in elementary school. They also suggest that the positive changes in behavior that Head Start children display during Head Start may well boost the odds of their doing well in elementary school.
REFERENCES
Pianta, R.C., & McCoy, S.J. (1997). The first day of school: The predictive validity of early school screening. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18, 1-22.
Zill, N., & West, J. (2001). Entering kindergarten: A portrait of American children when they begin school. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
9This chapter focuses on social-emotional measures of school readiness. See Chapter I for information about cognitive measures and the Appendix for a complete listing of measures used in FACES.(back)
10The fact that the mean Cooperative Behavior rating was slightly higher for the children for whom kindergarten teacher ratings were obtained than for the overall FACES 1997 sample suggests that the follow-up subsample was somewhat biased toward children with better adjustment.(back)
| Table of Contents | Previous | Next |