Table of Contents | Previous | Next |
INTERNALIZING/EXTERNALIZING BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS
NATIONAL HEAD START IMPACT STUDY
Measure: Classroom Observation Record
Background
The Classroom Observation Record (COR; High Scope Educational Research Foundation, 1992) is a teacher rated, observational assessment of a wide array of normative child behavior (e.g., language, mathematics, social relations, creative representation, and music and movement). It is not used as a clinical tool for diagnosing behavior problems, but is a criterion-referenced assessment of normative social development, and low scores may be indicative of possible social problems.
The Head Start Impact Study is funded by the Administration for Children and Families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Westat (prime contractor) conducts the study in collaboration with the Urban Institute, the American Institutes for Research, and Decisions Information Resources (subcontractors).
Population Assessed
The Head Start Impact Study involves 4,750 (2,829 treatment and 1,921 control) 3- and 4-year-old newly entering Head Start-eligible preschool children across 84 nationally representative grantees and delegate agencies in communities where there are more eligible children and families than can be served by the program. Of the 4,750 children selected for the study, approximately 42 percent are Hispanic; 27 percent, Black; 28 percent, White; and 3 percent, other. Sixty-six percent of the children speak English as their primary language, 31 percent speak Spanish, and 3 percent speak a language other than Spanish or English. Gender is evenly split on the child sample.
The sample selection process began by including all fiscal year 1999–2000 Head Start grantees and delegate agencies in all 50 states, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico. Programs that were very new, migrant, or tribal or that offered Early Head Start only were excluded. Geographic grantee clusters were developed using a minimum of eight grantees/delegate agencies per cluster, and the clusters were grouped into 25 strata using state pre-K and childcare policy, child race/ethnicity, urban/rural location and region as stratifiers. One cluster was selected per strata with probability proportional to size (N=261 grantees/delegate agencies). Next, the eligibility of grantees/delegate agencies in each cluster was determined. Those that were closed or merged and those that were saturated (have very few children in the community who are not served) were excluded. Remaining grantees/delegate agencies within the clusters were then stratified based on grantee/delegate agency characteristics including local contextual variables. Three grantees/delegate agencies were randomly selected from each cluster. These grantees/delegate agencies were contacted for participation in the study and the list of centers operating within these grantees/delegate agencies in 2002–2003 was compiled. Center eligibility was determined by excluding saturated centers and combining small centers with nearby centers to create center groups. Using the same stratification characteristics as used for the grantees/delegate agencies, approximately three centers were selected from each grantee/delegate agency based on proportional probabilities (i.e., larger centers have greater chance of selection). The final sample included 378 centers within 84 grantees/delegate agencies. Once the centers were selected, random assignment of children within these centers resulted in 2,829 children in the treatment group and 1,921 children in the comparison group for a total of 4,750 children.
Children selected were considered part of one of two cohorts. Cohort one included children who were 3-years-old in the 2002–2003 school year. Cohort one will be followed through 2005–2006, when they will have reached first grade. Cohort two consists of children who were 4-years-old during the 2002–2003 school year, and thus are moving into kindergarten in the 2003–2004 school year. Cohort two will be followed through their first grade year in 2004–2005.
Periodicity
The COR (High Scope Educational Research Foundation, 1992) was part of the self-administered Teacher/Care Provider Child Report forms given in the spring of 2003. The same instrument will be used for the 3-year-old cohort in spring 2004.
Subscales/Components
The first year of data collection is complete, but subscales are not yet available. Five items in the COR are related to socio-emotional behavior.
Procedures for Administration
The teacher/care provider rated each child on five items related to socio-emotional behavior from COR (High Scope Educational Research Foundation, 1992). Two items are on problem solving and initiative and three items are on social relations. The same instrument will be used for the 3-year old cohort in spring 2004.
Psychometrics/Data Quality
Psychometric data for the study is not yet available.
Languages Available
Teacher/Care Provider Child Report forms are available in English and Spanish.
Items Included
A full listing of items cannot be given because of copyright restraints. Sample items follow:
Please circle the number below the one item that best describes how well the child solves problems. (Time frame is within the past week. A glossary of sample behaviors is provided.)
Child does not yet identify problems.
Child identifies problems, but does not try to solve them, turning instead to another activity.
Child uses one method to try to solve a problem, but if unsuccessful, gives up after one or two tries.
Child shows some persistence, trying several alternative methods to solve a problem.
Child tries alternative methods to solve a problem and is highly involved and persistent.
Please circle the number below the one item that best describes how well this child makes friends with other children. (Time frame is within the past week. A glossary of sample behaviors is provided.)
Child does not yet identify classmates or other children by name.
Child identifies some the children by name and occasionally talks about them.
Child identifies a classmate or another child as a friend.
Child is identified by a classmate or another child as a friend.
Child appears to receive social support form a friend and shows loyalty to the friend.
References and Source Documents
CTB Macmillan/McGraw-Hill. (1990). Developing Skills Checklist. Monterey, CA: CTB/McGraw-Hill.
FACES Research Team. Head Start Quality Research Consortium. from Achenbach, T. S. (unpublished). Discriminant analysis of Child Behavior Checklist for National Center of Health Statistics, 1996. Burlington, VT: Center for Children, Youth, and Families, Universities of Vermont.
Lutz, M.N., Fantuzzo, J.F., & McDermott, P. (2002). Multidimensional assessment of emotional and behavioral adjustment problems of low-income preschool children: development and initial validation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17(3), 338–355.
Pianta, R. C. (2001). Student-teacher relationship scale. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Pianta, R. C. (1992). Child-parent relationship scale. Unpublished measure, University of Virginia.
Puma, M., Bell, S., Shapiro, G., Broene, P., Cook, R., Friedman, J., & Heid, C. (2001). Building Futures: The Head Start Impact Study Research Design Plan. Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services.
Schweinhart, L., McNair, S., Barnes, H., & Larner, M. (1993). Observing young children in action to assess their development: The High/Scope Child Observation Record Study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 445–54.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/hs/impact_study/index.html
| Table of Contents | Previous | Next |