Photo credit: Tony Tran
I stumbled on the website for Harvard's Center on the Developing Child while researching my paper and discovered an incredible resource within it. One of the initiatives they are working on is a meta-analysis of efficacy in early intervention programs. We've frequently discussed whether or not early intervention or programs such as Head Start/Early Head Start are effective over the long run. The results of studies have indicated that, in large part, it depends on the program. Blanket judgments such as "early intervention cannot give children long-term gains in development" are invalid due to the wide variety in program quality. This initiative seeks to learn what makes a quality program, and how to help programs increase the quality of their care.
They have identified 5 factors:
1. Small group sizes and high adult : child ratios
2. Qualified and well-compensated personel
3. Warm and responsive adult-child interactions
4. A language-rich environment
5. Safe physical environment
They have also identified 3 layers of programs to most effectively serve children living in different life conditions:
1. General health and childcare (for all children)
2. More broadly supportive programs for low-income families
3. Targeted, more intensive interventions for children living with 'toxic stress' (drug exposure, foster care system, physical or sexual abuse, violent neighborhoods)
Here is a link to a video that explains this study.
No comments:
Post a Comment