Local education agencies (LEAs) have considerable discretion in the development and implementation of early childhood policy and programs. It is therefore useful to describe local implementation of early childhood policies, including those for young children with disabilities. A survey was conducted of early childhood programs administered by public schools in Massachusetts to obtain data on six aspects of program implementation: characteristics of the children served, program settings, service characteristics, teacher characteristics, family involvement activities, and funding and administration. Results revealed important variations among LEAs in integration, duration and frequency of services, staff-child ratios, teacher qualifications, and other aspects of policy implementation. Potential state responses are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barnett, W.S., & Escobar, C.M. (1990). Economic costs and benefits of early intervention. In S.J. Meisels & J.P. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of Early Childhood Intervention (pp. 560–582). New York: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Bredekamp, S. (Ed.) (1987a). Accreditation criteria and procedures of the National Academy of Early Childhood Programs. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
3.
Bredekamp, S. (Ed.) (1987b). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through Age 8 (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: NAEYC.
4.
Bricker, D., & Cripe, J.W. (1992). An activity-based approach to early intervention. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
5.
Cohen, D.K. (1982). Policy and organization: The Impact of state and federal education policy on school governance. Harvard Educational Review, 52, 474–499.
6.
Cohen, D.K. (1990). Governance and instruction: The promise of decentralization and choice. In W.H. Clune & J.F. Witte (Eds.), Choice and control in American education: Volume 1. The theory of choice and control in American education (pp. 337–386). Philadelphia: Falmer.
Firestone, W.A. (1989). Using reform: Conceptualizing district initiative. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 151–164.
9.
Frede, E.C., Barnett, W.S., Rosario, J., Barton, A., & Culhane, J.(1992). Breaking down the walls: A case study in collaborative evaluation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
10.
Frede, E.C., with the Project Impact Survey Task Force (1990). State survey of public school early childhood programs. Unpublished Questionnaire. Trenton, NJ: Trenton State College.
11.
Guralnick, M.J. (1981). Programmatic factors affecting child-child social interactions in mainstreamed preschool programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1, 79–91.
12.
Hofferth, S.L., Brayfield, A., Deich, S., & Holcomb, P.(1991). National child care survey, 1990 (Urban Institute Report 91–5). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
13.
Kagan, S.L. (1987). Early schooling on what grounds? In S.L. Kagan & E.F. Zigler (Eds.), Early schooling: The national debate. New Haven: Yale University Press.
14.
Levin, H.M. (1983). Cost effectiveness: A primer. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
15.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1986). Chapter 766 regulations. Quincy, MA: Author.
16.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1988). Chapter 188 early childhood standards for programs for 3- and 4-year-olds. Quincy, MA: Author.
17.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1989a). Massachusetts Department of Education Division of School Programs' early childhood initiatives. Quincy, MA: Author.
18.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1989b). Mission statement of Bureau of Early Childhood Programs. Quincy, MA: Author.
19.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1990). Per pupil expenditure 1989–90. Quincy, MA: Author.
20.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1991a). Bureau of Early Childhood Programs annual report FY 1990. Quincy, MA: Author.
21.
Massachusetts Department of Education. (1991b). Massachusetts educational personnel census. Unpublished data. Quincy, MA: Author.
22.
Massachusetts Department of Education (1992). Eligibility guidelines for special education. Quincy, MA: Author.
23.
McDonnell, L.M., & Elmore, R.F. (1987). Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 133–152.
24.
McLaughlin, M., Smith-Davis, J., & Burke, P.J. (1986). Personnel to educate the handicapped in America: A status report. College Park: University of Maryland, Institute for the Study of Exceptional Children and Youth.
25.
Meisels, S., Harbin, G., Modigliani, K., & Olson, L. (1988). Formulating optimal state early childhood intervention policies. Exceptional Children, 55, 159–165.
26.
Oakes, J. (1986). Educational indicators: A guide for policymakers. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Policy Research in Education, Rutgers University.
27.
Rule, S., Stowitschek, J.J., & Innocenti, M. (1986). Day care for handicapped children: Can we stimulate mainstream service through a day care-special education merger?. Child Care Quarterly, 15, 223–232.
28.
Smith, B.J. (1992). Leadership for children and families. DEC Communicator, 18(3), 7.
29.
Timar, T. (1989). A theoretical framework for local responses to state policy: Implementing Utah's career ladder program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 329–341.
