This study investigates how program evaluation has contributed to the definition of quality in early childhood programs and what social and cultural conditions have influenced these definitions. First, a review of evaluation reports from the last 3 decades identified three types of quality used to evaluate early childhood programs: (a) outcome-determined quality, (b) standards-based quality, and (c) developmental appropriateness. An analysis of questionnaire responses from evaluators and interviews with early childhood practitioners was also conducted in order to explore underlying social and cultural conditions of each quality definition. The authors conclude that, in order to be valid and meaningful, evaluation of early childhood programs should be based on in-depth understanding of dynamic program processes and diverse stakeholders’ perspectives on program quality. Evaluation should challenge and expand the dominant perspectives on early childhood program quality.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bracht, G. H. (1975). Planning evaluation studies. In R. A. Weinberg & S. G. Moore (Eds.), Evaluation of educational programs for young children: The Minnesota round table on early childhood education II (pp. 7-18). Washington, DC: Child Development Associate Consortium.
2.
Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
3.
Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
4.
Bresler, L. (1993). Three orientations to arts in the primary grades: Implications for curriculum reform. Arts Education Policy Review, 94(6), 29-34.
5.
Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
Colbert, C., & Taunton, M. (1992). Developmentally appropriate practice for the visual arts education of young children. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
7.
Collins, R. C., Colker, L. J., & Copple, C. E. (1994, January). Kaleidoscope: Profile of an arts-based early childhood program. Final report of an evaluation study [and] technical appendix (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED384410). Vienna, VA: Collins Management Consulting, Inc.
8.
Fuller, B., Holloway, S. D., & Bozzi, L. (1997). In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Evaluating child care and preschools: Advancing the interests of government, teachers, or parents?Issues in early childhood educational assessment and evaluation. Yearbook in early childhood education (Vol. 7, pp. 7-27). New York: Teachers College Press.
9.
Gilliam, W. S., & Zigler, E. F. (2000). A critical meta-analysis of all evaluations of state-funded preschool from 1977 to 1998: Implications for policy, service delivery and program evaluation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 441-473.
10.
Greene, J. C. (1990). Technical quality versus user responsiveness in evaluation practice. Evaluation and Program Planning, 13, 267-274.
11.
Greene, J. C. (2000). Understanding social programs through evaluation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 981-999). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
Jipson, J. (1991). Developmentally appropriate practice: Culture, curriculum, connections. Early Education and Development, 2, 120-136.
13.
Los Angeles County Economic and Youth Opportunities Agency, Research and Evaluation Division. (1970, September). Evaluation of Los Angeles county Head Start program, 1969-1970 (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED058928). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
14.
Moss, P., Dahlberg, G., & Pence, A. (2000). Getting beyond the problem with quality. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 8(2), 103-115.
15.
Moss, P., & Pence, A. (Eds.). (1994). Valuing quality in early childhood services: New approaches to defining quality. New York: Teachers College Press.
16.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1984). Accreditation criteria & procedures: Position statement of the National Academy of Early Childhood Programs. Washington, DC: Author.
17.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1988). Position statement on standardized testing of young children 3 through 8 years of age. Young Children, 43, 42-47.
18.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (1998). Accreditation criteria & procedures of the National Association for the Education of Young Children (1998 ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
19.
National Association for the Education of Young Children & National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education. (1991). Guidelines for appropriate curriculum content and assessment in programs serving children age 3 through 8. Young Children, 46(3), 21-38.
20.
Penn, H. (1994). Working in conflict: Developing a dynamic model of quality. In P. Moss & A. Pence (Eds.), Valuing quality in early childhood services: New approaches to defining quality (pp. 10-27). New York: Teachers College.
21.
Rallis, S., & Rossman, G. (2001). Communicating quality and qualities: The role of the evaluator as critical friend. In A. P. Benson, D. M. Hinn, & C. Lloyd (Eds.), Advances in program evaluation: Vol. 7. Visions of quality: How evaluators define, understand and represent program quality (pp. 107-120). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
22.
Ripple, C. H. (2000, May). New York state universal prekindergarten assessment meeting. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, College of Human Ecology, Cornell Early Childhood Program.
23.
Schwandt, T. A. (1989). Recapturing moral discourse in evaluation. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 11-16.
24.
Schwandt, T. A. (1992). Better living through evaluation? Images of progress shaping evaluation practice. Evaluation Practice, 13, 135-144.
25.
Shepard, L. A. (1991). The influence of standardized tests on the early childhood curriculum, teachers, and children. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Issues in early childhood curriculum (pp. 166-189). New York: Teachers College Press.
26.
Slavin, (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15-21.
27.
Spodek, B. (1983). Early childhood education: An overview. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 8, 203-207.
28.
Spodek, B. (1991). Reconceptualizing early childhood education: A commentary. Early Education and Development, 2, 161-167.
29.
Spodek, B., & Saracho, O. N. (1997). Evaluation in early childhood education: A look to the future. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Issues in early childhood educational assessment and evaluation. Yearbook in early childhood education (Vol. 7, pp. 198-206). New York: Teachers College Press.
30.
Stake, R. E. (2001). A problematic heading. American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 349-354.
31.
Travers, J. R., & Light, R. J. (Eds.). (1982). Learning from experience: Evaluating early childhood demonstration programs. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32.
Walsh, D. J. (1991). Extending the discourse on developmentally appropriateness: A developmental perspective. Early Education and Development, 2, 109-119.
33.
Weinberg, R. A., & Moore, S. G. (1975). Introduction. In R. A. Weinberg & S. G. Moore (Eds.), Evaluation of educational programs for young children: The Minnesota round table on early childhood education II (pp. 1-5). Washington, DC: Child Development Associate Consortium.
34.
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
35.
Westinghouse Learning Corporation & Ohio University. (1969). The impact of Head Start: An evaluation of the effects of Head Start on children’s cognitive and affective development (Contract No. B89-4536). Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Economic Opportunity.
36.
Worthen, B. R., Sanders, J. R., & Fitzpatrick, J. L. (1997). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
37.
Yagi, K. (1989, August). ECIA, Chapter 1 early childhood education program in the Portland public schools. 1988-89 evaluation report (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED342824). Portland, OR: Portland Public Schools, Research and Evaluation Department.
38.
Zill, N., Resnick, G., Kim, K., McKey, R. H., Clark, C., Pai-Samant, S., et al. (2001, January). Head Start FACES: Longitudinal findings on program performance. Third progress report (Contract No. HHS-105-96-1912) (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED453969). Washington, DC: Administration on Children, Youth and Families, Commissioner’s Office of Research and Evaluation and the Head Start Bureau.
