Getting a Head Start on Child Abuse and Neglect

The following is a paper prepared for coursework in pursuit of a PhD in General Education from Capella University. The paper hasn't been published or peer reviewed. I offer it here for the purpose of adding to the dialogue on education that continues now, five years later.

Getting a Head Start: On Getting Even for Developmentally Abused and Neglected Children in a Developmentally Abused and Neglected Program

Nancy L. Gray
February 2003

Abstract

Head Start is investigated through an examination of the literature about Head Start, Child Development, and Child Abuse and Neglect as they interrelate. Head Start makes a "significant difference" to children in all 50 states, plus the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Territories by providing "high quality" comprehensive health, nutritional, educational, social and other services. An estimated 20% of the children who attend Head Start programs are abused and neglected by their primary caretakers. Children's development is negatively impacted by abuse and neglect. The literature indicates Head Start also experiences a form of "abuse and neglect" from the government agencies that serve as its caretakers. Head Start's development is less than its critics expect and demand. There may be a connection.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents 3
Introduction 4
Head Start 6
Child Development and Head Start. 8
Child Abuse, Neglect and Head Start. 9
Connections 12
Bibliography 17


Getting a Head Start: On Getting Even for Developmentally Abused and Neglected Children in a Developmentally Abused and Neglected Program

INTRODUCTION

Head Start, the federally funded national pre-school program, is an anomaly. Talk about getting a head start and the first thought that comes to the average person is about someone gaining an advantage over the competition. Mention getting a head start to Early Childhood educators, pediatricians and other service providers for children, and the subject quickly focuses on Project Head Start, a national program designed not to give an advantage, but to even the playing field for the 60% of those three-to-five-year-old children it reaches, that might otherwise be left out of the game altogether. Ask its critics, and Head Start becomes just another federal program that fails to deliver on its promises. Which is it?

Project Head Start, according to the "Creating A 21st Century Head Start Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Head Start Quality and Expansion, is "…a symbol of hope for a better life for low-income children and their families." (1993 p2) A Head Start parent giving testimony before the Advisory Committee said "I learned to live again, not just survive. Head Start gave me and my children a chance to succeed, to be winners." (1993 p2) Unfortunately, the anomaly is that Head Start may be the most "successful social program of its time" but find itself, once again, in danger of an early demise through the efforts of critics and the government agencies responsible for its success.
Like the twenty percent of its children who are abused and neglected, Head Start bears the marks of the innocent victim of its environment. When times are good and money is plentiful, Head Start is everyone's darling blue-eyed political baby. When times are rough, Head Start takes a beating. When Head Start personnel have difficulty in "determining when a refusal for treatment may be considered child abuse or neglect," they can see "45CFR 1304.22(a)(5) for guidance." (The Administration for Children and Families, Head Start Bureau, 2003, p12). When Head Start is refused treatment in the form of adequate and necessary funding, neglected through reductions in auxiliary services needed to implement and maintain the quality of the program, or abused in the guise of "Standardized Testing" that won't provide "meaningful data," (Jacobson, 2003, p1). and threatened by abandonment by its federal parent, Health and Human Services, to be placed in the foster care of the states with their "cash-strapped governors" who will "slice off services to make federal money go farther," (Schemo, 2003) who will provide the guidance to determine if, in fact, it is being "helped," as suggested by its critics, or abused and neglected as suggested by its advocates? Who will be its arbiter?

Head Start isn't simply a pre-school program. It serves as a handicap to increase the chances for those children and their families who are struggling with the disability of impoverishment. Head Start is presently a program struggling with its own developmental problems. Just as low-income, disabled, or abused and neglected children need a program that views their "developmental milestones" flexibly, not attempting to force conformity where there are too many uncontrolled factors, but instead seeking "consistent results over time and across users,"(The Administration for Children and Families, Head Start Bureau, 2003, p 6) so too does the Head Start program deserve flexibility in meeting its "Program Performance Standards." Head Start "narrows the gap between disadvantaged students and all other children….improves social skills….leads to continued improvements…relative to other children during kindergarten." (Head Start FACES…, 2001, pi). Head Start does not create an even playing field, but its graduates are at least playing in the game.

This paper considers three issues concerning Head Start. The first issue is Head Start as a program. The second issue is development as it relates to Head Start as a program, and the children it serves. The third issue is abuse and neglect as it relates to Head Start as a program, the children it serves, and perhaps, the future of both.

HEAD START

Project Head Start began in 1965, during an "optimistic period of American history, a time when many believed that government should take a proactive, extensive role in eradicating the negative effects of poverty on children's development." (Zigler/Styfco, 1993, p1) At that time, "much of the country's poverty" was located in "physically or culturally isolated enclave." Children represented half of the "nation's thirty million poor people." President Lyndon Johnson declared War on Poverty. Johnson was committed to "overcome a lot of hostility in our society against the poor…by going at the children," believing that "education and self-help programs…could succeed in transforming the lives of poor Americans." (Zigler/Styfco, 1993, p 3). Today, Head Start reaches nearly 60% of eligible low-income children between the ages three and five. It's newest addition, Early Head Start, reaches 3% of low-income children from six months to age three.

Head Start didn't begin with "especially unique" components. What Head Start did, that was new, was to combine components "to form a multifaceted intervention" with the intention to "develop ways to serve very young children." The basic program was designed to meet the "developmental needs of the poor children." The program would "optimize their competence in social and school settings" by providing "developmentally appropriate educational experiences, health screening and referral, mental health services, social services, nutrition education, and hot meals, and parent involvement." (Zigler/Styfco, 1993, p 5) Development of "motor, language, social, cognitive, perceptual, and emotional domains" was, and remains, a primary consideration. (The Administration for Children and Families, Head Start Bureau, 2003, p 6).

Head Start has five primary objectives. The first is to "enhance children's healthy growth and development. The second is to "strengthen families as the primary nurturers of their children." The third is to "provide children with educational, health and nutritional services." The fourth is to "link children and families to needed community services." And the fifth is to "ensure well-managed programs that involve parents in decision making." (Head Start FACES, 2002, p4)

In 1993, Health and Human Services announced the formation of an Advisory Committee to "review the program and make recommendations for improvements and expansion." The purpose was to make sure "the vision and potential of Head Start" are renewed, "the program strengthened," and the changing needs of children and families met. The committee's intent was to "develop a set of recommendations that could guide program planning," and ensure that the "powerful legacy of an earlier time continues to thrive into the next century." (Creating…1993, p 2). Among their findings: "Head Start must not be isolated from other providers; it must take its place as a partner in a community and state." (Creating…1993, p 3). Expecting it to do so, at this time when states are struggling with massive budget cuts and reduced services to the poor and their children, is tantamount to inviting the destruction of the one program proven to make a difference in the "school readiness" of low-income children.

CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND HEAD START

Head Start works with a "whole child" approach. Educational preparedness involves the "provision of academic and social experiences that are developmentally appropriate as well as health care and family support services." (Zigler/Styfco 1993, p113). Head Start is successful because its "program performance standards require the use of a developmentally appropriate curriculum keyed to each child's needs and to all areas of the child's development." At Head Start, "teachers facilitate, rather than direct learning." (Zigler/Styfco 1993, p98). Unfortunately, many Head Start programs are "marginal, staffed by people who are poorly paid and have little training." (Vander Zanden, 2003, p291). In spite of that, "seventy-five percent of Head Start classrooms were rated as good or better, nearly one-fifth as very good or excellent, and classroom was of 'inadequate quality'…ratings compare favorably with other studies of preschool and child care…average numbers from both class size and child adult ratios were far better than those required…for Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation standards." (Head Start FACES…2001, piv).

One of Head Start's original planning committee members, Urie Bronfenbrenner, was in the initial stages of developing "his ecological approach to human development." In order to be effective, he said, an "intervention" must involve the "complex interrelationship among children, their families and communities."( Zigler/Styfco, 1993, p4). Young children are "just beginning to construct their personal universes," and experiencing many emotional responses of self and others, "for the first time," so emotional health and "overall mental health" were "central" to the program. Children were to be helped to "learn desirable ways of expressing feelings," and "regulating their emotions." (Vander Zanden, 2003, p290).

"Head Start children have larger gains in "vocabulary knowledge…early writing…and math skills….play became more complex, with children becoming move involved in interactive play with peers, a key indicator of social development," but are "still substantially below national norms at the end of the Head Start year" as critics are quick to note. Head Start children also "showed little progress in letter recognition or book and print concepts over the course of the program year…problem behaviors showed minimal or no change." (Head Start FACES…2001, pii)

Head Start "received the highest rating of any government program" in a 1999 report of the American Customer Satisfaction Index, ((Head Start FACES…2001, piv,) and is called "America's premiere early childhood program," by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Head Start seems to be what its name suggests: an advantage for the disadvantaged. Unfortunately, that promising title has been both a promise and a disconnect for many of its graduates. This politically popular program has experienced cycles of ups and downs. Sometimes vilified for its failures, especially during lean economic times, at other times erroneously glorified for its successes when politically expedient to do so, Head Start is about to face its greatest challenge. The abuse and neglect by the government agencies responsible for its care escalate as administration policies batter the hopes of millions for a Head Start for their children.

CHILD ABUSE, NEGLECT AND HEAD START

Child abuse and neglect are not easily or generally defined. Although the Federal Child Abuse and Treatment Act provides a "minimum set of acts or behaviors that define physical abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse," each state is "responsible for providing its own definitions of child abuse and neglect." (U.S. Depart…, 2/2002, p1). Head Start figures show that "About one fifth of children were reported to have been exposed to community or domestic violence in their lives." (Head Start FACES…, 2001, pii) and this exposure to violence is becoming another form of child abuse and neglect. In 2000, there were "approximately 879,000 children found to be victims of child maltreatment." (U.S. Depart…, 2002, p2) Many experts in the field believe the number represents only a small portion of actual victims. In general, child abuse and neglect are of four main types: "physical abuse, physical or emotional neglect, sexual abuse and emotional abuse."

Children in child abuse and neglect studies "frequently experience" multiple forms of abuse. As many as "90% of the subjects in one study" experienced more than one form of abuse and neglect." (Workshop…, 2002, p 2). Children who live in "grueling environments" cannot learn academic skills. In order to make a difference for these children, to give them an opportunity to benefit from education, they first need early preparation to overcome the negative consequences to their development. "Comprehensive services" are required for that. (Zigler/Styfco, 1993). The comprehensive services provided by Head Start has been shown to make a significant difference for children, including the abused and neglected, to move forward in their development.

Additionally, "Support from parents, the school environment, and peers all play a role in helping children overcome adversity in their world." (Workshop, 2002, p 13). Head Start programs provide all of these to low-income children. Resilience also makes a difference in how children are able to continue in negative situations with less distress and damage to their development. "Factors contributing to resilience include "A strong relationship with a positive, caring adult" is one factor that contributes to resilience. "Community safe havens" are another factor. But "certain characteristics of the child including intelligence, self-esteem, and access to resources" may prove to be the most enduring factors in contributing to a child's resilience. (Workshop, 2002, p7). Head Start provides an opportunity to develop all of them.

The "disadvantaged populations served by intervention programs" have changed over the years, but the children's basic needs remain essentially the same. "Poverty has become more pervasive…increases in…child and substance abuse have grown." (National Head Start Association, 1990, p 24). An estimated 20% of Head Start students have "serious family problems that significantly hinder their learning in school…child abuse and neglect are a problem…poor health and nutrition" are a cause for concern. (Zigler/Styfco, 1993, p 103). All of these issues impact a child's readiness to learn. Head Start improves that dramatically in many cases.

Child abuse and neglect are expensive. Not only do child abuse and neglect have "detrimental effects" on the physical, psychological, cognitive and behavioral development of children, including "physical injuries, brain damage, chronic low self-esteem, problems with bonding and forming relationships, developmental delays, learning disorders, and aggressive behavior" but they are also "linked with long-term negative societal consequences." (U.S. Dept…, 1999, p1). The costs are both direct and indirect. The "investments in prevention" lead to "payback curves" that "extend over a long period of time." Some studies indicate a possible return on investment of as much as 1600% for every dollar spent on child abuse and neglect prevention. (U.S. Dept…, 1999 pp 3-6). Head Start represents an investment with an even greater return for dollars spent, not necessarily in dollars, but in lives changed for the better.

CONNECTIONS

"The original planners had a vision of what every Head Start family should receive. Over twenty-five years later this vision is largely unfulfilled, and the addition of more children will only delay its realization. It much wiser to serve fewer children well than to serve more children poorly, for the literature makes clear that only high-quality programs can produce meaningful benefits." (Zigler/Styfco, 1993, p32)

A connection among Head Start programs, child development and child abuse and neglect is evident even in this partial review of the literature relating to each. But what of the initial suggestion that the Head Start program, its development and any form of "abuse and neglect" may share a similar connection? A brief review of recent occurrences will indicate a viable connection is there.

Head Start is still a developing program. During Head Start's nearly thirty-five year development, its own research has lead to many advances in child development interventions, policies and other important early childhood education and related subjects. Any developmental process has stages. Head Start is no different. And just as an organism's development is impacted by environmental factors, so, too, is Head Start's development impacted by changing funding levels, increasing demands placed on its limited resources, attacks on its infrastructure, including losses of formerly available public school space in which to run its programs, and a drain on its qualified teachers to hastily created state funded preschool with funding to pay much higher salaries. Other situations that have occurred through its developmental period could be construed as evidence of intent to create a "failure to thrive" environment for its graduates, by failing to provided adequate transition services and adequately fund follow up programs, such as Project Follow Through, which results in the loss of gains made by the children while in the Head Start program. Today as the need for the program grows, the "neglect and abuse" continue against the developing program in greater degree than ever.

In April 2002, President Bush, announced an Early Childhood Initiative to improve early education for children that included new steps to further strengthen the Head Start program." (HHS Fact Sheet, 2002). As this paper is compiled, President Bush and his administrations are making decisions that may result in the demise of Head Start. Standardized testing for every four-year-old preschooler is projected for implementation in the fall of 2003. Early childhood educators and experts worry "that federal officials are going too far in their drive to hold local programs accountable for children's performance." Not the least of their concerns is the fear that teachers will begin "teaching to the test," with-the-three year olds, rather than continuing the original, and highly effective Head Start goal to focus on "children's social and emotional development. (Jacobson, 2003).

In addition to the risks associated with the Standardized Testing program, funding is again creating problems in 2003 for Head Start. Because the Bush administration failed to pass the 2003 budget in a timely manner, officials have been running "countless federal programs, from early childhood education to welfare, from setting priorities because they do not know how much money they will get." (Stolberg, 2003).

The Bush 2004, $2.23 trillion budget remains enmeshed in controversy. Bush's budget "reflects his "most urgent national priorities: 'Winning the war against terrorism, securing the homeland and generating long-term economic growth." The budget has "record deficits" and will "speed up billions of dollars in income tax cuts, provide huge increases for the Pentagon and offer a modest jump in spending for NASA." Cuts include, spending on "programs for juvenile delinquency, " money for "public housing…aid to rural schools…and government financed child care." These programs, like Head Start, have all been shown to increase low-income children's opportunities for succeeding.

The news that worries Head Start supporters more than funding cuts, is the Bush administration proposal that "Head Start would become a block grant program." Administration officials, who "dispute the view that Head Start is a success," say that this would "allow states to coordinate Head Start better with their own preschool programs." They "describe the proposal as a logical extension of President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act" (Schemo, 2003) while failing to mention that NCLP appropriations have not been funded.
Critics of the Administration's proposal, including Sarah Green, president of the National Head Start Association, contend "turning Head Start into a block grant program could be the first step toward dismantling it, as governors slice off services to make federal money go further." One example is in Florida where the voters passed a referendum that Governor Jeb Bush "must provide preschool for all children by 2005." The voters gave no clear direction to "how the cash-strapped state would pay for it." New York is another example of a state that might "slice" the Head Start money into pieces. Governor Pataki's "latest budget eliminates universal preschool, and cuts back preschool for poor children." (Schemo, 2003).

The Head Start program is successful "in giving poor children an advantage when they reach school." Some critics fail to note that the "ultimate goal of Head Start…is to promote the social competence of children." (Head Start FACES…2002). Numerous studies demonstrate that the comprehensive approach of Head Start, reaches the whole child and the family. Although "more research is needed on how interventions for parents affect the development of their children," (Workshop…, 2002, 26) Head Start has clearly shown that helping parents, helps children.

When the Bush "administration officials" say of Head Start, "the fairest way to look at data that's been done is to say it's clear children do show some improvement, but they still lag quite significantly behind more advantaged peers when they enter kindergarten" (Schemo, 2003) is politically motivated rhetoric designed to obfuscate the facts. Saying "some improvement" is dismissive of how much improvement actually occurs, especially for the majority of children who "enter Head Start with literacy skills below the national norms," (Head Start FACES… 2002, p14). "Gains in cognitive skills" as well as "on early writing and math tasks," were in fact larger "among children who were initially in the bottom quarter…" (Head Start FACES… p 20).
The statement that children "still lag quite significantly behind" suggests a greater disparity than exists, and fails to account for the fact that the average children in kindergarten also lag behind their "advantaged peers." Children fortunate enough to attend top quality programs can be expected to show the greatest improvements but that is not sufficient reason to eliminate the only program that does make a difference for low-income children. Although Head Start "narrows the skills gap…it does not close the gap."

Quality is an issue for Head Start programs, and when funding is inadequate to proved the best materials and teachers, programs naturally suffer reduction in quality. And "observed quality of Head Start classrooms has been linked with child outcomes." (Head Start FACES…, 2001). In spite of that, no Head Start was found to be of "inadequate" quality. Head Start quality is "better than other center-based preschool programs." (Head Start FACES…p 94).Parent volunteers, community assistance, determination of the teachers make a difference. There is no logical justification to use these known, but correctable disadvantages as an excuse to weaken the Head Start program even more than inadequate funding already does. Part of Head Start's mission is to prepare low-income children to enter Kindergarten, "ready to learn," and they are.
Head Start is "America's premiere early childhood program, providing comprehensive developmental services for America's low-income, preschool children." (HHS Fact Sheet, 2002). If that alone does not make Head Start worth keeping, let the administration provide whatever funding is needed to make any improvements needed so that each and every Head Start program is in fact a head start, or at least an even start, for America's low-income children as they begin their educational race to succeed.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Includes projected resources for future research including books, articles, studies, web materials.

Abe, J. A., & Izard, C. E. (1999). A Longitudinal study of emotion expression and personality relations in early development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 566-577.

Adamson, L. (1996). Communication development during infancy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Administration for Children & Families; Administration on Children, Youth & Families; Commissioner's Office of Research & Evaluation and the Head Start Bureau. (2001). Head Start FACES: Longitudinal Findings on Program Performance. Third Progress Report. January 2001. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

Administration on Children, Youth, and Families. (1995). Head Start Bureau, Charting our progress: Development of the Head Start Program Performance Measures. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

Administration on Children, Youth, and Families. (1997). Head Start Bureau, First progress report on the Head Start Program Performance Measures. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

Administration on Children, Youth, and Families. (1998). Head Start Bureau, Head Start Program Performance Measures: Second progress report. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Health & Human Services.

Adolf, K. E. (2000). Specificity of learning: Why infants fall over a veritable cliff. Psychological Science, 11, 290-295.

Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1992). A consideration of social referencing in the context of attachment theory and research. In S, Feinman (Ed.), Social Referencing and the social construction of reality in infancy. New York: Plenum.

Albus, K. E., & Dozier, M. (1999). Indiscriminate friendliness and terror of strangers in infancy: Contributions from the study of infants in foster care. Infant Mental Health Journal, 20(1), 20-41.

Alexander, L.L., & Entwisle, D.R. (1988). Achievement in the first 2 years of school: Patterns and processes. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 53. (2, Serial No. 218).

Arnet, J. (1989). Caregivers in day-care centers: Does training matter? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 10. 541-552.

America's Children: Key national indicators of child well-being 1998. (1998). ChildStats.gov. Retrieved August 32, 1998, from the World Wide Web: http://www.childstats.gov/ac1998/ac98.htm.

Baldwin, D. A., & Markman, E, M. (1989). Establishing word-object relations: A first step. Child Development, 60, 381-398.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1989a). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist. 44, 1175-1184.

Bandura, A. (1989b). Regulation of cognitive processes through perceived self-efficacy. Developmental Psychology, 25, 729-735.

Bandura, A. (1999). Moral disengagement in the perpetration of inhumanities. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 3(3), 193-209.

Barnes, H.V., Guevera, M.D., Garcia, G., Levin, M., & Connell, D.B. (1999). How do Head Start staff characteristics relate to parent involvement and satisfaction? Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM.

Baumrind, D. (1994) The social context of child maltreatment. Family Relations, 43, 360-368.

Baumrind, D. (1996). The discipline controversy revisited. Family Relations, 45, 405-414.

Baumwell, L., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Bornstein, M. H. (1997). Maternal verbal sensitivity and child language comprehension, Infant Behavior and Development, 20, 247.

Beard, R. M. (1969). An outline of Piaget's developmental psychology for students and teachers. New York: New American Library.

Belsky, J. (1990). Parental and nonparental child care and children's socioemotional development: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 885-903.

Belsky, J. (1993). Etiology of child maltreatment: A developmental-ecological analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 413-434.

Belsky, J. (1996a) Infant attachment, security, and affective-cognitive information processing at age 3. Psychological Science, 7, 111-114.

Belsky, J. (1996b). Parent, infant, and social-contextual antecedents of father-son attachment security. Developmental Psychology, 32, 905-913.

Belsky, J., & Eggebeen, D. (1991). Early and extensive maternal employment and young children's socioemotional development: Children of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 1083-1110.

Belsky, J., & Rovine, M. (1987). Temperament and attachment security in the strange situation: An empirical rapprochement. Child Development, 58, 787-795.

Belsky, J., & Rovine, M. (1993). Non-maternal care in the first year of life and the security of infant-parent attachment. In R. Pierce (Ed.), Lifespan development: A diversity reader. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.

Balky, J., Youngblade, Rovine, M., & Volling, B. (1991). Patterns of marital change and parent-child interaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 487-498.

Berk, L. E., & Winsler, A. (1995) Scaffolding children's learning: Vygotsky and early childhood education. NAEYC research into practice series, vol. 7. Washington, DD: National Book Association for Young Children.

Berkowitz, L. (1993) Aggression: Its causes, consequences and control. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Berrick, J. D., & Gilbert, N. (1991). With the best of intentions: The child sexual abuse prevention movement. New York: Guilford Press.

Besharov, D. J. (1990). Recognizing Child abuse: A guide for the concerned. New York: Free Press.

Bigler, R., Jones, L. C., & Lobliner, D.B. (1997). Social categorization and the formation of intergroup attitudes in children. Child Development, 68, 530-543.

Biller, H. B. (1993). Fathers and families: Paternal factors in child development. Westport, CT: Auburn House.

Bjorklund, D. F., & Green, B.L. (1992). The adaptive nature of cognitive immaturity. American Psychologist, 47, 46-54.

Blagg, N. (1991). Can we teach intelligence? A comprehensive evaluation of Fuerstein's instrumental enrichment program. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Blakely, K. S. (1994) Parents' conceptions of social dangers to children in the urban environment. Children's Environment, II, 16-25.

Block, J. (1995). A contrarian view of the five-factor approach to personality description. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 187-215.

Bolland, J. M., McCallum, D. M., Lian, B., Baily, C. J., & Rowan, P. (2001). Hopelessness and violence among inner-city youths. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 5(4), 237-244.

Bornstein, M. H., & O'Reilly, A. W. (Eds.). (1993). The role of play in the development of thought. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory. London: Routledge.

Brain facts: A parent's guide to early brain development, (1999). I Am Your Child. Retrieved February 4, 1999, from the World Wide Web: http://iamyourchild.org/docs/bf-0.html.

Brain, G. B. (1979). Head Start, a retrospective view: The founders. Section 2: The early planners. In E. Zigler & J. Valentine, (Eds.) Head Start: A legacy of the War on Poverty, New York: Free Press. 72-134.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986, February). Alienation the four worlds of childhood. Phi Delta Kappan, 67, 430-436.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1997). Systems vs. associations: Its not either/or. Families in Society, 78, 124.

Bronstein, R. E. (1992). The dependent personality: Developmental, social, and clinical perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 3-23.

Brownlee, S. (1996). The biology of soul murder: Fear can harm a child's brain. Is it reversible: U. S. News and World Report, 12(19), 71-74.

Building their futures: How early Head Start programs are enhancing the lives of infants and toddlers in low-income families: Summary report. (2001). Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project. Commissioner's Office of Research and Evaluation and the Head Start Bureau. Administration on Children, Youth & Families. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Bullock, M., & Lutenhaus, P. (1988). The development of volitional behavior in the toddler years. Child Development, 59, 664-674.

Bumiller, E. (2003). Bush's $2.2 Trillion Budget Proposes Record Deficits. The New York Times. Retrieved from World Wide Web, http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/04/politics/04BUDG.html?tntemail0, 2/6/2003.

Burhaus, K. K. & Dweck, C. S. (1995). Helplessness in early childhood. Child Development, 66, 1717-1738.

Bussey, K. (1992). Lying and truthfulness: Children's definitions, standards, and evaluative reactions. Child Development, 63, 129-137.

Campbell, J. J., Lamb, M. E., & Hwang, C. P. (2000). Early child care experiences and children's social competencies between 1.5 and 15 years of age. Applied Developmental Science: Special Issue: The Effects of Quality Care on Child Development, 4(3), 166-175.

Candland, D. K.(1993). Feral children and clever animals" Reflections on human nature. New York: Oxford University Press.

Carlson, M. J., & Corcoran, M. E. (2001). Family structure and children's behavioral and cognitive outcomes. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 779-792.

Carr, M., Borkowski, J. G., & Maxwell, S. E. (1991). Motivational components of underachievement. Developmental Psychology, 27, 108-118.

Case, A., Elder, G. H., Jr., & Bem, D. J. (1987). Moving against the world: Life-course patterns of explosive children. Developmental Psychology, 23, 308-313.

Caspi, A., Elder, G. H., Jr. & Bem, D. J. (1988). Moving away from the world: Life-course patterns of shy children. Developmental Psychology, 24, 824-831.

Cassidy, J., & Berlin, L. J. (1994). The insecure/ambivalent pattern of attachment: Theory and research. Child Development, 65, 971-991.

Chafel, J. A. 1992. Funding Head Start: What are the issues? American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 62, 9-21.

Chance, P., & Fischman, J. (1987, May). The magic of childhood. Psychology Today, 21, 48-58.

Chapman, M. (1988). Contextuality and directionality of cognitive development. Human Development, 31, 92-106.

Chess, S., & Thomas, A. (1996). Temperament: Theory and Practice. New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Child poverty fact sheet (June 2001). (2001) National Center for Children in Poverty. Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York. Retrieved December 2, 2001 from the World Wide Web: http://cpmcnetcolumbia.edu/dept/nccp/ycpf.html.

Collins, R. C. (1990) Head Start salaries: 1989-90 staff salary survey. Alexandria, VA: National Head Start Association.

Comer, J. P. (1980). School Power. New York: Free Press.

Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Cost, quality and child outcomes in child care centers, public report, second edition. Denver: Economics Department, University of Colorado at Denver.

Creating A 21st Century Head Start Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Head Start Quality and Expansion, December 1993. (1993). U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Washington, DC. Retrieved from the World Wide Web 2/1/2003. http://www.bmcc.org/Headstart/21Century/index.html.

Dunn, Lloyd M., & Dunn, Leota M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Third Edition. Examiner's manual and norms booklet. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

Elliot, S.N., Gresham, F.M., Freeman, R., & McClosky, G. (1998). Teacher and observer ratings of children's social skills: Validation of the Social Skills Rating Scales. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 6. 152-161.

Goal One Technical Planning Group. (1991). Reconsidering children's early development and learning: Toward shared beliefs and vocabulary. Draft report to the National Education Goals Panel. Washington, DC: National Education Goals Panel.

Harms, T., Clifford, R.M., & Cryer, D. (1998). Early childhood environment rating scale. New York: Teacher's College Press.

Haskins, R. (1989). Beyond metaphor: The efficacy of early childhood education. American Psychologist, 44(2). 274-282.

Hauser-Cram, P., D. E., Pierson, D. K. Walker, & T. Tivnan. (1991). Early Education in Public Schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

HHS Fact Sheet. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Retrieved from the World Wide Web, 1/23/2003. http://fatherhood.hhs.gov/factsheets/fact20020426b.htm.

Head Start FACES: Longitudinal Findings on Program Performance, Third Progress Report. (2001) U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Horacek, H., Ramey. C. Campbell, F. Hoffman, R. & Fletcher, R. (1987). Predicting school failure and assessing early intervention with high-risk children. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 26. 758-63.

Howes, C. (1980). Peer play scale as an index of complexity of peer interaction. Developmental Psychology, 16. 371-372.

Howes, C. (1985). Sharing fantasy: Social pretend play in toddlers. Child Development, 56(5), 1253-1258.

Howes, C. (1987). Social competence with peers in young children: Developmental sequences. Developmental Review, 7, 252-272.

Howes, C., & Matheson, C. (1992). Sequences in the development of competent play with peers: Social and pretend play. Developmental Psychology, 28(5), 961-974.

Howes, C. & Rodning, C. (1992). Attachment security and social pretend play negotiations: Illustrative study #5. In C. Howes, O. Hunger and C.C. Matheson (Eds.), The collaborative construction of pretend: Social pretend play functions. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Howes, C., & Stewart, P. (1987). Child's play with adults, toys, and peers: An examination of family and child-care influences. Developmental Psychology, 23(3), 423-430.

Howes, C., & Unger, O.A., & Seidner, L.B., (1989). Social pretend play in toddlers: Parallels with social play and with solitary pretend. Child Development, 60(1), 77-84.

Hubbell, R., Plantz, M., Condelli, L.& B. Barrett. (1987). The transition of Head Start children into public school. Final report. Vol. 1. Alexandria, VA: CSR.

Jacobson, L. (2003). White House Plan for Head Start Draws Critics. Education Week, 1/15/2003, vol.22, Issue 18, 20-22. Retrieved from the World Wide Web, 1/27/2003. http://library.capella.edu:2165/delivery.asp?tb=1&_ug=dbs+1+1n+en-us+sid+E2DCE112-4…

Jordan, T. J., Grallo, R, Deuthsch, M. & C. P. Deutsch. (1985). Long-term effects of early enrichment: A 20-year perspective on persistence and change. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13, 395-415.

Kagan, S. L. (1991a). Moving from here to there: Rethinking continuity and transitions in early care and education. In B. Spdek & O. Saracho, (Eds.) Yearbook in early childhood education, 2. New York: Teacher's College Press.

Kagan, S. L. (1991b). United we stand: Collaboration in child care and early education services. New York: Teacher's College Press.

Layzer, j, Goodson, B., & Moss, M. (1993). Final report, volume 1: Life in preschool. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, Inc.

McKey; R., Condelli, L. Ganson, H., Barrett, B., McConkey, C. & Plantz, M. (1985) The impact of Heads Start on children, families and communities: Final report of the Head Start Evaluation, Synthesis and Utilization Project (DHHS Publication NO. OHDS 85-31193). Washington D C: U.S. Government Printing Office.

National Head Start Association. (1990). Head Start: The nation's pride, a nation's challenge. Report of the Silver Ribbon Panel. Alexandria, VA: Author.

O'Brien, R.W., D'Elio, M.A., Connell, D.B., Hailery, L., & Swartz, J.P. (1999). The impact of Head Start fathers on the lives of their children. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM.

Parker, F. L., Piotrkowski, & Peay, L. (1987). Head Start as a social support for mothers: The psychological benefits of involvement. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 57. 220-233.

Powell, D. R. (1989). Families and early childhood programs. Research monographs of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, 3.

Ralph, J. (1989). Improving education for the disadvantaged: Do we know whom to help? Phi Delta Kappan. (Jan). 395-401.

Raver, C. C. & Zigler, E. (1991). Three steps forward, two steps back. Head Start and the measurement of social competence. Young Children, 46(4). 3-8.

Scarr, S., Eisenberg, M., & Deater-Deckard, K. (1994). Measurement of quality in child care centers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9, 131-151.

Schemo, D.J. (2203). Head Start Plan Worries Supporters. The New York Times. Retrieved from the World Wide Web, 2/12/2003. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/12/education/12Head.html?tntemail0.

Schorr, L. B. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the cycle of disadvantage. New York: Doubleday.

Schweinhart, L.J., McNair, S., Barenes, 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, 445-455.

Shonkoff, J.P., & Phillips, D.A. (eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Seitz, V., Apfel, Rosenbaum, L., & E. Zigler. (1983). Long-term effects of Projects Head Start and Follow Through: The New Haven project. In Consortium for Longitudinal Studies, eds. As the twig is bent: Lasting effects of preschool programs. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 299-332.

Snow, C.E., Tabors, P.O., Nicholson, P.A., & Kurland, B.F. (1995). SHELL: Oral language and early literacy skills in kindergarten and first-grade children. Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 10(1), 37-48.

Stolberg, C.S. (2003) As Bush Plans 2004 Budget, Parties Haggle Over 2003's. The New York Times. Retrieved from the World Wide Web 1/22/2003. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/22/national/22SPEN.html?tntemail0.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1980). Head Start in the 1980's. Review and recommendations. Washington DC.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999) Prevention Pays: The Costs of Not Preventing Child Abuse and Neglect. The Administration for Children and Families. Retrieved December 29, 2002, from http://www.calib.com/nccanch/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) Summary of Key Findings from Calendar Year 2000. Children's Bureau Administration on Children, Youth and Families. National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information. Retrieved December 29, 2002, from http://www.calib.com/nccanch/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (Revised 2/2002). What is Child Maltreatment. The Administration for Children and Families. Retrieved December 29, 2002, from http://www.calib.com/nccanch/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (Revised 3/2002). You Have the Power to Prevent Child Abuse and Neglect. The Administration for Children and Families. Retrieved December 29, 2002, from http://www.calib.com/nccanch/pubs/factsheets/canstats.cfm

U.S. House of Representatives. (1990a). Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1990. May 9. (Report No. 101-480).

U.S. House of Representatives. (1990b) Opportunities for success: cost effective programs for children update, 1990, Dec. 21. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office (Report No. 101-1000).

Vaden-Kiernan, M., E'Elio, M.A., & Sprague, K. (1999). The FACES embedded case study: Documenting the methodology and early findings. Paper presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM.

Valentine, J. (1979). Program development in Head Start: A multifaceted approach to meeting the needs of families and children. In E. Ziegler & J. Valentine, (Eds.) Project Head Start: A legacy of the War on Poverty, New York: Free Press. 349-365.

Vander Sandmen, James W. (2003). Human Development. New York: McGraw-Hill.

White, K. R., Bush, D. W. & G.C. Casto. (1985). Learning from previous reviews of intervention. Journal of Special Education, 19, 417-428.

Whitebook, M., Howes, C., D. & Phillips, D. (1989). Who Cares? Child care teachers and the quality of care in America: Final report of the National Child Care Staffing Study. Berkeley, CA: Child Care Employee Project.

Workshop on Children Exposed to Violence: Current Status, Gaps and Research Priorities. (2002). National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Zigler, E. (1976). Head Start: Not a program but an evolving concept. In J. D. Andrews, ed., Early Childhood Education: It's an art! It's a science! Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. 1-14.

Zigler, E & S. Muenchow. (1992) Head Start: The inside story of America's most successful educational experiment. New York: Basic Books.

Zigler, E. & J. Valentine, (Eds.) (1979) Project Head Start: A legacy of the War on Poverty Poverty. New York: Free Press.