| This study explores the role of science in the formulation of public policy for children. Since the mid-Sixties, large scale programs for children, particularly low income and minority youngsters, have emerged. Federal expenditures for sixteen children's programs multiplied more than twentyfold during the period FY1965-1979, at a cost of eleven billion dollars in the later year. The lives of millions of children and their families are affected.; Child development is big business. In response to the growing labor force participation of women and other socioeconomic trends, public expenditures for young people can be expected to command a growing share of the national product in the future.; In a pluralistic society, many factors influence the public agenda. Historical, socioeconomic, and political forces have been the dominant considerations shaping the topography of today's children's programs. Neither theoretical understandings of how children learn and develop nor scientific evidence of what programs work and why have been of pivotal importance.; Yet in an era of growing skepticism of government, coupled with a particular reluctance to spend for human services, it is more crucial than ever to find rational criteria to assure taxpayers that social investments are achieving their intended purposes.; This study examines the research and evaluation data concerning three children's programs--Head Start, Follow Through, and day care--to determine what existing scientific evidence tells us about successes and failures. The study also introduces the concept of social competence as a new way of thinking about goals and outcomes of children's programs and as a framework for future policy planning and program accountability.; The major findings concerning Head Start, Follow Through, and day care are as follows: (1)Head Start--None of the recent studies support the disappointing conclusions of the Westinghouse evaluation released in 1969. Studies over the past decade point to positive gains of a Head Start experience in cognitive and language, socioemotional, and physical development, including long term gains of real world educational importance (e.g., promotion on grade level with peers and ability to avoid placement in special education and to function effectively in the regular classroom). These results are consistent with other recent research documenting the lasting benefits of early childhood education programs. (2)Follow Through--Children in Follow Through classrooms do not perform as well as students in non-Follow Through schools. The prevalent interpretation stemming from the Follow Through evaluation that so-called "basic skills" educational models are more effective in fostering the disadvantaged child's school achievement is challenged. Educational approaches based on all major schools of early education theory and practice are of approximately equal effectiveness. (3)Day Care--No evidence was found that run-of-the-mill day care produces developmental gains comparable to Head Start or research-oriented preschool programs. There were no indications that quality day care is harmful to young children. Results of the National Day Care Study identify program variables subject to regulation that could be used in a strategy to upgrade publicly sponsored day care.; Social competence is proposed as the overall goal for child development and early education programs as a substitute for the overly used and abused IQ tests and as an amplification of standardized achievement tests.; Social competence refers to the child's attitudes and behaviors that shape the ability to function in the community and at home--in preschool, school, and out-of-school settings. Social competence represents a developmental profile that takes into account the interrelatedness of cognitive and language, socioemotional, and physical development, as well as the link between the child's present and future capacities. |
