Study of the I mpact of Pre-Kindergarten Experiences on FCPS Students Final Report June 2016 Office of Program Evaluation
Purpose of the Presentation to the School Board For information only, no action required, Present major findings, evidence, and conclusions about the impact of pre- kindergarten experiences on FCPS students, Provide recommendations based on the study’s findings and research, and Address questions about the study. 2
I ntroduction FCPS strategic commitment to “provide quality early childhood experiences…to prepare students to enter Kindergarten successfully” (FCPS’ Ignite , p.18) FCPS offers: Family Early Childhood Education Program/ Head Start (FECEP), Bridge to Kindergarten (B2K), Special Education Preschool Program, and Home Instruction to Parents of Pre-Kindergarten Youngsters (HIPPY). 3 Pages 2-5
Study Purpose and Scope Study purpose : Identify extent of differences in academic and behavioral outcomes for students with and without formal pre-kindergarten experiences Investigate costs, funding, and Return on Investment (ROI) for the FECEP program Study scope : Focus on outcomes and costs, but not: • quality of pre-kindergarten experiences • student outcomes during pre-kindergarten • instructional quality/content during K-12 4 Page 11
Student Outcomes
Student Outcomes Former FECEP 2 Yrs. FECEP Formal Pre-K Outcomes vs. vs. vs. Over Time Matched/ 1 Yr. FECEP No Pre-K No Pre-K Achievement • Reading and Math Standardized Achievements Tests • On-Time Graduation • ESOL Support Services • Special Education • Advanced Math Placement Participation in • AAP Placement Advanced • Algebra I in Middle School Opportunities • Course Beyond Algebra II • AP/IB Course Enrollment • Attendance Behaviors and • Work Habit Ratings from Elementary Progress Report Habits • Discipline Offenses (for MS and HS) 6
Former FECEP vs. Matched Students with No Formal Pre-K 7
Demographics of Former FECEP Students SY 2015-16 Kindergartners Pre-Kindergarten Students with English Free/ Reduced Experience Type Disabilities Learner Price Meals (SWD) (EL) (FRM) FECEP 8% 72% 95% (n=1,410) 11% of (118) (1,018) (1,337) Kindergartners All Students Entering K 8% 36% 31% (n=12,953**) (1,044) (4,698) (4,024) *Percent (n) **Includes students whose parents responded “Licensed Family Daycare Provider” (n=316) or “Other” (n=324) on the Pre-Kindergarten Experience form or who did not have information provided on the form (n=1,118). 8 Page 8
Former FECEP Participants by Pyramid SY 2015-16 Kindergartners 9 Page 9
FECEP Waitlist, SY 2014-15 (1,711 Students Attended FECEP) Number of Students on County-wide FECEP Waitlist in SY 2014-15 * Three-year-olds Four-year-olds (n=39) (n=262) *Waitlist for three-year-olds has capacity limits because the FECEP program has limited spaces for these students. Thus, some three-year-olds whose parent/guardian inquired about FECEP are not added to the waitlist and, consequently, not included in this figure. 10 Page 10
FECEP Waitlist, SY 2015-16 (1,755 Students Attended FECEP) Number of Students on County-wide FECEP Waitlist in SY 2015-16 * Three-year-olds Four-year-olds (n=43) (n=243) *Waitlists for three-year-olds has capacity limits because the FECEP program has limited spaces for these students. Thus, some three-year-olds whose parent/guardian inquired about FECEP are not added to the waitlist and, consequently, not included in this figure. 11
Question 1a Former FECEP vs. Matched/ No Pre-K (Findings 1-6) 6) To what extent does participation in FECEP benefit students once they enter Kindergarten and progress through school? 12 Pages 15-26
Measuring Differences in Outcomes (Effect Size) Large Large Advantage Advantage 13 Pages 13-15
Former FECEP vs. Matched/ No Pre-K Achievement Findings Former FECEP students demonstrated stronger early reading skills upon entering Kindergarten than those who had no formal experience. Reading skill differences that favored former FECEP students were evident through the end of Grade 1. Former FECEP students had a consistent small advantage in math achievement. FECEP program participation had a small positive effect on high school graduation rates. 14 Pages 15-18
Former FECEP vs. Matched/ No Pre-K Reading and Math Achievement Evidence Reading End of End of End of Kindergarten Entry Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 End of End of End of Grade 3 Grade 5 Grade 8 Math End of End of End of 15 Grade 3 Grade 5 Grade 8 Pages 15-17
About Diminishing Achievement Advantages National phenomenon found in many studies of preschool impact. Diminishing advantages mean a reduction in the difference between those with and without preschool; not the same as reduction in achievement for those with preschool. Potential explanations of the phenomenon: Focus on closing achievement gaps, Instruction does not maximize initial advantages. FCPS participating in UVA study in Fall 2016 that will investigate this phenomenon in-depth. 16
Former FECEP vs. Matched/ No Pre-K Achievement Evidence On-Time High School Graduation State Federal Definition Definition 17 Pages 17-18
Former FECEP vs. Matched/ No Pre-K Need for Support Services Finding Former FECEP students required fewer Special Education services in elementary and middle school. 18 Pages 19-20
Former FECEP vs. Matched/ No Pre-K Need for Support Services Evidence Need for Fewer Special Education Services Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 5 Grade 8 Grade 12 19 Pages 19-20
2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP 20
Question 1b 2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP (Finding 7 7) To what extent does participation in FECEP benefit students once they enter Kindergarten and progress through school? 21 Pages 24-26
2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP Achievement, Need for Support Services, and Advanced Opportunities Findings When differences emerged, they favored students attending the FECEP program for two years, rather than one: higher achievement in some grades and greater on-time high school graduation rates, lower need for ESOL services, greater participation in some advanced opportunities during high school. 22 Pages 24-26
2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP Achievement Evidence Reading End of End of End of Kindergarten Entry Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 End of End of End of Grade 3 Grade 5 Grade 8 Math End of End of End of Grade 3 Grade 5 Grade 8 23 Pages 24-26
2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP Achievement Evidence On-Time High School Graduation State Federal Definition Definition 24 Page 25
2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP Need for Support Services Evidence Need for Fewer ESOL Services Kindergarten Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 8 Grade 12 Grade 5 25 Pages 24-26
2 Years of FECEP vs. 1 Year of FECEP Advanced Opportunities Evidence Advanced Coursework in Middle and High School Algebra I Course Beyond in Middle Algebra II School Passed Passed 1 AP/IB 3 AP/IB Course Courses 26 Pages 24-26
Summary Student Outcomes Former FECEP 2 Yrs. FECEP Formal Pre-K Outcomes vs. vs. vs. Over Time Matched/ 1 Yr. FECEP No Pre-K No Pre-K Higher Reading Higher Reading Achievement until end of until end of Grade 1 Kindergarten Higher Grad Rate Higher Grad Rate Fewer SPED Fewer ESOL Support Services Services Services No Reliable Higher Participation in Differences Participation in Advanced High School Opportunities No Reliable No Reliable Behaviors and Differences Differences Habits 27
Formal Pre-K vs. No Formal Pre-K 28
Formal Pre-K vs. No Formal Pre-K Background Pre-K Experience FCPS Parents Indicated: SY 2015-16 (n=12,953)* *Excludes Licensed Family Daycare Provider (316), Other (324), No Information (1,118). 29 Pages 3-6
Demographics of Formal Pre-K and No Formal Pre-K SY 2015-16 Kindergartners Pre-Kindergarten Students with English Free/ Experience Type Disabilities Learner Reduced (SWD) (EL) Price Meals (FRM) Formal Pre-K 10% 28% 24% (n=9,766) (999) (2,739) (2,350) 75% of Kindergartners No Formal Pre-K 1% 67% 60% (n=1,429) (15) (957) (857) 11% of Kindergartners All Students 8% 36% 31% Entering K (1,044) (4,698) (4,024) (n=12,953**) *Percent (n) **Includes students whose parents responded “Licensed Family Daycare Provider” (n=316) or “Other” (n=324) on the Pre-Kindergarten Experience form or who did not have information provided on the form (n=1,118). 30 Pages 3-6
No Formal Pre-K by Pyramid SY 2015-16 Kindergartners 31 Pages 3-6
Question 2 Formal Pre-K vs. No Formal Pre-K (Findings 8-11) 11) To what extent do students with and without formal pre-kindergarten experience differ once they enter Kindergarten and progress through school? 32 Pages 27-35
Formal Pre-K vs. No Formal Pre-K Achievement Finding A reading achievement advantage for students with formal pre-k experience was highest upon Kindergarten entry and continued through the end of Grade 2. Students with formal pre-k experience demonstrated higher math performance at one grade but not the other. 33 Pages 28-29
Recommend
More recommend
