混合式学前教育的机会差距?五个大规模系统的社区学前班与公立学校学前班在人口统计、质量和儿童收益方面的差异

IF 3.2 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Christina Weiland , Meghan McCormick , Jennifer Duer , Allison Friedman-Krauss , Mirjana Pralica , Samantha Xia , Milagros Nores , Shira Mattera
{"title":"混合式学前教育的机会差距?五个大规模系统的社区学前班与公立学校学前班在人口统计、质量和儿童收益方面的差异","authors":"Christina Weiland ,&nbsp;Meghan McCormick ,&nbsp;Jennifer Duer ,&nbsp;Allison Friedman-Krauss ,&nbsp;Mirjana Pralica ,&nbsp;Samantha Xia ,&nbsp;Milagros Nores ,&nbsp;Shira Mattera","doi":"10.1016/j.ecresq.2024.05.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Mixed-delivery prekindergarten (Pre-K) systems with slots in both public schools and community-based organization (CBO) settings are common in the U.S. Historically, policies and investments in many of these systems have placed CBOs and, by extension the children who attend them, at a disadvantage relative to public school programs and peers. In this descriptive study, we used secondary data to explore setting inequities in five large-scale Pre-K mixed-delivery systems (Boston, New York City, Seattle, New Jersey, and West Virginia), all of which had taken explicit steps to improve equity across settings. Our public school sample included 2,247 children in 367 classrooms in 146 schools and our CBO sample consisted of 1,700 children in 220 classrooms in 109 centers. We found evidence of substantial sorting of children and teachers by setting. Where we found differences in quality and children's gains, these tended to favor public schools. However, localities with fewer policy differences by setting showed fewer such setting differences. Findings suggest that advancing the goals of equitable, high-quality Pre-K access and narrowing opportunity gaps before kindergarten entry may require more research and policy attention to mixed-delivery setting policy equity.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48348,"journal":{"name":"Early Childhood Research Quarterly","volume":"68 ","pages":"Pages 247-259"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The mixed-delivery pre-k opportunity gap? Differences in demographics, quality, and children's gains in community-based versus public school programs across five large-scale systems\",\"authors\":\"Christina Weiland ,&nbsp;Meghan McCormick ,&nbsp;Jennifer Duer ,&nbsp;Allison Friedman-Krauss ,&nbsp;Mirjana Pralica ,&nbsp;Samantha Xia ,&nbsp;Milagros Nores ,&nbsp;Shira Mattera\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ecresq.2024.05.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Mixed-delivery prekindergarten (Pre-K) systems with slots in both public schools and community-based organization (CBO) settings are common in the U.S. Historically, policies and investments in many of these systems have placed CBOs and, by extension the children who attend them, at a disadvantage relative to public school programs and peers. In this descriptive study, we used secondary data to explore setting inequities in five large-scale Pre-K mixed-delivery systems (Boston, New York City, Seattle, New Jersey, and West Virginia), all of which had taken explicit steps to improve equity across settings. Our public school sample included 2,247 children in 367 classrooms in 146 schools and our CBO sample consisted of 1,700 children in 220 classrooms in 109 centers. We found evidence of substantial sorting of children and teachers by setting. Where we found differences in quality and children's gains, these tended to favor public schools. However, localities with fewer policy differences by setting showed fewer such setting differences. Findings suggest that advancing the goals of equitable, high-quality Pre-K access and narrowing opportunity gaps before kindergarten entry may require more research and policy attention to mixed-delivery setting policy equity.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Early Childhood Research Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"68 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 247-259\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Early Childhood Research Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885200624000577\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Childhood Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885200624000577","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

混合学前班(Pre-K)系统既有公立学校的名额,也有社区组织(CBO)的名额,这种情况在美国很常见。从历史上看,许多混合学前班系统的政策和投资都使社区组织处于相对于公立学校项目和同龄人的不利地位,进而也使就读于社区组织的儿童处于相对于公立学校项目和同龄人的不利地位。在这项描述性研究中,我们利用二手数据探讨了五个大规模学前班混合交付系统(波士顿、纽约市、西雅图、新泽西州和西弗吉尼亚州)中的环境不平等问题,所有这些系统都采取了明确的措施来改善不同环境间的公平性。我们的公立学校样本包括 146 所学校 367 个教室中的 2247 名儿童,我们的社区组织样本包括 109 个中心 220 个教室中的 1700 名儿童。我们发现有证据表明,儿童和教师在不同的环境中存在很大的差异。在我们发现质量和儿童收益存在差异的地方,这些差异往往有利于公立学校。然而,在政策差异较小的地方,这种环境差异也较小。研究结果表明,要实现公平、高质量的学前教育目标,缩小入园前的机会差距,可能需要对混合办学环境的政策公平性进行更多的研究和政策关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The mixed-delivery pre-k opportunity gap? Differences in demographics, quality, and children's gains in community-based versus public school programs across five large-scale systems

Mixed-delivery prekindergarten (Pre-K) systems with slots in both public schools and community-based organization (CBO) settings are common in the U.S. Historically, policies and investments in many of these systems have placed CBOs and, by extension the children who attend them, at a disadvantage relative to public school programs and peers. In this descriptive study, we used secondary data to explore setting inequities in five large-scale Pre-K mixed-delivery systems (Boston, New York City, Seattle, New Jersey, and West Virginia), all of which had taken explicit steps to improve equity across settings. Our public school sample included 2,247 children in 367 classrooms in 146 schools and our CBO sample consisted of 1,700 children in 220 classrooms in 109 centers. We found evidence of substantial sorting of children and teachers by setting. Where we found differences in quality and children's gains, these tended to favor public schools. However, localities with fewer policy differences by setting showed fewer such setting differences. Findings suggest that advancing the goals of equitable, high-quality Pre-K access and narrowing opportunity gaps before kindergarten entry may require more research and policy attention to mixed-delivery setting policy equity.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
8.10%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: For over twenty years, Early Childhood Research Quarterly (ECRQ) has influenced the field of early childhood education and development through the publication of empirical research that meets the highest standards of scholarly and practical significance. ECRQ publishes predominantly empirical research (quantitative or qualitative methods) on issues of interest to early childhood development, theory, and educational practice (Birth through 8 years of age). The journal also occasionally publishes practitioner and/or policy perspectives, book reviews, and significant reviews of research. As an applied journal, we are interested in work that has social, policy, and educational relevance and implications and work that strengthens links between research and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信