Michigan Early Childhood Education Preschool Program Process Evaluation Report, 1989-90.

Autor/inn/en	Claus, Richard N.; Quimper, Barry E.
Institution	Saginaw Public Schools, MI. Dept. of Evaluation Services.
Titel	Michigan Early Childhood Education Preschool Program Process Evaluation Report, 1989-90.
Quelle	(1990), (37 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Check Lists; Classroom Observation Techniques; Compensatory Education; Formative Evaluation; High Risk Students; Inner City; Preschool Children; Preschool Education; Program Effectiveness; Program Evaluation; Program Improvement; Public Schools; School Readiness; State Programs; Urban Youth + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Checkliste; Kompensatorischer Unterricht; Problemschüler; Pre-school age; Preschool age; Child; Children; Pre-school education; Preschool education; Vorschulalter; Kind; Kinder; Vorschulkind; Vorschulkinder; Vorschulerziehung; Vorschule; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Public school; Öffentliche Schule; Readiness for school; School ability; Schulreife; Regierungsprogramm; Urban area; Urban areas; Youth; Stadtregion; Stadt; Jugend
Abstract	This document reports the findings of the 1989-90 process evaluation of the Saginaw, Michigan school district's state-funded prekindergarten program for 4-year-olds at risk of academic failure. As of January 29, 1990, a total of 255 pupils were participating in the program at 11 sites. The Michigan Early Childhood Education Preschool (MECEP) program is based on the Piagetian concept that a child best develops intellectually in a stimulating environment that provides positive reinforcement for experimenting, seeking and attaining knowledge, acquiring language, and developing concepts. For evaluation purposes, half-day observations were made of the program's 10 prekindergarten teachers. The MECEP Program Activity Observation Checklist and Associated Language Observation Instrument were used. Observations were intended to determine whether program activities related directly to cognitive, psychomotor, parent participation and education product objectives. While the observations indicated that the program was operating as planned, they also revealed areas that could be improved. Recommendations for improvement are stated. Appendices provide a list of participants, a list of MECEP program components and objectives, the instruments used, and a count of teachers' use of language production and enhancement techniques. (RH)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC