Michigan Early Childhood Education Preschool Program Process Evaluation Report, 1992-93.

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, 1992-93.
Quelle	(1992), (42 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Check Lists; Classroom Observation Techniques; Cognitive Development; Compensatory Education; Emotional Development; Formative Evaluation; High Risk Students; Individual Development; Language Acquisition; Parent Participation; Preschool Children; Preschool Education; Program Effectiveness; Program Evaluation; Program Improvement; Psychomotor Skills; School Readiness; State Programs + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Checkliste; Kognitive Entwicklung; Kompensatorischer Unterricht; Gefühlsbildung; Problemschüler; Individuelle Entwicklung; Sprachaneignung; Spracherwerb; Elternmitwirkung; Pre-school age; Preschool age; Child; Children; Pre-school education; Preschool education; Vorschulalter; Kind; Kinder; Vorschulkind; Vorschulkinder; Vorschulerziehung; Vorschule; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Psychomotorische Aktivität; Readiness for school; School ability; Schulreife; Regierungsprogramm
Abstract	This document reports the findings of a process evaluation of the Saginaw, Michigan Early Childhood Education Preschool program for 4-year-olds at risk of academic failure. As of December, 1992, a total of 279 pupils were attending the program at 8 sites. The goal of the program is to enable 4-year-olds to develop school readiness skills. Program components include children's cognitive, psychomotor, and affective development; parent and community participation; curriculum; and staff development. The process evaluation consisted of on-site observations of all eight classrooms and the use of an activity observation checklist and language observation instrument. Observations revealed that: (1) activities to meet the program's daily objectives took place in all classrooms; (2) a record of parent participation was maintained in all classrooms; (3) labels were placed on objects throughout the classrooms to assist in word recognition; and (4) teachers used language production and enhancement techniques. Overall, the program was operating as planned. Suggestions for improving some areas of the program are offered. Appendixes include a list of program participants, a list of objectives for each of the program's component areas, copies of the activity checklist and language observation instrument, and a table listing teachers' use of language production and enhancement techniques. (MM)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC