Gender differences in behavioral regulation in four societies: The United States, Taiwan, South Korea, and China

The current study investigates gender differences in behavioral regulation in four societies: the United States, Taiwan, South Korea, and China. Directly assessed individual behavioral regulation (Head–Toes–Knees–Shoulders, HTKS), teacher-rated classroom behavioral regulation (Child Behavior Rating Scale, CBRS) and a battery of school readiness assessments (mathematics, vocabulary, and early literacy) were used with 814 young children (ages 3–6 years). Results showed that girls in the United States had significantly higher individual behavioral regulation than boys, but there were no significant gender differences in any Asian societies. In contrast, teachers in Taiwan, South Korea, as well as the United States rated girls as significantly higher than boys on classroom behavioral regulation. In addition, for both genders, individual and classroom behavioral regulation were related to many aspects of school readiness in all societies for girls and boys. Universal and culturally specific findings and their implications are discussed

The added impact of parenting education in early childhood education programs: A meta-analysis

Many early childhood education (ECE) programs seek to enhance parents’ capacities to support their children's development. Using a meta-analytic database of 46 studies of ECE programs that served children age three to five-years-old, we examine the benefits to children's cognitive and pre-academic skills of adding parenting education to ECE programs for children and consider the differential impacts of: 1) parenting education programs of any type; 2) parenting education programs that provided parents with modeling of or opportunities to practice stimulating behaviors and 3) parenting education programs that were delivered through intensive home visiting. The results of the study call into question some general longstanding assertions regarding the benefits of including parenting education in early childhood programs. We find no differences in program impacts between ECE programs that did and did not provide some form of parenting education. We find some suggestive evidence that among ECE programs that provided parenting education, those that provided parents with opportunities to practice parenting skills were associated with greater short-term impacts on children's pre-academic skills. Among ECE programs that provided parenting education, those that did so through one or more home visits a month yielded effect sizes for cognitive outcomes that were significantly larger than programs that provided lower dosages of home visits

Nonpoor children in head start: Explanations and implications

According to the Head Start Act (1998), children are income-eligible for the program if their “families' incomes are below the poverty line.” There are a number of statutory exceptions to this general rule and, according to the Head Start Bureau, the result is that about 6 percent of the children in the program are not poor. But the major national surveys of Head Start families report that 30 percent or more of Head Start children are not “poor.” This paper confirms and explains the high proportion of nonpoor children in Head Start: at enrollment, at least 28 percent are not poor; at midyear, at least 32 percent are not poor; and by the end of the program year, at least 34 percent and perhaps more than 50 percent are not poor. Although the presence of some of these nonpoor children seems to be an appropriate or at least understandable aspect of running a national program with Head Start's current organizational structure, the presence of others seems much less warranted and raises substantial questions of horizontal equity. Moreover, taken together, the large number of nonpoor children suggests that the program is not well targeted to fulfill its mission of providing compensatory services to developmentally disadvantaged children-and reveals the essential ambiguity of Head Start's role in the wider world of early care and education. The income and program dynamics that have led to so many nonpoor children being in Head Start are also at work in many other programs, and, thus, our findings demonstrate the need to understand better how income eligibility is determined across various means-tested programs.