Evaluating Ourselves in Head Start.

Autor/inn/en	Nomland, Ella Kube; und weitere
Institution	Greater Los Angeles Community Action Agency, CA.; California Head Start Directors Association, Los Angeles.
Titel	Evaluating Ourselves in Head Start.
Quelle	(1973), (82 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Administration; Biculturalism; Bilingual Education; Career Development; Child Development; Disadvantaged Youth; Federal Programs; Handicapped Children; Health; Mental Health; Nutrition; Parent Participation; Preschool Children; Preschool Education; Preschool Teachers; Program Evaluation; Rating Scales; Social Services; Volunteers + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Verwaltung; Bikulturalität; Bilingual teaching; Bilingualer Unterricht; Berufsentwicklung; Kindesentwicklung; Benachteiligter Jugendlicher; Gesundheit; Psychohygiene; Ernährung; Elternmitwirkung; Pre-school age; Preschool age; Child; Children; Pre-school education; Preschool education; Vorschulalter; Kind; Kinder; Vorschulkind; Vorschulkinder; Vorschulerziehung; Vorschule; Erzieher; Erzieherin; Kindergärtnerin; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Rating-Skala; Social service; Soziale Dienstleistung; Soziale Dienste; Freiwilliger
Abstract	This Head Start evaluation system was developed at the request of the California Head Start Directors Association. There was a broad-based input in all phases of its development, from Head Start directors, Head Start staff from all components, and Head Start parents. It was extensively field tested in one of the major California Head Start programs. In all, more than 200 people were involved in formulating items, in the pilot study, and in post evaluation sessions. The system includes evaluation schedules for the following twelve components: Education (bilingual, bicultural, handicapped children, facilities), Health, Social Services, Mental Health, Parent Involvement, Training and Career Development, Nutrition, Volunteers (other than parents), and administration. The format is a 4-point rating scale on which the evaluator reacts to a performance standard indicating: performance exceeds the standard; performance meets the standard; performance is somewhat below the standard and needs improvement; and performance is substantially below the standard and needs immediate improvement. Space is provided for comments and recommendations. (Author/RC)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC