Get documents about "School Readiness Data Collection: Fall 2004
Document Sample
Kansas Kindergarten Readiness Project: Results of Three Year Study
Renee’ Patrick, Ph.D. Gayle Stuber, Ph.D.
Parsons State Hospital and Training Center Kansas State Department of Education
Dual Diagnosis Treatment and Training Services School Improvement and Accreditation
Parsons, Kansas Topeka, Kansas
School Readiness Project Three Year Summary: 2005 - 2008
Background
The School Readiness Project, initially undertaken in 2003 by KSDE and other partners, has been expanded in order to study the skills and assets
children bring with them into formal early education at the beginning of Kindergarten. From fall 2005 to spring 2008, a single set of measures
were consistently used across the years to provide data for an equitable analysis of children’s skills and experiences prior to Kindergarten and
through the Kindergarten year.
Kansas Early Learning Inventory: KELI
Kindergarten teachers were asked to complete assessments based upon their observation of semi-randomly selected children in their class. Data
were provided on a total of 5073 children over the course of the three year study with 2082 children entering Kindergarten in 2005;1863 children
in 2006, and 1207 children in 2007.
The Kansas Early Learning Inventory (KELI) is an assessment tool developed in part by the Kansas State Department of Education and the Qualls
Early Learning Inventory. Teachers were asked to rate each selected child on each item of the KELI using a three to four point scale at the
beginning of the school year. Assessment items described skills, abilities and knowledge of kindergarteners in nine developmental areas. Of the
nine domains, six domains are nationally normed and are from the Qualls Early Learning Inventory (QELI). These domains are reported in three
developmental categories as follows:
o Delayed
o Developing
o Developed
It is important to note that according to the QELI manual, it is not atypical for children at beginning or exiting Kindergarten to fall into the
Developing category.
Teachers rated children at the beginning of the school year and near the end of the school year in the spring. Thus, a change score could be
computed to determine the degree of change each child made on each item and on each domain measured by the KELI. The KELI’s nine domains
are; Physical Development, Social- Emotional Development and Symbolic Development (as developed by early childhood professionals in the
state of Kansas) and General Knowledge, Oral Language, Written Language, Math Concepts, Attentive Behavior and Work Habits (as developed
for the QELI).
1
DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION: Kindergarten Sample (2005-08)
Demographic characteristics of the children in the sample were collected at the district level and submitted to the state level for federal reporting
purposes. Each child in the project was assigned a state identification number to allow for tracking future aggregate results. Demographic
information was not available for 68 children in the sample. Approximately 48.6% of the sample was female and 51.4% male. The table below
provides information regarding the racial distribution for the sample.
Table 1 Racial Distribution:
Racial Category Percent of Sample
Caucasian 82.80%
Native American 1.00%
African American 5.00%
Asian/Pacific Islander 1.10%
Hispanic 8.90%
Unspecified 1.00%__________________ _
The racial distribution for the sample is similar to the Kindergarten through 12th grade population in Kansas, although with a somewhat larger
population of Caucasians. Approximately 13.8% (n = 705) of the sample have a designated disability for educational purposes and receive special
education services. This is only slightly higher than percentage of students receiving special education services the total Kansas public school
population. The following table provides information related to the percentage of children in each disability category receiving special education
services through an Individualized Education Program (IEP).
Disability Category Percent of Total Sample Percent of Disability Sample
Autism 0.2% 1.6%
Developmental Delay 4.9% 35.7%
Emotional Disability 0.04% 0.3%
Hearing Impaired 0.1% 0.7%
Learning Disability 0.2% 1.4%
Multiple Disabilities 0.04% 0.3%
Mental Retardation 0.1% 0.4%
Speech/Language Disability 7.9% 57.2%
Other Health Impaired 0.3% 2.0%
Traumatic Brain Injury 0.04% 0.3%
Orthopedic Impairment 0.2% 0.1%
Visual Impairment 0.0% 0.0%
2
KELI RESULTS
Results from the three Kansas developed domains (physical development; social skills development; and symbolic development) have not been
placed into developmental levels as the domains from the QELI portion of the KELI are. These three domains were deemed critical ones by
Kansas kindergarten and early childhood teachers and professionals and therefore were added to the QELI scales. Average, modal and standard
deviation scores for all students on all scales of the KELI are reported below.
Average Scale Scores for each KELI Domain in the Fall
Domain Scale N Min Max Mean SD
Physical Development Scale 5144 0 14 11.64 2.598
Social-Emotional Development Scale 5141 0 24 19.06 4.565
Symbolic Development Scale 5141 0 18 12.38 3.743
General Knowledge Scale 5137 0 13 9.74 2.531
Oral Communication Scale 5131 0 24 19.05 4.919
Written Language Scale 5132 0 20 9.22 4.596
Math Concepts Scale 5126 0 25 16.51 5.182
Work Habits Scale 5120 0 21 17.05 3.902
Attentive Behavior Scale 5121 0 21 16.66 4.281
3
General Knowledge Fall Developmental Level Math Concepts Fall Developmenal Level
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Delayed 202 3.9 3.9 3.9 Valid Delayed 181 3.5 3.5 3.5
Developing 1980 38.4 38.5 42.5 Developing 1709 33.2 33.4 36.9
Developed 2955 57.4 57.5 100.0 Developed 3229 62.7 63.1 100.0
Total 5137 99.7 100.0 Total 5119 99.4 100.0
Missing System 15 .3 Missing System 33 .6
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
Oral Communication Fall Developmental Level Work Habits Fall Developmental Level
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Delayed 138 2.7 2.7 2.7 Valid Delayed 361 7.0 7.1 7.1
Developing 2164 42.0 42.2 44.9 Developing 1951 37.9 38.1 45.2
Developed 2828 54.9 55.1 100.0 Developed 2806 54.5 54.8 100.0
Total 5130 99.6 100.0 Total 5118 99.3 100.0
Missing System 22 .4 Missing System 34 .7
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
Written Language Fall Developmental Level Attentive Behavior Fall Developmental Level
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Delayed 1573 30.5 30.7 30.7 Valid Delayed 380 7.4 7.4 7.4
Developing 2277 44.2 44.4 75.0 Developing 2165 42.0 42.3 49.7
Developed 1281 24.9 25.0 100.0 Developed 2571 49.9 50.3 100.0
Total 5131 99.6 100.0 Total 5116 99.3 100.0
Missing System 21 .4 Missing System 36 .7
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
4
SPRING RESULTS
Overall, children’s scores improved on each domain measured by the KELI, although there were a few children whose scores decreased in each
domain. Spring scale scores are presented in the table below.
Domain Scale N Min Max Mean SD
Physical Development Scale 5145 0 14 13.40 1.40
Social-Emotional Development Scale 5148 0 24 21.64 3.30
Symbolic Development Scale 5146 0 18 16.52 2.26
General Knowledge Scale 5144 0 14 12.15 1.43
Oral Communication Scale 5130 0 24 22.35 3.12
Written Language Scale 5132 0 20 17.78 3.31
Math Concepts Scale 5131 0 25 23.05 2.94
Work Habits Scale 5131 0 21 19.12 2.82
Attentive Behavior Scale 5129 0 21 18.62 3.37
5
General Knowledge Spring Developmental Level Oral Communication Spring Developmental Level
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Delayed 157 3.0 3.1 3.1 Valid Delayed 173 3.4 3.4 3.4
Developing 762 14.8 14.8 17.9 Developing 705 13.7 13.7 17.1
Developed 4224 82.0 82.1 100.0 Developed 4252 82.5 82.9 100.0
Total 5143 99.8 100.0 Total 5130 99.6 100.0
Missing System 9 .2 Missing System 22 .4
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
Written Language Spring Developmental Level Work Habits Spring Developmental Level
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Delayed 140 2.7 2.7 2.7 Valid Delayed 153 3.0 3.0 3.0
Developing 804 15.6 15.7 18.4 Developing 869 16.9 16.9 19.9
Developed 4188 81.3 81.6 100.0 Developed 4109 79.8 80.1 100.0
Total 5132 99.6 100.0 Total 5131 99.6 100.0
Missing System 20 .4 Missing System 21 .4
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
Math Concepts Spring Developmental Level Attentive Behavior Spring Developmental Level
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid Delayed 108 2.1 2.1 2.1 Valid Delayed 260 5.0 5.1 5.1
Developing 554 10.8 10.8 12.9 Developing 1187 23.0 23.1 28.2
Developed 4469 86.7 87.1 100.0 Developed 3682 71.5 71.8 100.0
Total 5131 99.6 100.0 Total 5129 99.6 100.0
Missing System 21 .4 Missing System 23 .4
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
6
FULL DAY KINDERGARTEN
Program Comparisons
Scores in several of the KELI domains tended to be higher in the spring for Kindergarten children attending full-day verses half-day
programming. Although scales associated with school social skills (Social-Emotional Development, Work Habits, Attentive Behavior) were not
impacted by full or half day attendance for children receiving special education services, children with an IEP did benefit from full-day
programming as evidenced by their higher scores in academic areas measured by the KELI.
Table (2): Differences in Spring KELI Scores by Full or Half Day Programming for Full Sample
KELI Scale Full-Day N Mean SD Significance
Physical Development Scale Yes 2449 13.4006 1.36183
No 1185 13.4540 1.42247 NS
Social-Emotional Development Scale Yes 2450 21.5049 3.36948
No 1184 22.0287 3.07679 .0001
Symbolic Development Scale Yes 2448 16.5658 2.25612
No 1184 16.3438 2.31849 .006
General Knowledge Scale Yes 2447 12.1026 1.44273
No 1184 12.2230 1.49701 .02
Oral Communication Scale Yes 2437 22.3197 3.12375
No 1182 22.2547 3.25781 NS
Written Language Scale Yes 2437 17.9462 3.19546
No 1183 17.2443 3.56525 .0001
Math Concepts Scale Yes 2440 23.0873 2.91765
No 1183 22.8639 3.05686 .036
Work Habits Scale Yes 2436 19.0731 2.86715
No 1184 19.3775 2.59172 .001
Attentive Behavior Scale Yes 2435 18.5331 3.47547
No 1183 18.9797 3.03275 .0001
Programming effects were then separated out by special education status. Information was available for approximately 494 special education
students and 3121 regular education students. Comparisons of programming effects separated out by educational supports provide the following
results.
7
Table (3): Full and Half Day Programming Effects by Special Education Status
Domain Scale Full-Day Regular Education Mean Special Education Mean
Physical Development Scale Spring Yes 13.53 12.69
No 13.60 12.27
Social Development Scale Spring Yes 21.72 20.25
No
22.25** 20.21
Symbolic Development Scale Spring Yes 16.78 15.36
No 16.59** 14.34**
General Knowledge Scale Spring Yes 12.24 11.33
No 12.39** 10.89
Oral Communication Scale Spring Yes 22.63 20.59
No 22.61 19.32*
Written Language Scale Spring Yes 18.23 16.3215
No 17.61** 14.24**
Math Concepts Scale Spring Yes 23.35 21.60
No 23.23 19.85**
Work Habits Scale Spring Yes 19.29 17.86
No 19.62** 17.32
Attentive Behavior Scale Spring Yes 18.78 17.13
No 19.27** 16.56
Note: * = p. < .05; ** = p. < .01
Interestingly, full day programming did not provide a significant benefit for children with IEP’s on measures of school social skills. Also
noteworthy is that full day programming provided a benefit on Oral Communication. Given the large number of children receiving special
education services for speech and language development, this is an important finding.
There were no significant differences on measures of gender for full or half day attendance.
8
For IEP
Full-Day Total
Yes No
Does Child Have IEP no Count 2078 1058 3136
% within IEP 66.3% 33.7% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 84.9% 89.2% 86.3%
% of Total 57.2% 29.1% 86.3%
yes Count 369 128 497
% within IEP 74.2% 25.8% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 15.1% 10.8% 13.7%
% of Total 10.2% 3.5% 13.7%
Total Count 2447 1186 3633
% within IEP 67.4% 32.6% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 67.4% 32.6% 100.0%
A larger proportion of the children receiving IEP services attended full day services than those who do not receive special education services.
Results were significant, Pearson Chi Square 12.43, 1 df, p. = .0001.
9
For Racial Distribution
Full-Day Total
Yes No
Race Refused to designate Count 37 11 48
% within Race 77.1% 22.9% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 1.5% .9% 1.3%
% of Total 1.0% .3% 1.3%
Native American Count 28 13 41
% within Race 68.3% 31.7% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 1.2% 1.1% 1.1%
% of Total .8% .4% 1.1%
Asian Count 23 16 39
% within Race 59.0% 41.0% 100.0%
% within Full-Day .9% 1.4% 1.1%
% of Total .6% .4% 1.1%
African American Count 112 66 178
% within Race 62.9% 37.1% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 4.6% 5.6% 4.9%
% of Total 3.1% 1.8% 4.9%
Hawaiian/Pacific Islander Count 0 3 3
% within Race .0% 100.0% 100.0%
% within Full-Day .0% .3% .1%
% of Total .0% .1% .1%
Caucasian Count 2025 955 2980
% within Race 68.0% 32.0% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 83.6% 81.1% 82.8%
% of Total 56.3% 26.5% 82.8%
Hispanic Latino Count 197 114 311
% within Race 63.3% 36.7% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 8.1% 9.7% 8.6%
% of Total 5.5% 3.2% 8.6%
Total Count 2422 1178 3600
% within Race 67.3% 32.7% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 67.3% 32.7% 100.0%
10
Significantly more children whose racial background was withheld attended full day programming and significantly fewer Asians/Pacific
Islanders attended full day programming. Somewhat fewer African American and Hispanic children attended full day programming. Results were
significant, Pearson Chi Square 13.83, 6 df, p. = .031.
For Lunch Status
Full-Day Total
Yes No
Lunch Full Price Count 1262 783 2045
% within Lunch 61.7% 38.3% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 51.6% 66.1% 56.3%
% of Total 34.8% 21.6% 56.3%
Free Count 850 297 1147
% within Lunch 74.1% 25.9% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 34.8% 25.1% 31.6%
% of Total 23.4% 8.2% 31.6%
Reduced Count 334 105 439
% within Lunch 76.1% 23.9% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 13.7% 8.9% 12.1%
% of Total 9.2% 2.9% 12.1%
Total Count 2446 1185 3631
% within Lunch 67.4% 32.6% 100.0%
% within Full-Day 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 67.4% 32.6% 100.0%
A larger proportion of children receiving free or reduced price lunches attended full day programming than children paying full price for lunches.
Results were significant, Pearson Chi Square 68.61, 2 df, p. = .0001.
11
BMI
Teachers were asked to provide the height and weight for children in the sample in fall and spring. A fall weight was provided for 4659 children,
with an average weight of 48.19 pounds. The range for this sample was 25 pounds to 147 pounds. A fall height was provided for 4670 children,
with an average height of 45.05 inches. The range for this sample was 34 inches to 61 inches. A body mass index (BMI) was computed for all
children whose teachers reported both height and a weight (n = 4648). The average BMI for all students was 16.62. The average age for children
in this sample was 5.22 years of age. The BMI at the 50th percentile for boys at approximately age 5.22 years is approximately 15.40 and for girls
it is 15.20. The oldest child in the sample is 7 years old. The BMI at the 50th percentile for male and 7 year olds is 15.50. Thus, on average, this
group’s average BMI is above the 50th percentile. The 50th percentile for BMI does not approach 16 until about age 8.5 for both girls and boys.
The range for BMI scores in the fall for females was 9.62 to 39.73 and for males was 9.67 to 32.62.
Based on information from the Centers for Disease Control, children whose BMI falls at the 85th percentile are considered overweight and those at
the 95th percentile are morbidly obese. Children whose BMI falls below the 5th percentile are considered grossly underweight. Based on an
average age of 5.22 years, the BMI at the 5th, 85th and 95th percentiles are approximately 13.50, 16.80, and 18.25 for girls and 13.75, 16.85 and
18.00 for males respectively. Based on data collected for this sample, approximately 3.7% of the female sample is underweight and 33.3% of
females are potentially overweight with BMI scores falling at the 85th percentile or above for children age 5.22 years. Approximately 17.5% of the
female sample is potentially obese with BMI scores above the 95th percentile of 18.25. Similarly, approximately 4.3% of the male sample was
underweight and 35.5% of males were potentially overweight with BMI scores falling at the 85th percentile or above for children age 5.22 years.
Approximately 20.4% of the male sample had BMI scores above the 95th percentile of 18.00.
The average age of students at spring measurement was 5.75 with the oldest child age 8 years. The BMI for the 50th percentile at age 5.75 is 15.20
for females and 15.40 for males. The BMI at the 50th percentile for 8 year olds is 15.80. The range of BMI scores in the spring for females was
6.01 to 39.94 and for males was 5.16 to 31.35. The BMI scores for the 5th, 85th and 95th percentiles at age 5.75 are approximately 13.50, 17.00
and18.60 for girls and 13.80, 17.00 and 18.25 for boys. Based on data from spring data collection approximately 4.5% of the female sample was
underweight and 32.2% were potentially overweight with a BMI score above the 85th percentile. Approximately 16.5% of the female sample had a
BMI score above the 95th percentile score of 18.60. Similarly, approximately 4.7% of the male sample was underweight and 33.0% were
potentially overweight with a BMI score above the 85th percentile. Approximately 18.0% of the males had a BMI score above the 95th percentile
score of 18.25.
These scores are just estimates based on group normative data. However, they are suggestive that a significant proportion of our children entering
Kindergarten have weight problems. Approximately 30% of entering and exiting Kindergarteners are at risk of being overweight while nearly 4%
are considered grossly under weight and may not be getting adequate nutrition. Children who are underweight and overweight may have problems
with attention and achievement as a result of other bio-physiological functioning affected by non-ideal nutrition and weight. To determine whether
nutrition may play a part in our children’s weight an analysis of children by their school lunch status was conducted. Children receiving school
funded lunch programming (free or reduced) scored significantly higher on average for BMI with children receiving free lunch scoring higher than
other students on BMI at fall school entry and those paying full price scoring significantly lower at spring data collection. (See Appendix for
graphs).
12
Table (4): ANOVA Table Comparison of BMI by Lunch Status
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
BMI Between Groups 156.855 2 78.428 13.222 .000
Within Groups 27474.406 4632 5.931
Total 27631.261 4634
BMIS Between Groups 223.609 2 111.804 16.720 .000
Within Groups 29308.062 4383 6.687
Total 29531.671 4385
Children were then placed into risk categories based on their BMI scores. The categories were Underweight, Typical Weight, Overweight and
Obese. Children were then evaluated by their teachers on 9 domains of functioning, as measured by the Kansas Early Learning Inventory (KELI).
Children whose scores placed them into the Obese category scored significantly lower on all KELI domains than their peers at Kindergarten entry.
13
Table (5): ANOVA Table for Underweight, Typical, and Overweight Comparison of KELI Domain Scores
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Physical Scale Fall Between Groups 392.199 3 130.733 19.621 .000
Within Groups 30676.422 4604 6.663
Total 31068.621 4607
Social Scale Fall Between Groups 689.187 3 229.729 11.100 .000
Within Groups 95200.939 4600 20.696
Total 95890.125 4603
Symbolic Scale Fall Between Groups 304.584 3 101.528 7.273 .000
Within Groups 64187.908 4598 13.960
Total 64492.491 4601
General Knowledge Scale Fall Between Groups 99.295 3 33.098 5.134 .002
Within Groups 29621.076 4595 6.446
Total 29720.371 4598
Oral Communication Scale Fall Between Groups 246.607 3 82.202 3.394 .017
Within Groups 111178.995 4590 24.222
Total 111425.601 4593
Written Language Scale Fall Between Groups 498.076 3 166.025 7.963 .000
Within Groups 95743.164 4592 20.850
Total 96241.240 4595
Math Concepts Scale Fall Between Groups 827.875 3 275.958 10.367 .000
Within Groups 122260.003 4593 26.619
Total 123087.878 4596
Work Habits Scale Fall Between Groups 389.077 3 129.692 8.575 .000
Within Groups 69438.694 4591 15.125
Total 69827.771 4594
Attentive Behavior Scale Fall Between Groups 476.804 3 158.935 8.799 .000
Within Groups 82927.933 4591 18.063
Total 83404.737 4594
To test whether this change in distribution was significant, the BMI scores were matched for each student and compared. A paired t-test indicated
that the change in BMI scores was significant, with spring BMI scores being significantly higher than fall scores at the p. <.001 level of
significance (N = 4283, Fall BMI M = 16.30, Spring BMI M = 16.65).
14
Parent data regarding their efforts to have their child taught a sport or taken to a sporting event were compared with BMI scores for the fall. This
analysis revealed an interesting trend, though on the whole only modestly approaching significance (p. = .065) for main effects. Parents who
reported that their children were taught or taken to sports on a daily basis had a higher BMI than children whose parents reported this weekly,
monthly or rarely. These individual comparisons were significant at the p. < .01 level of significance or better. These relationships were no longer
significant at spring measurement. Several factors may impact child weight upon school entry. Parents may desist with outside sporting activities
once children enter school for a variety of reasons. They may feel school adequately provides for physical activities for their children, or their time
may be constrained as a result of family, work and other factors in their daily lives.
Parents Teach or Take to Sporting Event N Mean Fall BMI Score SD
never 101 16.64 2.51
rarely 473 16.49* 2.49
monthly 712 16.41* 2.35
weekly 1324 16.58* 2.49
daily 197 17.53 15.71
Total 2807 16.59 4.79
Note. * Significant mean difference from Weekly mean BMI score at p. < .01 or
Children whose parents participated in Parents as Teachers programming also tended to have lower BMI scores at the p. < .01 level of significance
(Yes N = 297, M = 14.41; No N = 738, M = 15.16). PAT parent educators provide information about healthy eating habits and appropriate
physical activity in their work with families suggesting that information and education has a positive effect on children’s eating habits and
physical activity.
Additional analysis regarding the teacher’s implementation of gross motor activities into the daily curriculum may elucidate the extent to which
school programming can have positive effect for students whose BMI is high at the beginning of the school year.
15
Results of Parent Surveys
Teachers were asked to give parents a survey of home practices and supports that could be supportive of school readiness. Results indicate that
many parents participate in several of the practices listed on the survey such as reading to their child, talking with their child about events of the
day, and participating in Parents as Teachers. Tables below show the percentages of parental participation. Participation in child care is also
shown below.
Someone reads to my child in our home. My child and I talk about what happened during the day
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid never 79 1.5 1.9 1.9 Valid never 13 .3 .3 .3
rarely 23 .4 .6 2.4 rarely 8 .2 .2 .5
weekly 457 8.9 11.0 13.4 weekly 29 .6 .7 1.2
daily 3614 70.1 86.6 100.0 daily 4130 80.2 98.8 100.0
Total 4173 81.0 100.0 Total 4180 81.1 100.0
Missing System 979 19.0 Missing System 972 18.9
Total 5152 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
How often does my child read or pretends to read alone and/or to others? Did you or family member participate in PAT
Cumulative Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid never 186 3.6 4.5 4.5 Valid yes 815 15.8 27.6 27.6
rarely 97 1.9 2.3 6.8 no 2136 41.5 72.4 100.0
weekly 605 11.7 14.6 21.4 Total 2951 57.3 100.0
daily 3256 63.2 78.6 100.0 Missing System 2201 42.7
Total 4144 80.4 100.0 Total 5152 100.0
Missing System 1008 19.6
Total 5152 100.0
CAREthreeC
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
Valid No Care 1372 26.6 26.6 26.6
Childcare Pre K 3780 73.4 73.4 100.0
Total 5152 100.0 100.0
16
Children receiving previous childcare experiences prior to Kindergarten were no different than those who did on measures of gender and IEP
status. Thus males or females and children with or without an IEP were equally likely to have received previous childcare experiences. There were
significant chi square differences at the p. < .001 level of significance for children receiving previous childcare experiences by racial distribution
and lunch status.
Table (6): Percent of Children Receiving Childcare by Race
Race Total
Refused Hawaiian/
to Native African Pacific Hispanic
designate American Asian American Islander Caucasian Latino
No Care Count 16 19 14 77 1 1054 173 1354
% within Childcare 1.2% 1.4% 1.0% 5.7% .1% 77.8% 12.8% 100.0%
% within Race 25.4% 37.3% 26.9% 30.3% 25.0% 25.0% 38.4% 26.6%
% of Total .3% .4% .3% 1.5% .0% 20.7% 3.4% 26.6%
Count 47 32 38 177 3 3155 278 3730
Childcare Pre K % within Childcare 1.3% .9% 1.0% 4.7% .1% 84.6% 7.5% 100.0%
% within Race 74.6% 62.7% 73.1% 69.7% 75.0% 75.0% 61.6% 73.4%
% of Total .9% .6% .7% 3.5% .1% 62.1% 5.5% 73.4%
Total Count 63 51 52 254 4 4209 451 5084
% within Childcare 1.2% 1.0% 1.0% 5.0% .1% 82.8% 8.9% 100.0%
% within Race 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 1.2% 1.0% 1.0% 5.0% .1% 82.8% 8.9% 100.0%
Significantly fewer children with Native American, African American, or Hispanic backgrounds attended some form of preschool or childcare
prior to Kindergarten. Pearson Chi Square 41.96, 2 df, p. = .001.
17
Table (7): Percent of Children Receiving Childcare by Lunch Status
Lunch
Full Total
Price Free Reduced
No Care Count 634 559 178 1371
% within Childcare 46.2% 40.8% 13.0% 100.0%
% within Lunch 22.2% 34.0% 29.1% 26.8%
% of Total 12.4% 10.9% 3.5% 26.8%
Childcare Pre K Count 2225 1087 434 3746
% within Childcare 59.4% 29.0% 11.6% 100.0%
% within Lunch 77.8% 66.0% 70.9% 73.2%
% of Total 43.5% 21.2% 8.5% 73.2%
Total Count 2859 1646 612 5117
% within Childcare 55.9% 32.2% 12.0% 100.0%
% within Lunch 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
% of Total 55.9% 32.2% 12.0% 100.0%
Fewer children receiving reduced price lunch attended some form of preschool or childcare prior to Kindergarten than those receiving full priced
lunch, and fewer children receiving free lunch attended some form of care prior to Kindergarten than those receiving either reduced or full priced
lunches. Results were significant, Pearson Chi Square 75.84, 2 df, p. = .0001.
Despite the fact that at-risk preschool services are available in many districts, there are a considerable number of children not attending any form
of preschool who would qualify for at-risk services based on poverty requirements for the program.
18
Fall BMI Scores by Lunch Status
16.80
Mean of BMI
16.60
16.40
Full Price Free Reduced
Lunch
Spring BMI Scores by Lunch Status
17.00
16.90
16.80
Mean of BMIS
16.70
16.60
16.50
16.40
Full Price Free Reduced
Lunch
19
Related docs
Other docs by HC120727193445
c to a body that governs a health profession in a jurisdiction other than Ontario
Views: 0 | Downloads: 0
