The relevance of delivery mode and other programme ...

40 BLOK ET AL. / EFFECTIVENESS OF EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATIONTable 2Summary of characteristics of the studies in the meta-analysisVariablesReferences Experimental comparisons 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17Baker et al., 1998. Cohort I (Hippy vs. Control) 0 0 1 0 90 37 32 58 80 1 1 1 14 2 0 0 1Cohort II (Hippy vs. Control) 0 0 1 0 91 47 66 54 75 1 1 1 20 2 0 0 1Gersten et al., 1988. Direct instruction (K-3) vs.1 1 0 0 70 54 121 64 83 9 1 2 40 9 1 0 1ComparisonGoodson et al., 2000. Comprehensive Child Development 0 0 0 0 90 1640 1560 18 74 1 1 1 33 1 0 1 1Program vs. ControlHowell et al., 1990. Peabody LDK-R vs. Control 1 1 0 0 88 19 19 55 98 1 1 2 6 4 0 0 0Boehm RG vs. Control 1 1 0 0 88 19 19 55 98 1 1 2 6 4 0 0 0Bracken CDP vs. Control 1 1 0 0 88 19 19 55 98 1 1 2 6 4 0 0 0Johnson & Walker, 1987, Houston Parent–Child Development 0 1 1 0 75 51 88 12 100 1 1 3 20 7 0 0 11991; Walker & Johnson,1988.Program vs. ControlKagitcibasi et al., 2001. Education daycare (ED) with mother 0 0 0 1 85 27 37 48 0 1 1 1 14 2 0 0 1training (MT) vs. ED without MTCustodial daycare (CD) with mother 0 0 0 1 85 40 65 48 0 1 1 1 14 2 0 0 1training (MT) vs. CD without MTHome care (HC) with (MT) vs. HC 0 0 1 1 85 23 63 48 0 1 1 1 14 2 0 0 1without MTLee et al., 1988; 1990. Head Start vs. No preschool 1 1 1 0 69 333 204 50 100 1 1 2 9 20 0 0 0Head Start vs. Other preschool 1 1 0 0 69 333 109 50 100 1 1 2 9 20 0 0 0Olds et al., 1994; Treatment 3 vs. Treatment (1 þ 2) 0 0 1 0 77 78 148 0 0 1 1 1 4 1 0 0 1Olds et al., 1998. Treatment 4 vs. Treatment (1 þ 2) 0 0 1 0 77 88 148 0 0 1 1 1 24 1 0 0 1Slavin et al., 1990;Success for All (SFA) preschool0 1 0 0 87 40 40 49 90 9 1 2 10 15 1 0 1Madden et al., 1993. 1987/1988 vs ControlSFA kindergarten 1987/1988 vs. Control 0 1 0 0 87 60 60 60 90 9 1 2 10 25 1 0 1SFA grade 1 1990/1991 vs. Control 0 1 0 0 90 246 246 49 99 9 1 2 30 12 0 0 1SFA grade 2 1990/1991 vs. Control 0 1 0 0 90 185 185 49 99 9 1 2 30 12 0 0 1Ramey et al., 2000.Abecedarian (preschool þ K-2 transition) 0 1 0 0 72 25 22 4 98 1 1 3 96 13 1 1 1vs. ControlAbecedarian (preschool only) vs. Control 0 1 0 0 72 22 22 4 98 1 1 3 50 20 0 1 1Reynolds, 1994.Chicago CPC and EP (full intervention) 1 0 0 0 72 160 191 42 100 9 1 2 50 15 1 0 1vs. Non-CPC comparison groupRiksen-Walraven et al., 1996. Instapje vs. Control 1 0 1 1 94 37 38 13 100 1 1 1 4 2 0 0 1Scarr & McCartney, 1988. Mother Child Home Program vs. Control 0 0 0 1 78 78 39 27 60 2 2 1 20 2 0 0 1Schweinhart, 2000;Perry Preschool vs. Control 0 0 1 0 62 58 65 36 100 1 1 3 15 14 0 0 1Luster & McAdoo, 1996.Schweinhart et al., 1986. Distar vs. Control 1 1 1 0 67 23 65 36 93 1 1 3 20 13 0 0 1High/Scope vs. Control 1 1 1 0 67 22 65 36 95 1 1 3 20 13 0 0 1Nursery vs. Control 1 1 1 0 67 23 65 36 93 1 1 3 20 13 0 0 1Seitz et al., 1985. Family Support Intervention vs. Control 1 1 1 0 68 18 18 0 83 1 1 3 30 9 0 1 1Tuijl et al., 2001. Hippy vs. Control (Moroccan sample) 1 0 0 1 96 83 55 57 100 1 1 1 15 2 0 0 1Hippy vs. Control (Turkish sample) 1 0 0 1 96 122 59 57 100 1 1 1 15 2 0 0 1Wasik et al., 1990. Care þ Family Education vs. Control 0 1 0 0 78 14 22 2 90 1 1 3 48 25 0 1 1Family Education vs. Control 0 1 0 0 78 25 22 2 90 1 1 1 48 2 0 1 1Whitehurst et al., 1999. Head Start þ Emergent LiteracyIntervention vs. Head Start1 1 0 0 92 140 140 36 67 2 1 3 7 3 0 0 1See Table 1 for explanation of variables and codes.generally low. On average, 76 and 97%, respectively, of theparents were classified in the lowest category. Of the 34comparisons, 26 were conducted in the United States, 3 in theNetherlands, 3 in Turkey, and 2 in Bermuda.The comparisons were more or less uniformly distributedwith regard to the delivery mode: 13 concerned a home-basedprogramme, 11 a centre-based programme, and 10 a combinedhome- and centre-based programme. Because delivery modewas pertinent to our research question, the following sectionprovides a more detailed discussion of the programmesconcerned. Most comparisons were of programmes thatincluded the coaching of parenting skills (29 out of 34). Socialor economic support was much less frequently included in thecomparisons (6 out of 34).The duration of the programmes varied greatly, viz. from 4to 96 months (average: 22 months). The intensity of theprogrammes varied from 1 to 25 hours per week (average: 8.5hours per week). Most programmes were discontinued whenstudents entered Grade 1, or earlier. Only five comparisonsconcerned programmes that were continued after kindergarten;all these were centre-based or a combination of homebasedand centre-based.