Head Start CARES: Boosting Social-Emotional Development

Early childhood educators understand the value of nurturing the social and emotional development of pre-kindergartners. But limited research exists about the effectiveness of specific social-emotional strategies, especially their effectiveness in large-scale programs.

New findings, though, from the Head Start CARES study indicate that, with appropriate supports, large-scale pre-K programs can implement evidence-based strategies successfully and improve the social-emotional skills of pre-kindergartners.

Head Start CARES (Classroom-based Approaches and Resources for Emotion and Social skill promotion) is the first large-scale nationally randomized study of strategies for promoting the social and emotional development of four-year-olds. The study, conducted from 2009-2011, examined the implementation and impact of three interventions designed to boost children’s social-emotional development: the Incredible Years Teacher Training Program, Preschool PATHS, and Tools of the Mind―Play. MDRC, a nonprofit research organization, conducted the study on behalf of the Office of Planning, Research, and Evaluation at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Researchers released their first report, which analyzed the implementation of the three interventions in the 307 participating Head Start classrooms, this spring. Then, this month the team released the executive summary of a follow-up report, Impact Findings from the Head Start CARES Demonstration, which examines the effects of the three interventions on the social-emotional outcomes of the more than 3,600 children involved in the study. The full report will be available later this summer.

Although all three interventions focus on developing children’s social and emotional skills, each one targets a different teaching practice to impact the outcomes. The Incredible Years focuses on modifying teachers’ classroom management approach to promote positive teacher-child relationships. Preschool PATHS (Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies) provides teachers with highly scripted lessons about emotions and social interactions that teachers incorporate into the school day. Finally, Tools of the Mind―Play trains teachers how to support children’s imaginative play to encourage them to explore social roles and different viewpoints.

In smaller randomized studies, each of the three interventions has shown positive benefits for the social-emotional development of low-income children. But the Incredible Years Teacher Training Program and Preschool PATHS exhibited the most promising results in the CARES study. Students exposed to the Incredible Years and Preschool PATHS programs demonstrated better understanding and knowledge about emotions, stronger social problem-solving skills, and more positive social behaviors (such as cooperating with peers) than children in the control group. Furthermore, the magnitude of the impacts was similar to findings from earlier smaller-scale studies, according to Pamela Morris, project director, and Shira Mattera, co-author of the impact report.

“There appears to be more than one way to improve children’s understanding of emotions and social problem-solving skills, key precursors to children’s more competent social behavior,” Morris and Mattera write in an e-mail interview. “Prior to CARES, it was our expectation that these skills are best moved by discrete lessons, but the findings show that supporting teachers’ more positive classroom management, as well as by providing explicit lessons to support these skills, were both effective strategies for improving this aspect of children’s social and emotional development.”

Although the Incredible Years and Preschool PATHS impacted children’s social skills and social behaviors, none of the interventions impacted children’s behavior regulation or related executive functions. There was one exception: the Incredible Years reduced the occurrence of problem behaviors associated with acting out and hyperactivity among children at greatest risk for exhibiting those behaviors.

The positive impacts from both the Incredible Years and Preschool PATHS suggest that Head Start programs have options for selecting the specific intervention that suits their individual needs. But the Head Start classrooms involved in the CARES study did not accomplish these results alone. As I noted in an earlier post, the Head Start CARES project included an extensive professional development model that included ongoing training and coaching for teachers and program monitoring and technical assistance to support the scaling of the three interventions across the multiple sites.

Morris, a professor of applied psychology at New York University and senior fellow at MDRC, and Mattera, a research associate at MDRC, acknowledge that having such a comprehensive professional development package was crucial to the success of the CARES study. At the same time, though, they do not believe the level of support they provided exceeds the capacity of individual Head Start grantees and emphasize that motivated  programs could implement and sustain the interventions on their own.

The authors of the study do not believe the level of support they provided exceeds the capacity of individual Head Start grantees and emphasize that motivated programs could implement and sustain the interventions on their own.

“It is hard to know how the effects might compare if a center or grantee were to take on implementation outside of the study,” they explain. “On the one hand, implementation may be weaker because they may not be able to provide the same number of days of training or coaching, or be able to build a management information system to monitor implementation. On the other hand, there is reason to think that programs who decide to invest their own resources may provide higher levels of support as directors may more closely monitor implementation, make very clear that implementation is a priority, and teachers may be able to mutually support each other. …”

“Our implementation experience suggests that when grantee buy-in and support are high, implementation is better,” Morris and Mattera continue. “All of this is to say that the ‘typical’ implementation may not necessarily be weaker than that provided here.”

Nonetheless, the CARES report demonstrates that complete and thorough program implementation is key to realizing the potential impacts of these social-emotional interventions, and successful implementation ultimately depends on appropriate program supports, monitoring, and ongoing teacher training. The CARES study offers a promising model for how Head Start centers can undertake that challenge. Given the variability that exists between Head Start programs, though, the success of that implementation, and the actual impacts of these social-emotional interventions, most likely will depend on the motivation and resources of individual programs.