Download:
pdf |
pdfContract No.: HHSP233000025T
MPR Reference No.: 6200-001
Early Head Start
Research and Evaluation
Project, 5th-Grade
Follow-Up
Supporting Statement for
Request for OMB Approval of
Data Collection Instruments
September 6, 2006
Submitted to:
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
7th Floor West, 370 L’Enfant Promenade, SW
Washington, DC 20047
Project Officer:
Rachel Chazan Cohen
Submitted by:
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
600 Maryland Avenue, SW
Suite 550
Washington, DC 20024
Project Director:
Jerry West
CONTENTS
Section
A.
Page
JUSTIFICATION ................................................................................................ 1
1.
Explanation of the Circumstances That Make Collection Necessary ............. 1
a.
b.
c.
2.
Study Background ................................................................................ 1
Rationale for the Study ......................................................................... 3
Major Findings from Previous Waves of the Study ............................... 4
How, by Whom, and for What Purpose Information Is to Be Used ............... 4
a.
b.
Overview of the Design of the Study .................................................... 5
Research Questions, Information Elements, and Data Sources .............. 8
3.
Use of Improved Information Technology to Reduce Burden ..................... 24
4.
Efforts to Identify and Avoid Duplication................................................... 25
5.
Efforts to Minimize Burden on Small Businesses and Other Entities .......... 26
6.
Consequences of Less-Frequent Data Collection ........................................ 27
7.
Special Circumstances Requiring Collection of Information in a Manner
Inconsistent with Guidelines in Title 5, Section 1320.6 of the Code of
Federal Regulations.................................................................................... 27
8.
Efforts to Consult With Persons Outside the Agency.................................. 27
a.
b.
9.
Federal Register Announcement......................................................... 27
Federal Consultation........................................................................... 27
Payment or Gifts to Respondents................................................................ 28
10. Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents............................... 28
11. Justification of Questions of a Sensitive Nature.......................................... 30
12. Estimates of Response Burden to Respondents........................................... 31
13. Estimates of Annual Cost Burden to Respondents ...................................... 31
14. Estimate of Annual Cost to Federal Government ........................................ 31
iii
CONTENTS (continued)
Section
Page
A (continued)
15. Explanation of Changes or Adjustments..................................................... 31
a.
b.
Sample Design Changes ..................................................................... 32
Measures Changes .............................................................................. 33
16. Plans for Tabulation and Statistical Analysis and Time Schedule ............... 34
a.
b.
Data Analysis Plan ............................................................................. 34
Time Schedule.................................................................................... 38
17. Display of Expiration Date for OMB Approval .......................................... 39
B.
COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL
METHODS........................................................................................................ 39
1.
Sample Universe, Sampling Method, and Expected Response Rate ............ 39
2.
Statistical Methods for Sample Selection and Degree of Accuracy
Needed....................................................................................................... 40
a.
b.
c.
Statistical Methodology for Sample Selection..................................... 40
Use of Periodic Data Collection Cycles to Reduce Burden.................. 42
Data Collection Procedures................................................................. 43
3.
Methods for Maximizing Response Rates................................................... 49
4.
Tests of Procedures to Minimize Burden .................................................... 50
5.
Identity of Persons Consulted on Statistical Aspects of Design, and
Identity of Contractors................................................................................ 51
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................... 53
APPENDIX A:
CHILD INTERVIEW
APPENDIX B:
COMPONENTS OF THE HOME OBSERVATION
APPENDIX C:
MATERNAL INTERVIEW
APPENDIX D:
TEACHER QUESTIONNNAIRE
APPENDIX E:
OMB SUBMISSION HISTORY
APPENDIX F:
CONSENT FORM AND ADVANCE LETTER
APPENDIX G:
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT
iv
TABLES
Table
Page
1
5TH-GRADE FOLLOW-UP SAMPLE SIZES BY YEAR ..................................7
2
EARLY HEAD START 5TH-GRADE FOLLOW-UP STATISTICAL
POWER OF SAMPLE (1880 EXPECTED CASES) .........................................42
EXHIBITS
Exhibit
Page
1
MEASURES FOR THE EARLY HEAD START 5TH-GRADE
FOLLOW-UP STUDY ......................................................................................11
2
ESTIMATED RESPONSE BURDEN FOR RESPONDENTS IN THE
EARLY HEAD START 5TH-GRADE FOLLOW-UP STUDY .........................32
3
TIME SCHEDULE............................................................................................38
v
A. JUSTIFICATION
1.
Explanation of the Circumstances That Make Collection Necessary
a.
Study Background
The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) of the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) is requesting Office of Management and Budget (OMB) clearance for
the methodology and instruments to be used in conducting the 5th-grade follow-up of the Early
Head Start Research and Evaluation Study. This submission requests permission to contact and
collect data from 1,880 children, their parents, and teachers to facilitate periodic assessments of
Early Head Start's effectiveness in accordance with the 1998 reauthorization of Head Start (Head
Start Act, as amended, October 27, 1998, Section 649 (d) and (e)).
Since its founding more than a decade ago, Early Head Start has provided services to lowincome pregnant women and families with infants and toddlers. Designed as a two-generation
program, Early Head Start aims to (1) enhance the development and health of at-risk children,
(2) strengthen families, and (3) build and strengthen family and community partnerships. The
number of programs has grown from 68 in 1995 to approximately 700 programs that now serve
more than 54,000 families and 60,000 children (ACF, Early Head Start Almanac 2004).
The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project was designed to answer questions
about the impact of Early Head Start programs and services on children and families overall, and
to determine how various types of programs and services have affected children and families
with different characteristics living in diverse life circumstances. In addition to assessing the
impact of the initial years of the program, the evaluation project provides important information
about how Early Head Start could be improved and expanded.
Approximately 3,000 families at 17 sites have participated in the study, with roughly half of
the families randomly assigned to receive Early Head Start services and the other half assigned
1
to a control group.
Children and families participated in several intensive rounds of data
collection from the time a child or pregnant woman was first enrolled in Early Head Start (or
were assigned to the control group) through about age 3. An additional round of data—The
Early Head Start Prekindergarten Follow-Up, or prekindergarten round—was collected when the
children in the study were about 5 years old and preparing to enter kindergarten. This was the
last data collection involving the full sample of families and children. The planned 5th-Grade
Follow-up Study once again will involve the families and children of the Early Head Start
Research and Evaluation Project and provide new information about the children at another key
point of transition—as many complete their elementary school education and prepare to enter
middle school. This follow-up study will be the fifth time that most of these children and
families have been visited, the other times having been at 14, 24, 36, and 60 months. 1 Because
of the way the children initially were recruited for the study, it will take three years to collect
5th-grade data from the full sample of children. About 30 percent of the sample will be 5th
graders in spring 2007, 50 percent in spring 2008, and 20 percent in spring 2009.
Legislative Mandate.
Early Head Start was established in the 1994 Head Start
reauthorization legislation (P.L. 103-252) to serve infants and toddlers who are generally too
young to participate in the regular Head Start program. The law requires that a portion of Head
Start’s total appropriation be set aside to fund the Early Head Start program. This data collection
falls under the evaluation activities necessitated by the mandates of the 1998 reauthorization of
Head Start (Head Start Act, as amended, October 27, 1998, Section 649 (d) and (e)).
1
Families also were interviewed about the services they received at 7, 16, and 28 months after random
assignment.
2
b. Rationale for the Study
The Early Head Start study is the only large-scale study of a federal intervention with lowincome children and families beginning at infancy (and before birth in some cases) that
employed a randomized design across 17 sites. Results from the study offer evidence of
enhanced cognitive, language, and behavioral regulation outcomes in children through age 3 who
were randomly assigned to Early Head Start, as compared to those in a control group who had
access to the services usually available in the community (ACF 2002; Love et al. 2005; ACF
2006). The 5th-grade follow-up of this longitudinal study will help researchers and policymakers
to better answer questions about the benefits of children’s participation in the Early Head Start
program. The study also will provide updated information to document the status and changes in
a number of key areas:
• Early Head Start Impacts. As in all previous waves of data collection and analysis,
ACF plans to estimate the effects of Early Head Start on child and family service
receipt and outcomes when children are in 5th grade. Impacts will be estimated for
both the full sample and key subgroups, such as racial/ethnic minorities and children
who have experienced various Early Head Start service delivery approaches. Among
the outcomes of interest are children’s (1) reading and mathematics achievement in
grade 5, (2) language development, and (3) social skills and behavioral problems.
• Children’s Elementary School Experiences. Data will be collected to describe the
characteristics of the schools and classrooms attended by Early Head Start children
and compare them to schools attended by control group children, low-income
children, and 5th grade children in general. School-level characteristics of interest
include school size (enrollment) and locale (urbanicity), minority student enrollment,
poverty concentration, and school crime and safety. Classroom characteristics such as
class size, number and types of instructional staff, and teacher education,
certifications, and experience are of interest. For all children participating in the
study, a range of academic and behavioral problems—grade retentions, suspensions,
expulsions, and absenteeism, for example—will be identified.
• Contributions of Preschool Early Education Services and Elementary School
Experiences to Outcomes in 5th Grade. ACF has used data from the prekindergarten
wave to explore questions about the role of formal preschool experiences (including
Head Start in particular) in children’s development, both alone and in conjunction
with Early Head Start. The study will ask questions about the relationship of
children’s elementary school experiences to a range of outcomes in 5th grade, as well
3
as the possible moderating effects of children’s school experiences on the relationship
of Early Head Start/preschool participation to elementary school outcomes.
c.
Major Findings from Previous Waves of the Study
Reports from the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project (ACF 2002; Love et al.
2005) have documented the modest, positive program effects of Early Head Start programs on a
range of child and parent outcomes through age 3. In addition, the research has shown impacts
with larger effect sizes for children and families in mixed-approach programs (programs offering
a combination of home- and center-based services); African American children and families;
families enrolled during pregnancy; and families with a moderate number of demographic risk
factors, such as low parental education, single parenthood, and teenage motherhood. Attending
programs that were well implemented in relation to the federal Head Start program performance
standards produced a greater range of impacts for both children and their parents.
Preliminary findings from the data collected when the children were 5 years old and about to
start kindergarten suggest some sustaining program effects on children’s socio-emotional
development, involvement in formal pre-kindergarten programs, Spanish-speaking children’s
vocabulary, and parenting behaviors two years after program completion, and strong effects
persisting for African American children (ACF 2006; Raikes and Chazan-Cohen 2005). At age
5, home-based programs produced more and stronger impacts on children and their parents than
other program approaches, program participation was associated with lower parent depression
scores, impacts on parenting and the home environment for high-risk families emerged, and
program implementation was no longer important (ACF 2006).
2.
How, by Whom, and for What Purpose Information Is to Be Used
Data from the 5th-Grade Follow-Up Study will be used by ACF and others to better answer
questions about the longer-term benefits of children’s participation in the Early Head Start
4
program. It will be used to examine a range of constructs beyond school achievement, such as
impacts on mental health, early indicators of conduct problems, disabilities and special
education, injuries and accidents, and school absences, all of which are possible indicators of
costs to society while children are in 5th grade. These are also early indicators of problems that
may occur later in life such as juvenile delinquency and crime, drug use, and early parenthood,
as well as mental and physical health problems requiring treatment and having implications for
employment and further education (Heckman 2006).
The information from the study will help to inform policy decisions about Early Head Start
services and funding. The data will be a resource for additional research on Early Head Start
conducted by members of the Early Head Start Research Consortium, and by others interested in
enhancing the development and health of at-risk children. As was the case for previous data
waves, the data collected during the 5th-grade follow-up will be archived and made available for
use by the broader research community.
The rest of this section presents an overview of the study design, research questions,
information elements, and data sources.
a.
Overview of the Design of the Study
Seventeen Early Head Start programs from across the U.S. were selected to participate in the
Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project. All 17 programs were funded in 1995 and
1996, the first 2 years of Early Head Start funding. The 17 programs recruited 3,001 families to
participate, all of whom met the programs’ income eligibility requirements. Approximately half
of the families were randomly assigned to the program and the other half to the control group.
The control group families could not receive Early Head Start services, but could receive other
services available in their communities.
5
A total of 2,701 children and families will be selected for participation in the 5th-Grade
Follow-Up Study. This comprises all children in the original sample, across all 17 sites, for
whom parent or child assessment data were collected at 14, 24, 36, or 60 months
(prekindergarten). We expect that about 1,880 of these children and their families will
participate. This estimate of the number of completed cases is based on prior response rates
within each site and an expected 10 percent attrition since the last round of data collection in
2001-2003.
Because of the way the initial recruitment was conducted, we will be collecting data on
children who will enter 5th grade (or their sixth year of formal schooling) over a three-year
period. For this reason, the study will include three waves of data collection, starting in the
spring of 2007 and repeated in spring 2008 and 2009. Based on our current information from the
prekindergarten data collection and our knowledge of the children’s ages, we expect that
approximately 30 percent, or 660 cases, will be completed in 2007; 50 percent (924 cases) will
be completed in 2008; and 20 percent (296 cases) in 2009 (Table 1).2 (The few cases that would
have been eligible for data collection in 2006 will be included in the 2007 sample.)
2
The sample sizes here are based on all children who have completed at least one round of child assessment
data; we assume a 70 percent response rate. The total number of cases will be 2,701.
6
TABLE 1
5TH-GRADE FOLLOW-UP SAMPLE SIZES BY YEAR
Participants
Eligible children
Eligible teachers
Child response rate
Parent response rate
Teacher response rate
Completed child assessments
Completed parent interviews
Completed teacher questionnaires
Spring
2007
(30%)
Spring
2008
(50%)
Spring
2009
(20%)
Total
Study
Completes
Final Response
Rate Based on
Eligible Sample
810
810
70%
70%
75%
567
567
608
1351
1351
70%
70%
75%
946
946
1,013
540
540
70%
70%
75%
378
378
405
1,891
1,891
2,026
70%
70%
75%
The 5th-Grade Follow-Up Study will include a home visit and a teacher questionnaire.3 The
home visit has four components:
(1) a child assessment, (2) a child interview, (3) an
observation, and (4) a maternal (or primary caregiver) interview. For the first component, a
trained data collector will administer the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test -III (PPVT-III) and
the 5th-grade reading and math assessments from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study,
Kindergarten Class of 1998-99 (ECLS-K) to the child.
All three assessments will be
administered using a computer assisted interview (CAPI) mode. The assessment items will be
presented to the child on an easel, and the data collector will enter the child’s responses into a
laptop computer. The second component, the child interview, also will be administered via
CAPI.
The third component, observation, consists of a videotaped mother-child interaction, a set of
questions that the data collector will ask the mother following the interaction, and checklist-style
3
School record data is being collected on the first 30 percent of the children in the sample. Children’s teachers
will be asked to abstract this information with the consent of the children’s parents. This design enhancement is
being funded by the Partnership for America’s Economic Success. Funds from another private foundation are being
sought to support an interview with the children’s fathers and a videotaped father-child interaction. There is no
decision on this funding request at this time.
7
items that the data collector will complete based on observations of the home environment. The
last component is the maternal interview. During this CAPI interview, children’s mothers or
primary caregivers will be asked a series of questions about themselves and other family
members, and about their child’s school experiences. Mothers also will be asked to rate their
child’s social skills and to report any problem behaviors.
The home visit should take an average of 2.5 hours. We estimate that the child assessment
will occupy 70 minutes; the child interview, 15 minutes; the observation, 15 minutes; and the
maternal interview, 55 minutes.
The balance of the in-home time will be devoted to
administrative tasks such as explaining the study and obtaining informed consent for the
different study components.
For each child in the study, his/her 5th-grade teacher will be identified during the maternal
interview. Using information provided by the child’s parent, the teachers will be contacted and
asked questions about the child’s school and classroom environment and school experiences.
Teachers will be given the option of completing the questionnaire using either a Web-based or a
paper instrument. On average, the teacher questionnaire will take 35 minutes to complete. We
expect to obtain teacher data for about 75 percent of the study children (Table 1).
b. Research Questions, Information Elements, and Data Sources
The Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project was designed to answer questions
about program impacts on children and families at different points in time and at critical
transitions. The data that will be collected in the 5th-Grade Follow-Up Study will allow analysts
to answer the following types of questions:
Early Head Start Impacts
• What are the impacts of Early Head Start on children’s reading and mathematics
achievement and language development at the end of 5th grade?
8
• What are the impacts of Early Head Start on children’s receipt of special education
services, grade retention, absenteeism and truancy, and suspensions and expulsions?
• Do these impacts and others vary as a function of the Early Head Start program
model in which the children participated before age 3?
• Do these impacts vary as a function of child characteristics, such as gender or
race/ethnicity, and/or family characteristics, such as the number of family risk
factors? Are the impacts greater for some groups of children, such as African
American children? Are they greater for some families than others, such as families
with multiple risks?
Children’s Elementary School Experiences
• What are the characteristics of the schools and classrooms attended by Early Head
Start children, and how do these compare to those attended by other low-income
children (control group children)? How do they compare nationally?
• What are the educational and career experiences of Early Head Start children’s
classroom teachers, and how do these compare to those of other low-income children
and to 5th-grade teachers nationally?
• How and in what ways are the parents of Early Head Start children involved in their
children’s schools? How does their involvement compare to that of the parents of
other low-income children?
Contributions of Preschool Early Education Services and Elementary School Experiences
to Outcomes in 5th Grade
• What role does children’s formal preschool experience, including Head Start in
particular, have in children’s development and family functioning at or near the end
of elementary school?
• Do children who received Early Head Start, followed by formal care at ages 3 and 4
and good-quality elementary education, have better outcomes at grade 5 than children
who did not have these experiences?
The 5th-grade protocol has been designed to collect information about the children’s
physical health and development; height and weight; academic achievement; social competence
and problem behaviors at home and at school; attention and approaches to learning; home
environment; relationships with family and friends; extracurricular activities; maternal mental
health and use of social services; family living arrangements and financial resources; and
parental warmth, discipline, supervision, and involvement. A Measures Committee of the Early
9
Head Start Consortium thoroughly reviewed and selected the specific measures used to assess
these constructs. This Committee used the following criteria to prioritize possible measures:
(1) continuity with past waves of the study; (2) use in other studies, preferably those with large,
national samples; (3) demonstrated good psychometric performance when used with similar
samples; (4) feasibility of administration and coding; (5) age-appropriateness for children
entering early adolescence; (6) outcomes targeted or affected by the Early Head Start program;
and (7) utility for future cost-benefit analyses of Early Head Start.
One of the notable features of the 5th-grade design is the emphasis on measures that are
consistent with those used in previous rounds of data collection, but that have been adapted as
developmentally appropriate for 5th graders. Such measures will enable growth modeling of
children’s development from earlier time points, and also make it possible to study changes in
parenting processes over time. Another important feature of our data collection strategy is the
use of multiple reporters. For example, both mothers and teachers will report on children’s
aggressive behavior, hyperactivity, cooperation, and self-control.
This feature is important
because children may behave differently in different contexts.
There will be five data collection components: (1) a child assessment, (2) a child interview,
(3) a home observation, (4) a maternal interview, and (5) a teacher questionnaire. Exhibit 1
presents a summary of the measures to be included in each of these components, along with the
rationale for their selection (use in past waves, use in other studies, and reliability and validity).
The first four components will occur during a single home visit. Both the instruments to be
administered during the home visit and the teacher questionnaire are described in some detail
below. The child assessments are identified in Exhibit 1, but the actual instruments are not
included with this package because of copyright issues. The child interview is included in
Appendix A and the home observation measures in Appendix B. The maternal interview and the
teacher questionnaire are included in Appendixes C and D, respectively.
10
EXHIBIT 1
MEASURES FOR THE EARLY HEAD START 5TH-GRADE FOLLOW-UP STUDY
Construct
Measure
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
Psychometrics
Child Assessment
Child’s Cognition /
Academic
Achievement
# Items /
Admin
Time**
See
73 min.
ECLS-K Cognitive
Assessment
ECLS-K at 5th
Grade
Subtests:
(1) Language/Literacy, (2)
Mathematics
PPVT-III
Dunn & Dunn,
1997
36 months,
TPK
11
Rationale: Enables
comparability with
nationally representative
sample; demonstrated
good psychometric
properties.
5th grade: Language/Literacy
alphas = .72-.88. Reliability of
IRT-generated theta score = .94.
Correlated with teacher rating in
Language/Literacy = .63. Math
alphas = .58 - .88. Reliability of
theta = .94. Correlated with
teacher rating in Math = .65.
60 min.
--
Other Studies: FACES at
Head Start, K and 1st
grade; FF In-Home Study
at 30 and 60 mos; IHDP at
ages 5, 8, and 18; NLSYCS.
For 10-year-olds in national
norming sample (n=100): alpha =
.96 (Form IIIA) and .95 (Form
IIIB). Split-half reliability = .94
(IIIA) and .95 (IIIB). Test-retest
reliability on subsample = .88
(IIIA) and .89 (IIIB). PPVT-III
correlated with WISC-III Verbal
IQ = .91 (IIIA) and .92 (IIIB) for
sample of 41 7-11-year-olds.
Good discriminant validity.
13 min.
--
Construct
Measure
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
Psychometrics
Child Interview
Child’s SocialEmotional
Development /
Behavior
12
Parental Discipline
Body Mass Index
# Items /
Admin
Time**
See
21.5-25.5 min.
ECLS-K Self-Description
Questionnaire (SDQ)
Subscales:
(1) Perceived
Interest/Competence in
Reading,
(2) Perceived
Interest/Competence in
Math,
(3) Perceived
Interest/Competence in
School,
(4) Perceived
Interest/Competence in
Peer Relations,
(5) Externalizing,
(6) Internalizing
ECLS-K at 5th
Grade; adapted
from Marsh,
1990
Rationale: Possible
program impact.
5th Grade Subscale alphas:
(1) Perceived Interest/Competence
in Reading: .90
(2) Perceived Interest/Competence
in Math: .92
(3) Perceived Interest/Competence
in School: .83
(4) Perceived Interest/Competence
in Peer Relations: .82
(5) Externalizing: .78
(6) Internalizing: .79
42 items in
3rd Grade
Child
Interview
p. 1
Est. 10 min.
Evidence of reliability: children
who had been retained rated
themselves lower in academic
interest/competence and higher in
behavior problems.
Adaptation of the ParentChild Conflict Tactics Scale
– Child Report
Based on Straus
et al., 1998
Height and Weight
measurements
NICHD
Parent discipline a
program impact in past
EHS waves; also getting
Parent Report.
6 items
Other Studies: ECLS-K,
GBHDS, FF In Home
Study at 30 and 60
months.
5 min.
Rationale: Overweight and
obesity are possible
program impacts.
1.5 min.
Child
Interview
p. 3
Child
Interview
p. 4
Construct
Relationship with
Parents
Parental Supervision
Measure
Cite/Source
SDQ1 – Parent
Relationship Scale mother,
biological father, nonbiological father figure
Marsh, 1990
3 items from Parental
Monitoring subscale
Stattin & Kerr,
2000
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
Rationale: Possible
program impact.
Advantage of measure is
consistency with SDQ.
Psychometrics
Marsh, Smith, Barnes, & Butler,
1983: Sample of poor or workingclass 5th-6th graders in inner-city
Sydney, Australia (N = 528).
Alpha = .79. Test-retest stability
over 6-mo. period = .55.
Discriminant validity supported by
stronger correlations between
child test scores and SDQ1
academic scales than with nonacademic scales.
# Items /
Admin
Time**
8-24 items
2-6 min.
3 items
Other Studies: PSIDCDS2. Maternal report
used in NICHD SECCYD.
.75 min
See
Child
Interview
p. 5
Child
Interview
p. 8
Rationale: Possible
program impact. Child
report preferable to
maternal report.
13
Violence, Bullying at
School
Timing of Maturation
Peer Bullying
Pubertal Development
Scale
PSID-CDS2
Petersen et al.,
1988
Rationale: Construct
relevant to age group.
Could modify program
effects.
PSID-CDS2: Alpha = .62. Factor
loadings range = .42 - .66.
Other Studies: PHDCN
Age 9 cohort.
Petersen et al., 1988:
Administered to 2 cohorts of 6th
graders 5 times over 8 years
(N=253; primarily White, middle
class). Boys: alpha range = .72 .78. Girls: alpha range = .76 - .83.
Rationale: Important
construct during early
adolescence. Could modify
program effects.
4 items
1 min.
3 items
.75 min
Child
Interview
p. 9
Child
Interview
p. 10
Brooks-Gunn et al. (1987):
correlations with physician ratings
= .61-.67, and with self ratings =
.72-.80 among girls.
Maternal Interview
Family
Demographics
46.25-68.25 min.
Household composition;
Maternal education and
employment; Household
income; # moves;
Homelessness
TPK Parent
Interview;
ECLS-K 5th
Grade; FF Core
Interview
TPK
Could modify program
effects.
22-34 items
5.5-8.5 min.
Maternal
Interview
p. 2
Construct
Child’s Health
Child’s Education
Child’s ExtraCurricular Activities
14
Home Environment
Measure
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
TPK
Other Studies/ Rationale
Psychometrics
Could be impacted by
program or modify
program effects.
# Items /
Admin
Time**
Routine doctor and dentist
visits; Diagnosed
conditions; Health care
coverage; Regular
medications
TPK Parent
Interview
15-33
items
Current grade, teacher, and
classroom; Current and past
schools; School affiliation
and type; History of school
disruption; Absences;
Disabilities; IEP; Special
services; Summer school;
Grade retention; Family
involvement in school
NHES; IHDP at
age 18; ECLSK at 5th grade;
NICHD
SECCYD at 5th
grade
Could be impacted by
program or modify
program effects.
42-54 items
Participation in arts, sports,
clubs, other activities;
Whether provided by
school
NHES 2005
After-School
Programs and
Activities
Interview
Could be impacted by
program or modify
program effects.
1-7
items
Homework; Child’s number
of books at home
ECLS-K; NHES
Possible program impacts.
See
Maternal
Interview
p. 8
3.75-8.25
min
10.5-13.5
min.
Maternal
Interview
p. 11
Maternal
Interview
p. 18
.25-1.75
min.
Home-work:
6 items
Number of
books:
1 item
Maternal
Interview
p. 19
Maternal
Interview
p. 20
1.75 min.
Home Environment
Shortened Family
Environment Scale (FES)
Subscales :
(1) Conflict
(2) Cohesion
Moos, 1974
Shortened
Conflict
Subscale at
14 months, 24
months, 36
months
Full subscales in IHDP at
age 8.
Conflict in previous EHS waves:
alpha range = .65 - .68. Shortened
Cohesion Subscale items selected
using exploratory factor analysis
with IHDP Age 8 (excluding
mothers with a college degree);
alpha = .78 (Whiteside-Mansell,
2005).
8 items
2 min.
Maternal
Interview
p. 20
Construct
Maternal Mental
Health
Measure
CESD-SF
Parenting Stress IndexShort Form
Cite/Source
Ross,
Mirowsky, &
Huber, 1983
36 months,
TPK
Abidin, 1995
Shortened Subscales:
(1) Parental Distress, (2)
Parent-Child Dysfunctional
Interaction
15
Child’s
Social-Emotional
Development /
Behavior
Aggressive Behavior
Subscale from ASEBA / 618
Achenbach &
Rescorla, 2001;
Achenbach,
1991;
Child’s
Social-Emotional
Development /
Behavior
Hyperactivity Subscale
from Social Skills Rating
System (SSRS) – Parent
Report
Gresham &
Elliott, 1990
Cooperation and SelfControl Subscales from
Social Skills Rating System
(SSRS) – Parent Report
Gresham &
Elliott, 1990
Parental Discipline
Adaptation of the ParentChild Conflict Tactics Scale
– Parent Report
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
Used in past waves;
possible program impact
or moderator of program
effects.
EHS 36 mos. alpha = .88.
Alpha = .85 for women in Ross et
al. 1983.
12 items
Full Parental
Distress and
Parent-Child
Dys.
Interaction
subscales
used at 14
months, 24
months,
36 months
Used in past waves;
possible program impact.
Subscales from past waves factoranalyzed by Whiteside-Mansell et
al., 2005. Selected 1 of 2 factors
from Parental Distress (“Parenting
Demands Stress”) and 1 of 3
factors from Parent-Child
Dysfunctional Interaction
(“Dyadic Interaction”). Item
loadings range = .48-.80 for
Parenting Demands and .48-.86
for Dyadic Interaction.
11 items
24 months,
36 months,
TPK
Used in past waves;
getting Teacher Report for
comparability; key
outcome of interest,
especially from costbenefit perspective.
Alpha at 24 months = .91, at 36
months = .88.
Shorter than NICHD
Hyperactivity scale; also
getting Teacher Report for
comparability; also using
prosocial behavior scales
from SSRS.
In national norming sample
(N=4,170 children), alpha for
parent-reported Problem Behavior
subscales = .73-.87, test-retest
reliability = .65
(https://www.agsnet.
com/assessments/technical/
ssrs.asp#8)
Other Studies: NICHD
SECCYD at 5th Grade.
NICHD SECCYD: Cooperation
alpha = .79, Self-Control alpha =
.81.
Rationale: Important to get
prosocial behaviors in
addition to problem ones;
also getting Teacher
Report for comparability.
Based on Straus
et al., 1998
Psychometrics
# Items /
Admin
Time**
Parent discipline a
program impact in past
EHS waves; also getting
Child report.
3 min.
2.75 min.
18 items
4.5 min.
6 items
1.5 min.
Coop. = 10
items
Self-Control
= 10 items
5 min.
6 items
1.5 min.
See
Maternal
Interview
p. 22
Maternal
Interview
p. 24
Maternal
Interview
p. 27
Maternal
Interview
p. 29
Maternal
Interview
p. 29
Maternal
Interview
p. 30
Maternal
Interview
p. 32
Construct
Maternal Substance
Use
Family Well-being
Fathers
Measure
Drug use; Alcohol use;
Smoking in household
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
16
EHS 24-month
and TPK Parent
Interviews
24 months,
TPK
Maternal health; Child’s
exposure to domestic
violence; Social services
received
MOS-SF (Ware
& Sherbourne,
1992); CIDI
(World Health
Organization,
2005); CAGE
(Ewing, 1984);
EHS 24, 36,
months and TPK
P.I.’s
Maternal
health: 24
months, 36
months.
Exposure to
domestic
violence: 36
months, TPK.
Social
services:
TPK.
Biological father and fatherfigure residency;
Mother/father marital
status; Father/child contact;
Custody and child support;
Paternity; Mother/father
relationship quality
EHS 24 month
and TPK Parent
Interviews;
FF Core 5 Year
Interview;
NSFH; ECLSB; ECLS-K;
EHS Father
Interview
Other Studies/ Rationale
Could modify program
effects; shortened from
previous waves to save
time.
All could be impacted by
program or modify
program effects; measured
in previous waves.
Key area of interest in lowincome sample; could
modify program effects.
Psychometrics
# Items /
Admin
Time**
7-8 items
1.75-2 min.
6-8 items
See
Maternal
Interview
p. 33
1.5-2 min.
Maternal
Interview
p. 35
If no father:
4 items
1 min.
Maternal
Interview
p. 37
If Res. Bio
only:
9-15 items
2.25-3.75
min.
If Non-Res.
Bio only:
19-27 items
4.75-6.75
min.
If Non-Res.
Bio &
Father-Fig.:
29-41 items
7.25-10.25 min
If Father-Fig.
only:
13-18 items
3.25-4.5 min.
Construct
Measure
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
Psychometrics
Home Observation
Maternal Parenting
See
Approx.10 min.
Videotaped Mother-Child
Interaction: Disagreement
Task
Child SocialEmotional
Development
# Items /
Admin
Time**
NICHD
SECCYD at 5th
grade
Child Behavior Scales: (1)
Agency, (2) Negativity, (3)
Persistence, (4) Affection
Toward Mother
(May add Child Defiance
(GBHDS))
14 months, 24
months, 36
months, &
TPK included
a motherchild video
interaction
Other Studies: GBHDS.
Rationale: Continuity with
past waves. Will allow five
time points of data for
growth curve analysis.
Objective measure
superior to self-report
measures of parenting
and mother-child
relationship.
NICHD SECCYD: Composite var
for child pos engagement
(Affection + Mutuality –
Negativity): alpha = .70;
Composite var for task orientation
(Agency + Persistence): alpha =
.90.
Composite var for maternal
sensitivity (Supp Pres + Respect –
Hostility): alpha = .87
7 min.
Home
Observ. p.
3
Parent Behavior Scales: (1)
Supportive Presence, (2)
Respect for Child
Autonomy, (3) Stimulation
of Cognitive Development,
(4) Hostility
Home
Observ. p.
8
17
Dyadic Behavior Scale: (1)
Affective Mutuality
Mother-Child
Relationship
Home Environment
Home
Observ. p.
12
Homelife Interview
Observational Subscales:
(1) Parental Warmth, (2)
Parental Lack of Hostility,
(3) Parental Verbal Skills,
(4) Internal Environment,
(5) External Environment
PHDCN, Cohort
9, Waves 1-3;
based on Early
Adolescent
HOME
Inventory
(Bradley et al.,
2000)
HOME
Inventory at
14 months, 24
months, 36
months, TPK
Other Studies: NICHD
SECCYD used Early
Adolescent HOME at G5.
Rationale: Observational
measures avoid social
desirability bias and reduce
burden on respondent.
Leventhal et al., 2004: Random
sample of 2,685 households (17%
EA, 34% AA, 45% Latino) from
80 Chicago neighborhoods
(children aged 3-15). Subscale
alpha range: .67 - .85. All
subscales significantly correlated
with WISC-R Vocabulary and/or
behavior problems for 9-year-olds
(n=473-484).
33 items
(Note: Most
items can be
completed
after home
visit has
ended.)
Est. 3 min.
Home
Observ. p.
15
Construct
Measure
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
Psychometrics
Teacher Questionnaire
Type of school; Classroom
aides and materials;
Organization of classroom;
Grades taught at school;
Number of students and
teachers
ECLS-K at 5th
Grade, FF Age 5
Teacher Survey,
NICHD
SECCYD at 5th
Grade
Could modify program
effects.
Child’s Absences
Absences this year; Reason
for absences
IHDP at age 18
Possible program impact;
could also modify program
effects.
Parent/teacher conference
attendance
12-13
3-3.25 min.
FF Age 5 Teacher
Survey
1-2 items
.25-.5 min
Possible program impact.
4 item
1 min
Child’s SocialEmotional
Development /
Behavior
See
34.75-36.25 min.
Classroom and
School
Characteristics
Family Involvement
in Schooling
# Items /
Admin
Time**
Achenbach &
Rescorla, 2001;
Achenbach,
1991
Hyperactivity Subscale
from Social Skills Rating
System (SSRS) – Teacher
Report
Gresham &
Elliott, 1990
Cooperation and SelfControl Subscales from
Social Skills Rating System
(SSRS) – Teacher Report
Gresham &
Elliott, 1990
24 months,
36 months,
TPK
Used in past waves; also
getting Parent Report for
comparability.
Alpha at EHS 24 months = .91, at
36 months = .88.
Possible program impact.
In national norming sample
(N=4,170 children), teacherreported Problem Behavior
subscales alpha range = .82-.86,
test-retest reliability = .84.
(https://www.agsnet.
com/assessments/technical/
ssrs.asp#8)
20 items
5 min.
Teacher
Quest.
p. 5
Teacher
Quest.
p. 6
Teacher
Quest.
p. 7
18
Aggressive Behavior
Subscale from Teacher’s
Report Form
Teacher
Quest.
p. 2
Important to capture
prosocial behaviors in
addition to problem ones;
also getting Parent Report
for comparability.
In national norming sample
(N=4,170 children), teacherreported Social Skills subscales
alpha range = .93-.94, test-retest
reliability = .85. Validated against
CBCL-Teacher Report.
(http://www.agsnet.
com/assessments/
technical/ssrs.asp#8)
6 items
1.5 min.
Teacher
Quest.
p. 9
Coop. = 10
items
Teacher
Quest.
p. 9
Self-Control
= 10 items
Teacher
Quest.
p. 10
5 min.
Construct
Measure
Approaches to Learning and
Peer Relations Subscales from
ECLS-K Social Rating Scale
(SRS) – Teacher Report
Cite/Source
Previous
Waves
Other Studies/ Rationale
ECLS-K at 5th
grade Teacher
Questionnaire;
adapted from
Gresham &
Elliott, 1990
Possible program impact.
Psychometrics
ECLS-K 5th Grade:
Approaches to Learning split-half
reliability = .91,
Peer Relationships split-half
reliability=.92.
# Items /
Admin
Time**
Estimate: 24
items
See
Teacher
Quest.
p. 11
6 min.
Teacher
Quest.
p. 11
19
Child’s Disabilities
and Use of Special
Services
Physical or psychological
disabilities; IEP; Special
education; Title I services;
Other services; Primary
placement
ECLS-K at 5th
Grade; FF Age
5 Teacher
Survey
Possible program impact.
Could modify program
effects.
School Climate
Teacher turnover;
Absenteeism; Drugs;
Overcrowding; Parent
involvement; Violence and
weapons
ECLS-K at 5th
Grade; FF Age
5 Teacher
Survey
Could modify program
effects.
Teacher race/ethnicity, age;
Education; Gender;
Certification; Years of
experience
ECLS-K at 5th
Grade; FF Age
5 Teacher
Survey
Could modify program
effects.
Neighborhood
Characteristics
Ethnic makeup; % singleheaded HHs; % HHs in
poverty
US Census
Could modify program
effects.
--
County
Characteristics
Violent and property crime
US Department
of Justice
Exposure to violence and
crime could modify
program effects.
--
School Quality
School & classroom size,
ethnic makeup; % children
free lunch; % children for
whom English is 2nd
language; % children
receiving special services;
teacher:student ratio;
structure (grades,
affiliation)
NCES Data
Could modify program
effects.
--
Teacher
Demographics
21-25 items
5.25-6.25
min.
13 items
3.25 min.
18 items
4.5 min.
Teacher
Quest.
p. 13
Teacher
Quest.
p. 16
Teacher
Quest.
p. 18
National Data
* All measures are considered “Tier I” (essential).
** With the exception of the Child Assessment instruments, the SDQ and body measurements in the Child Interview, and the Home Observation, all administration times were
calculated with the assumption of 15 seconds per item. The household roster in the Maternal Interview was assumed to include a total of 4 members.
KEY:
20
14 months = Early Head Start, 14 Month wave
24 months = Early Head Start, 24 Month wave
36 months = Early Head Start, 36 Month wave
CAGE = Cage Questionnaire
CIDI = Composite International Diagnostic Interview
ECLS-B= Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Birth Cohort
ECLS-K = Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Kindergarten Cohort
EHS = Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project
FACES = Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey
FF = Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study
GBHDS = Girls and Boys Health and Development Study
HOME = Home Observation for the Measurement of the Environment
IHDP = Infant Health and Development Program
MOS-SF= Medical Outcomes Study – Short Form General Health Survey
NCES = National Center for Education Statistics
NICHD SECCYD = National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Study of Early Child Care and Youth Development
NHES = National Household Education Survey, 2003 Parent and Family Involvement in Education Survey
NLSY- CS = National Longitudinal Survey of Youth - Child Supplement
NSFH= National Survey of Families and Households
PHDCN = Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods
PPVT III = Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Third Edition
PSID – CDS1 = Panel Study of Income Dynamics – Child Development Supplement, Wave 1
PSID – CDS2 = Panel Study of Income Dynamics – Child Development Supplement, Wave 2
SDQ = Self Description Questionnaire from ECLS-K
SDQ1 = Self Description Questionnaire - I
TPK = Early Head Start Transition to Pre-K Study
Home Visit Instruments. The first component of the home visit, the child assessment, is
comprised of three standardized individually administered assessments (Table 2). Children will
be administered the PPVT-III (Dunn and Dunn 1997), as well as the ECLS-K 5th-grade reading
(language and literacy) and math assessments (Princiotta et al. 2006; Pollack et al. 2006). The
PPVT-III is designed to assess children’s knowledge of the meaning of words by asking them to
say, or indicate by pointing, which of four pictures best shows the meaning of a word that is said
aloud by the assessor. A series of words is presented, ranging from easy to difficult for children
of a given age, each accompanied by a picture plate consisting of four line drawings. When the
level of difficulty becomes too great (as demonstrated by the child’s incorrect responses to
several items in a set), the test is ended. The full, 144-item test requires 10-15 minutes to
administer, because the average child receives only a subset of the items. It is suitable for a wide
range of ages from 2-1/2 through adulthood and has established age norms based on a national
sample of 2,725 children and adults tested at 240 sites across the United States.
The ECLS-K reading and math assessments both use a two-stage adaptive testing approach.
Children are first administered a level one, or routing test to determine their approximate level of
performance. Then they are administered a longer test that is tailored to their ability level. The
reading assessment measures children’s reading skills, vocabulary, and comprehension
(Princiotta et al. 2006). It provides information about their overall reading achievement and their
mastery of specific skills sets or levels of comprehension, such as deriving meaning from and
making interpretations beyond text. The math assessment measures children’s knowledge and
skills in a number of areas of mathematics, such as solving simple multiplication and division
problems, understanding of place value, and using rates and fractions to solve problems.
The second home visit component, the child interview, includes several measures of the
child’s social emotional development and internal or external problem behaviors. The Self-
21
Description Questionnaire (SDQ) that was used in the ECLS-K is included in the 5th-grade
instrument (Marsh 1990; Pollack et al. 2006). This measure provides information about the
children’s perceptions of their own academic and social competencies and problem behaviors.
The third component of the home visit, the observation, begins with a videotaped motherchild interaction. The interactive activity is the Disagreement Task, which is based on the
Parent-Child Discussion Task from the 5th Grade wave of the NICHD Study of Early Child Care
(SECC). The interviewer gives the child a stack of 15 index cards and tells the dyad that each
card lists a topic that parents and children often disagree about, such as homework, television, or
chores.4 The mother and child are instructed to go through the cards and select their top three
areas of disagreement, and then “talk together about each one and try to resolve some of your
disagreements.” The interviewer turns on the video camera, and the dyad is left alone for eight
minutes to discuss their disagreements.
The videotapes will be coded using a coding scheme that captures key elements of mother
and child behaviors. Seven scale scores will be developed that describe the mother’s behavior
(positive regard, negative regard, perspective taking, engagement, dominance, use of reasoning,
and use of coercion). Six scale scores will be developed that describe the child’s behavior
(positive regard, negative regard, perspective taking, engagement, defiance, and use of
reasoning), and two scores that describe the dynamic of the maternal-child dyad (mutuality and
competitiveness).
The second part of the observation is an adaptation of the Homelife observational scales
from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (Leventhal et al. 2004);
4
The complete list of topics is: playing computer or video games, television, honesty or lying, manners,
chores, school/homework, clean room, personal appearance, fighting with sisters or brothers, getting up in the
morning or to school on time, eating habits, respect for others, friends or classmates, sports or after-school activities,
and pets.
22
these scales are an expanded version of the H.O.M.E. Inventory (Bradley et al. 2000). Some
consist of questions that the data collector will ask the mother following the mother-child
interaction. Others will be comprised of checklist-style items completed by the data collector
based on observations of the home environment. These observational items can be completed
either while the mother-child interaction is being videotaped or immediately after the home visit.
At this point in the home visit, the child’s involvement will end. The mother then will be
interviewed, also using CAPI. The mother’s interview includes a series of questions designed to
collect information about the children’s parents and families (e.g., mother and father education
and employment, household/family composition and income), and the child’s health, social
skills, and problem behaviors. (Teachers also will be asked to report on children’s socialemotional development and problem behaviors.) In addition, mothers will be asked questions
about their child’s formal education and school experiences, and the level of family involvement
in the child’s school. Questions about the child’s home environment that were asked in prior
waves of the study will be repeated and new items about homework and who assists the child
with homework will be added. Using the CESD-Short Form, the interviewers once again will
ask mothers if they have any depressive symptoms (Ross et al. 1983) and will ask about parental
distress using the short form of the Parenting Stress Index (Abidin 1995). Mothers also will be
asked to identify the school that their child attends and to name their child’s 5th-grade teacher so
that the teacher can be asked to complete the teacher questionnaire. In addition, information
from the parent interview will be used to identify the children’s schools and to merge school
contextual information from the National Center for Education Statistics school universe files
(Common Core of Data and Private School Survey).
Teacher Questionnaire. For each child, we will collect information from the teacher about
the child’s school and classroom environment and his or her school experiences. Two types of
23
data will be collected. First, we will gather information about the general characteristics of the
child’s school, the educational background and experience of the child’s teacher, and the
teacher’s perceptions of the school. This information will be asked only once of each teacher
participating in the study. (In other words, if a teacher completes the questionnaire for more than
one child in a year, s/he will only have to provide information about the school and her/his own
educational background once.) Second, we will collect information about the child’s classroom,
behavior, approaches to learning, and peer relationships, as well as the relationship of the family
with the school, and the child’s disabilities and receipt of special educational services. The
child’s teacher will be asked to provide this information for each child in the study for whom he
or she is the primary teacher. All teacher questionnaire measures, and the rationale for their
inclusion, appear in Exhibit 1.
3.
Use of Improved Information Technology to Reduce Burden
The data collection plan for the 5th-grade follow-up reflects sensitivity to issues of
efficiency, accuracy, confidentiality, and respondent burden. Computer-assisted and Web-based
methods will be used for all data collection except the videotaped maternal-child interactions.
The use of Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI) will reduce respondent burden by
automating skip logic and question adaptations. Using this method will allow interviewers to
progress directly from question to question without having to refer to previous answers to check
whether a follow-up question should be asked, or whether phrasing should be adjusted to apply
appropriately to a respondent’s circumstances. CAPI will minimize data collector error through
control over question logic, consistency checks, and probes. It also will eliminate the need to
call back respondents to obtain missing data, since inconsistencies in responses will be corrected
during the interview process. The CAPI system will facilitate tracking because of its capability
24
to produce timely reports on screening and interview outcomes, yield rates, item nonresponse
rates, and data collector productivity.
The CAPI mode also will ease administration, improve the overall quality of the data, and
reduce the time interval between the end of data collection and the preparation of the data files.
For child assessments, computer-based data entry will reduce the burden by facilitating the
movement from one assessment to the other without the assessor needing to calculate stopping or
starting points. Any basal, ceiling, or routing rules will be programmed on the data collectors’
laptop computers to ensure a more accurate assessment.
Children’s teachers will be given the option of completing either Web-based or paper
instruments, although they will be encouraged to use the Web-based option. In addition, the
same types of edits that are programmed into the CAPI instruments will be programmed for the
Web-based teacher questionnaire. The Web-based survey will be programmed to accept only
valid responses and to check for logical consistency across answers. In this way, respondents
will be able to correct any errors as they complete the survey, minimizing the need for later
contacts to obtain missing or clarify inconsistent data. An initial e-mail sent to respondents will
contain a URL link to the Web survey, along with a unique user ID and password. A paper copy
of the Web-based instrument will available for teachers who choose this option.
4.
Efforts to Identify and Avoid Duplication
A review of the literature reveals that there is no evidence of other studies that offer
comprehensive information on the issues relevant to this project. This is the only large-scale
random assignment study of the Early Head Start program. The latest round of data collection
for the treatment and control groups in this study was concluded approximately five year ago.
This effort does not duplicate that effort, but rather is a continuation of a longitudinal evaluation
study begun in 1995. The first phase of the evaluation included several rounds of data collection
25
when children were 14-, 24-, and 36-months old. The second phase collected data on the study
children and their families when they were approximately 5 years old and about to start
kindergarten. The current study once again will involve the children and families of the Early
Head Start Research and Evaluation Project, and will provide new information about the children
at another key transition—as many complete their elementary school education and are about to
enter middle school.
While many useful interview items, child assessments, and parent-child interactions have
been identified from other studies and adopted for use in the 5th-grade follow-up, no comparable
data have been collected elsewhere on the characteristics of Early Head Start-eligible children
and families at multiple sites, their school experiences, or child and family outcomes.
No existing data set provides the breadth of description that will result from the 5th-grade
follow-up, either alone or when used with the data that have been collected from the earlier
rounds of the study. No available studies combine the five sources of primary data (maternal
interviews, child assessments, child interviews, home observations, and teacher questionnaires)
that will be collected in the 5th-grade follow-up.
5.
Efforts to Minimize Burden on Small Businesses and Other Entities
No small businesses are involved in this study. The 5th-grade data collection contractor will
be responsible for contacting the study families and for contacting and soliciting data from
children’s elementary school teachers.
Wherever possible, the burden on teachers will be
minimized by offering Web-based instruments. The potential burden on schools will be reduced
by our plan to utilize school universe data and children’s teachers as the primary sources of
information about the schools that the sampled children attend.
26
6.
Consequences of Less-Frequent Data Collection
Absent a new round of data collection, policymakers, researchers, and program planners will
know little about the sustained impacts of Early Head Start programs and services on children
and their families at later stages of their young lives. Without the 5th-grade follow-up data, we
will not know whether this early intervention program contributes to critical academic and
behavioral outcomes as children near the end of their elementary school careers. When the data
from this follow-up are combined with the data from the earlier rounds of the study, it will be
possible to estimate examine trajectories of key child outcomes (e.g., language development) and
parenting outcomes (e.g., parenting behaviors) for both the program and control groups.
7.
Special Circumstances Requiring Collection of Information in a Manner Inconsistent
with Guidelines in Title 5, Section 1320.6 of the Code of Federal Regulations
This study will be conducted in a manner entirely consistent with the guidelines in Title 5,
Section 1320.6 of the Code of Federal Regulations. There are no special circumstances that
might require deviation from these guidelines.
8.
Efforts to Consult With Persons Outside the Agency
a.
Federal Register Announcement
The required Federal Register notices (Appendix E) soliciting comments on the proposed
collection were published on July 14, 2006 and August 18, 2006.
b. Federal Consultation
Many individuals and organizations have made contributions to the design of the 5th-grade
follow-up, and to the data collection instruments and procedures. Their input was obtained
through in-person meetings and telephone conversations. Members of the Early Head Start
Research Consortium (especially members of the Consortium’s Grade 5 Measures Committee
27
and Grade 5 Planning Workgroup) were consulted throughout the measures development
process, as well as when data collection plans and strategies were being considered. The final
instruments and data collection protocols are the outcome of an iterative, collaborative process
representing the views of the federal government, contractors, and members of the Consortium.
9.
Payment or Gifts to Respondents
We recognize that participation in the Early Head Start 5th-Grade Follow-Up Study will
place some burden on study families and children, and on children’s 5th-grade teachers. We
have attempted to minimize this burden through our data collection procedures and our use of
carefully constructed instruments and assessments. Nevertheless, we believe it is important to
acknowledge the burden that participation entails as we have in all prior rounds of the study.
Parents who participate in the study will be paid $30 and children will be given $10 to buy
something special to thank them for their participation. Teachers who complete questionnaires
will be given $20 for each instrument they complete. Because of the expected dispersion of the
sample over the years, we anticipate that most teachers will complete only a single instrument.
To encourage use of the Web-based instrument, we will pay an additional $2 per instrument
completed to teachers who complete the questionnaire on the Web.
10. Assurance of Confidentiality Provided to Respondents
Data collectors will (1) conduct interviews and administer child assessments in locations
that guarantee the privacy of the respondents’ answers to the extent possible, and (2) will not
share individual responses with others. Individual parent and child interview responses and child
assessment scores will not be shared with Early Head Start programs or other entities. Teacher
reports will not be shared with parents or school officials. Data from the study will be reported
as group statistics only, and will not be used to review the performance of individual programs or
28
staff. All videotaped data will be secured and will be accessible only to individuals who have
signed a confidentiality pledge and have sworn to comply with the conditions of use.
We have crafted carefully worded consent forms (Appendix F) that explain in simple, direct
language the steps we will take to protect the privacy of the information each sample member
provides.
Assurances of privacy related to the parent interviews, home observations, and child
interviews and assessments will be given to each parent as he or she is recruited for this round of
the study. Parents will be assured that their responses will not be shared with the Early Head
Start program staff, their child’s teacher, or the school, and that their responses will be reported
only as part of aggregate statistics across all participating families. The data collection plan will
be explained to the responsible parent in written materials sent in advance of the home visit and
prior to obtaining any signatures, and a representative of the project will be available to answer
any questions. Data collectors will obtain signed, informed consent from all parents prior to
their participation and obtain their consent to interview and assess their children. They will be
asked to consent separately to the videotaped interaction and the teacher questionnaire. At the
beginning of the parent interview, the interviewer will review the contents of the consent form
with the parent; if a parent does not understand it, a member of the research team will explain it
and note the explanation on the consent form.
Children will be asked to read and sign a form indicating that they assent to being
interviewed, videotaped, and assessed. As with their parents, data collectors will explain the
form to the children and answer any questions they may have. Copies of the child assent form
and the teacher consent form completed by the parent will be forwarded to the child’s teacher at
the time the teacher is asked to participate.
29
All staff with access to individually identifiable data, including field data collectors, will be
required to sign a confidentiality agreement (Appendix G) as a condition for employment. By
signing this agreement, staff agree not to discuss the contents of interviews with anyone outside
of the research project. Staff may be subject to disciplinary, civil, or criminal actions for
knowingly and willfully allowing the improper disclosure or unauthorized use of confidential
information.
Data on laptop computers will be secured through operation and survey system
configuration and a password. The use of common Windows utilities, such as Explorer, will be
prevented, and all communication utilities will be disabled, except for those required to
communicate with the home office.
All files that could be used to link individuals with their responses will be kept under lock
and key at the research team offices. Any computer files that contain this information also will
be locked and password-protected. The data collection contractor’s project director will control
access to information in the locked files. Interview and data management procedures that ensure
confidentiality will be a major part of training.
11. Justification of Questions of a Sensitive Nature
To achieve its primary goal of enhancing the school readiness of children from low-income
families, the Early Head Start program needs to understand the social context and daily life
challenges faced by the children and families they serve. Thus, several questions of a sensitive
nature are included in the parent interview, such as questions about maternal feelings of
depression, alcohol and drug use, and children’s exposure to domestic violence.
The child interview includes the Pubertal Development Scale (Petersen et al. 1988), which
has been used in other studies of young boys and girls. When the child is asked about his or her
pubertal development, he or she may provide the answer on a form, and place it in a sealed
30
envelope to return to the data collector; this procedure is designed to protect sensitive personal
information.
The voluntary nature of the questions and the confidentiality of the respondent’s answers
will be restated before sensitive questions are asked. In all cases, questions on these topics are
part of a standardized measure or have been used extensively in prior studies with no evidence of
harm.
12. Estimates of Response Burden to Respondents
The estimated total burden for study respondents—parents, children, and teachers—for the
5th-Grade Follow-Up Study is listed in Exhibit 2. The total burden is 6,480 hours and the
annualized burden is 2,160 hours.
13. Estimates of Annual Cost Burden to Respondents
There are no direct monetary costs to participants.
14. Estimate of Annual Cost to Federal Government
The annual cost to the federal government for the 5th-Grade Follow-Up Study will be
approximately $1,900,000. This cost includes the development of the project materials; the data
collection at 17 research sites; data processing, coding, and analysis; and preparation of reports
of study findings. Respondent expenses and gifts are included in the costs.
15. Explanation of Changes or Adjustments
The 5th-grade data follow-up is a continuation of an ongoing longitudinal study of the
impacts of Early Head Start on children and parents. As a result, special attention has been given
to maintaining continuity between the sample and instrumentation in this follow-up round and
those of earlier phases of the study.
31
EXHIBIT 2
ESTIMATED RESPONSE BURDEN FOR RESPONDENTS IN THE EARLY HEAD START 5TH-GRADE
FOLLOW-UP STUDY
Instrument
Number of
Responses per
Respondent
Number of
Respondents
Average Burden
Hours per
Response
Total Burden
Hours
Year 1 – Spring 2007
Maternal Interview
570
1
1.00
570
Child Assessment
570
1
1.16
661
Child Interview
570
1
0.25
143
1,140
1
0.25
285
570
1
0.50
285
Home Observation (videotaped
interaction)
Teacher Questionnaire
Year 1 total
3,420
1,944
Year 2 - Spring 2008
Maternal Interview
950
1
1.00
950
Child Assessment
950
1
1.16
1,102
Child Interview
950
1
0.25
238
1,900
1
0.25
475
950
1
0.50
475
Home Observation (videotaped
interaction)
Teacher Questionnaire
Year 2 total
5,700
3,240
Year 3 – Spring 2009
Maternal Interview
380
1
1.00
2,092
Child Assessment
380
1
1.16
1,902
Child Interviews
380
1
0.25
759
Home Observation
(videotaped interaction)
760
1
0.25
190
Teacher Questionnaire
380
1
0.50
150
Year 3 total
2,280
1,296
Estimated Total Burden Hours:
a.
6,480
Sample Design Changes
This is the same cohort of children that has been part of Early Head Start study since
children and families were randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups, with the
exception of excluding those children and parents for whom no prior data have been collected.
32
Other sample design options for the 5th grade follow-up were considered but subsequently
rejected due to the expected loss of power that would result from a smaller sample size. These
other designs included disproportionate sampling by site and/or by the child’s prior response
history.
b. Measures Changes
To balance the need to support comparisons with previous rounds of the study with the need
to update the measurement battery, changes to Early Head Start study measures have been
considered carefully. Some changes have been made to the instruments because earlier versions
of measures were no longer appropriate for the study children now that they are in 5th grade.
Child Characteristics and Outcomes. The ECLS-K 5th-grade reading and math
assessments will replace the Woodcock-Johnson-R measures that were used in earlier rounds of
the study to measure children’s early reading and mathematics literacy. The two-stage adaptive
design of the ECLS-K instruments allows us to obtain an accurate and efficient measure of
children’s achievement in each of these domains. Moreover, using the ECLS-K measures allows
comparisons to the achievement of the ECLS-K national sample of 5th-grade children.
Now that the children in the study are older, it is possible for them to report on their own
feelings and perceptions. The child interview will be an important addition to this next round of
the study and an important new source of information about how children perceive their own
social and academic competencies, behaviors, and relationships with their parents. One of the
primary measures to be used comes from the ECLS-K 5th-grade instrument package, once again
making it possible to compare the findings from the Early Head Start study to those from the
ECLS-K.
Childhood obesity is a growing problem, and perhaps the most widespread child health
condition that the Early Head Start program potentially could influence. The measures of height
33
and weight that have been added to the Early Head Start child assessment battery will provide
data on the prevalence of obesity among both this sample of children and the control group
children. The measure of pubertal development included in the child interview also will provide
an important indicator of the child’s physical development, and will be used as a moderator of
important program effects.
Home Environments. Many of the items about the home environment asked in the parent
interview were asked in at least one prior round of the study (see Exhibit 1). However, some
modifications to the items are required to better represent the older age of the study children.
Schools and Classrooms. Most children in the study will be in 5th-grade when the data are
collected. A teacher questionnaire has been added to the study to collect information about the
schools the children attend, their 5th-grade classrooms, and their teachers’ qualifications and
experience. Teachers also will be asked to report on the children’s school performance or
academic achievement and school-related behaviors such as attendance, aggression (fighting at
school), and working cooperatively with their classmates. In addition, information from the
parent interview will be used to identify children’s schools; this information will be used to
merge school contextual information from the National Center for Education Statistics school
universe files (Common Core of Data and Private School Survey).
16. Plans for Tabulation and Statistical Analysis and Time Schedule
a.
Data Analysis Plan
ACF intends to fund experimental, nonexperimental, and methodological analyses of the
5th-Grade Follow-Up Study data. ACF will conduct or fund analyses that will address research
questions in several key areas, each of which is described below.
Early Head Start Impacts. ACF plans to estimate the effects of Early Head Start on child
and family service receipt and outcomes when children are in 5th grade. It will estimate the
34
impacts for both the full sample and key subgroups, including program subgroups based on
program approach (center-based, home-based, or mixed approaches) as well as family subgroups
based on characteristics reported at baseline (e.g., race/ethnicity, or demographic risks such as
single parenthood and low maternal education). Among the outcomes of interest are
(1) children’s reading and mathematics achievement in 5th-grade, as measured by the ECLS-K
assessments; (2) children’s language development, as measured by the PPVT-III; (3) children’s
behavioral problems based on data from parent and teacher reports and, for the first time,
children’s self-reports; (4) children’s perceived academic and social competencies, using their
self-reported SDQ data; (5) parenting behaviors and involvement, and aspects of the home
environment as reported in the parent interview and based on behaviors observed during the
videotaped maternal-child interaction; (6) children’s elementary educational experiences (e.g.,
identification of disability, progression through grades as expected, and indicators of school
problem behaviors, such as poor attendance, conduct reports, suspensions, and expulsions); and
(7) families’ use of health and human services.
The impacts of Early Head Start participation on the outcomes identified here, as well as
other 5th-grade outcomes, will be presented as differences in the mean outcomes for the program
and control groups. Regression-adjusted means will be estimated for both groups to adjust for
differences in the program and control group samples at the time of random assignment, and that
may be due to nonresponse after random assignment. As in prior rounds, impacts will be
estimated as the mean of the regression-adjusted impacts at the study sites (ACF 2002). Also, as
in prior rounds, the robustness of the analyses will be evaluated by estimating the impacts with
and without the adjustments for child and family background variables and by computing the
estimates of impact with and without the use of nonresponse adjusted weights.
35
Children’s Elementary School Experiences. ACF will use the data reported by children’s
parents and teachers to describe the characteristics of the schools and classrooms attended by
Early Head Start children, and how they compare to schools and classrooms attended by other
low-income children. Information about the schools and classrooms attended by the latter will
come from two sources: (1) the parents and teachers of the control group children in the study,
and (2) the ECLS-K 5th-grade data. Because many of the interview and questionnaire items
come from the ECLS-K instruments, it is possible to compare the children in the Early Head
Start sample to the low-income sample in the ECLS-K, as well as to the full ECLS-K national
sample. Many of the analyses of the schools and classrooms attended by the study children will
be descriptive. For example, the percentage of Early Head Start participants attending high
poverty schools will be compared to the percentage of control group children attending such
schools. The 5th-grade teacher questionnaire asks teachers about their certification, and these
data will be used to describe and compare the percentage of Early Head Start and control group
children being taught by teachers with temporary, emergency, or provisional certifications.
Preschool Education, Elementary School Experiences and Outcomes in 5th Grade. The
role of formal preschool experiences, particularly Head Start, in children’s development and
family functioning will be explored. Analyses using the birth-to-three and prekindergarten data
suggest that children and families who participated in both Early Head Start and formal care
arrangements after Early Head Start benefited from both types of programs (Chazan-Cohen et al.
2006). Whether this pattern persists to grade 5, and whether the benefit to early reading skills
reported in this analysis is found for children’s later reading comprehension will be examined.
The relationship of children’s elementary school experiences to child and family outcomes in 5th
grade also will be examined. Nonexperimental techniques will be used to explore these issues.
36
Assessment of Data Quality. Both unconditioned and conditioned response rates will be
calculated by local research site and data source (e.g., maternal interview and child assessment),
and separately for program and control group children and families. Baseline characteristics of
the program and control group children and families who participate at 5th-grade will be
compared to evaluate whether the groups are equivalent at this later stage of the study. Few
differences were observed in the baseline characteristics of children and families who
participated through age 3 (ACF 2002; Love et al. 2005). As noted above, the effects of sample
attrition and nonresponse on program impacts and other estimates also will be explored.
Many of the measures that will be used in the 5th-grade follow-up have a history of use in
other large-scale studies, or are standardized measures based on fairly extensive psychometric
data. In fact, both of these attributes were considered when selecting the measures for this study.
The use of electronic data collection aids will facilitate the collection of complete and accurate
data. Nevertheless, it is still important to evaluate the reliability and validity of key study
measures for the sample of children in this study, and this will be done whenever possible. For
all scales and other constructed variables, including standardized assessments, individual item
data will be examined for completeness, and score distributions will be analyzed. The internal
consistency of all scales and constructed variables also will be evaluated, using coefficient alpha
or similar statistics for the full sample and for important subgroups such as racial and ethnic
groups.
The 5th-grade follow-up data will be collected over a three-year period beginning in the
spring of 2007 and ending in the spring of 2009. No analyses are planned for the data collected
in spring 2007. Preliminary analyses will be conducted using the data from the first two waves
of the study, spring 2007 and spring 2008. Most of these analyses will focus on how the
measures are performing and on the possible impacts of nonresponse. All reports of findings
37
prepared for and released by ACF will be based on the full set of data from all three spring data
collections.
b. Time Schedule
We will select the children and families who will be asked to participate in the 5th-grade
follow-up in August 2006. In November and December 2006, we will conduct an extensive
effort to locate and obtain up-to-date contact information on all sampled families, and to obtain a
limited set of information about the schools the sampled children are attending and their current
grade in school. The field staff who will conduct the spring 2007 home visits will be hired and
trained in January 2007. We anticipate a 13-week field period for the home visits, beginning the
first week of February 2007 and extending until mid-May 2007. The data collection window for
the teacher questionnaires will last longer, ending in mid-June 2007. Preparations for and the
conduct of the spring 2008 and spring 2009 field periods will follow a similar schedule. The
schedule for the three rounds of data collection is presented in Exhibit 3.
EXHIBIT 3
TIME SCHEDULE
Activity Description
Date
Sample Selection
8/2006
Sample Locating
11/2006
Spring 2007 Staff Training
1/2007
Spring 2007 Data Collection
2/2007-6/2007
Spring 2008 Staff Training
1/2008
Spring 2008 Data Collection
2/2008-6/2008
Spring 2009 Staff Training
1/2009
Spring 2009 Data Collection
2/2009-6/2009
38
17. Display of Expiration Date for OMB Approval
The OMB number and expiration date will be displayed at the top of the cover page or first
Web page for each instrument used in the study. For the CAPI instruments, we will offer to read
the OMB number and expiration date at the start of the interview, while the Web-based teacher
survey will have the OMB number on the login page.
B. COLLECTION OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
1.
Sample Universe, Sampling Method, and Expected Response Rate
Of the 3,001 children in the original Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project
sample, 2,701 have provided some parent or child assessment data at one or more of the birth-tothree data collection waves (14-, 24-, or 36-months), or at the pre-kindergarten wave. We plan to
use these children as the sample for the 5th-grade follow-up. After excluding from the sample
the approximately 300 children for whom no data were ever collected, we are taking a census, or
a 100 percent sample, of these cases.
Because virtually all children in the cohort are considered eligible, for planning purposes the
expected 5th-grade response rate can be thought of as the expected completion rate or yield; that
is, the number of completes divided by the number of attempted cases. Different sites have
experienced different levels of success over the prior waves of data collection, so we divided the
sample by site and further divided the sample within site by prior response history (two or more
completed child assessments versus one or no child assessments) when estimating the response
rate. Then, within each of these 34 cells, we took the completion rate (completes divided by
sample) for the most recent round (the prekindergarten wave) and multiplied it by an expected
attrition rate of 10 percent. This new rate is the expected response rate we estimate for the 5th
grade wave. After applying these rates to the 34 cells, we expect to have 1,879 completed cases,
for an expected response rate of 70 percent.
39
2.
Statistical Methods for Sample Selection and Degree of Accuracy Needed
We now describe in greater detail the statistical methodology for the sample selection and
the data collection methodology.
a.
Statistical Methodology for Sample Selection
Sample Selection. We are taking a census of the eligible population, so no sampling
procedures will be used for this study.
Estimation Procedures.
We will create weights to account for the nonresponse
encountered within the sample. Because we are taking a census, the weights do not have to
account for the probability of selection of each case in the sample.
For each data collection instrument, we will construct an analysis weight at the child level.
Each of these weights starts with the sampling weight, which is the inverse of each child's
probability of selection, in this case equal to 1. For each data collection instrument, we
then make a determination about which noncompletes are ineligible, eligible, or have
undetermined eligibility status (where eligibility corresponds to whether the sample member is
part of the target population to which we are generalizing our findings). We also will determine
the most appropriate weighting adjustment cells; that is, we will group all children in the sample
by characteristics that are known for both respondents and nonrespondents, and that probably are
related to the propensity to respond, as well as to key outcomes. Those sample members within
the same cell, both respondents and nonrespondents, are expected to be homogeneous with
respect to response propensity and outcomes. Within cells, we will weight up the respondents so
they represent themselves and those nonrespondents we believe are eligible. This weighting
adjustment factor will be the inverse of the weighted response rate within the cell.
Variance Estimation. The 17 sites were originally selected in a non-probabilistic manner
and results will not be generalized beyond these sites. And, within those sites, we are selecting a
40
census of children who are eligible for this follow-up study, and the results will not be
generalized beyond the 2,701 children in the sample. Therefore, there is no sampling error
around the statistics resulting from this effort; however, because we will undoubtedly have some
nonresponse, the statistics will still be estimates of the true values due to nonresponse and other
nonsampling error. In fact, the respondents can be regarded as a subsample from the initial
sample under a certain missing mechanism. The standard errors of these estimates must account
for the unequal weights due to nonresponse. There is no contribution to the design effect due to
unequal probabilities of selection or due to clustering. We do not expect much of a design effect
due to unequal weighting, and estimate that it would be about 1.17. Proper variance estimation
techniques, such as Taylor Series or replication, would be utilized to account for the unequal
weighting.
Adequacy of Sample Size. Based on prior findings from the Early Head Start Research and
Evaluation Project, we expect effect sizes to range from 0.1 to 0.2 standard deviations. Table 2
shows the power for point-in-time estimates comparing program and control groups (each
comprising approximately half the sample). We conservatively assumed no covariance between
program and control group estimates. We assumed a Type I error rate of .05 (two-sided). The
top half of the table shows the power for the full sample and various subgroups, as does the
bottom half after controlling for baseline characteristics that would explain about 25 percent of
the variance. So, for example, we would be comparing 940 program cases to 940 control cases
for the full sample. We would have .85 power to detect a difference of .15 of a standard
deviation of the measure. If controlling for baseline characteristics, the power increases to .93.
Unusual Problems Requiring Specialized Sampling Procedures. We do not anticipate
any unusual problems that require specialized sampling procedures.
41
b. Use of Periodic Data Collection Cycles to Reduce Burden
We will collect the data for the Early Head Start 5th-Grade Follow-Up Study during three
relatively brief data collection periods. Children will be interviewed and assessed in the spring
of the 5th-grade, or in the spring of their sixth-year of formal schooling if they have been held
back a year in school. Approximately 30 percent of the children will be interviewed and
assessed in spring 2007, another 50 percent in spring 2008, and the final 20 percent in spring
2009. Parents will be interviewed and children’s teachers questioned on this same schedule.
Children, their parents, and teachers will be asked to participate only once over this three-year
period.
TABLE 2
EARLY HEAD START 5TH-GRADE FOLLOW-UP
STATISTICAL POWER OF SAMPLE (1880 EXPECTED CASES)
Full sample:
Subgroups:
2/3 (627 and 627)
1/2 (470 and 470)
1/3 (313 and 313)
1/5 (188 and 188)
Z(1-beta) for Z(1-beta) for Z(1-beta) for
diff of .1sd
diff of .15sd
diff of .2sd
940
0.0449
1.0474
2.0498
Power for
diff of .1sd
0.5179
Power for
diff of .15sd
0.8525
Power for
diff of .2sd
0.9798
1.3140
0.8739
0.3514
-0.1706
0.3734
0.2935
0.2106
0.1434
0.6899
0.5657
0.4104
0.2683
0.9056
0.8089
0.6373
0.4323
Z(1-beta) for Z(1-beta) for Z(1-beta) for
diff of .1sd
diff of .15sd
diff of .2sd
940
0.3551
1.5126
2.6702
Power for
diff of .1sd
0.6387
Power for
diff of .15sd
0.9348
Power for
diff of .2sd
0.9962
0.4722
0.3730
0.2658
0.1770
0.8093
0.6894
0.5166
0.3408
0.9657
0.9053
0.7608
0.5423
627
470
313
188
-0.3230
-0.5431
-0.8043
-1.0653
0.4955
0.1654
-0.2265
-0.6179
If control for baseline characteristics (R-squared=.25):
Full sample:
Subgroups:
2/3 (627 and 627)
1/2 (470 and 470)
1/3 (313 and 313)
1/5 (188 and 188)
627
470
313
188
-0.0697
-0.3239
-0.6255
-0.9269
0.8754
0.4942
0.0417
-0.4103
1.8205
1.3123
0.7089
0.1063
42
c.
Data Collection Procedures
The collection of data from children, parents, and teachers is a varied and complex process.
The procedures that will be used to collect data from children and parents during the home visits
and from children’s teachers are described in the following sections.
Contacting Families and Conducting Home Visits. The first step in conducting the home
visits is to make contact with the family and obtain its consent for participation. Just before data
collection begins, an advance letter will be mailed to the sampled families as a first contact
attempt. The letter will describe the purpose and importance of the study and its confidential and
voluntary nature, and provide a toll-free telephone number that sampled families can call if they
have questions. The letter also will remind families that they have participated in the past, and
will contain a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs).
The second contact will be the data collector’s telephone call to the home. When the data
collector first calls, he or she will ask to speak with the child’s mother. If the mother does not
reside there, the data collector will ask to speak with the person primarily responsible for the
child. To clarify “primary responsibility,” the data collector will ensure that the individual
claiming responsibility lives with the child and is “the person who can tell us about the child’s
health” and “the person the school would contact if there were a problem.” Once the data
collector has established the identity of the primary caregiver and how that person is related to
the child, he or she will describe the purpose and components of the home visit and inform the
caregiver of the payment he or she and the child will receive for participating. Once the
caregiver has agreed to participate, the data collector will schedule the home visit. Given the
length of the visit, many families probably will schedule it for a Saturday or Sunday, but data
collectors will be available after school and on weekday evenings for families preferring those
times. While it is preferable to complete all assessments and interviews in a single home visit,
43
this may not always be possible, and data collectors may have to return to the home to complete
their work.
An extensive locating effort is planned for the fall in advance of each spring data collection.
Mail, telephone, and national database matching techniques will be used to update contact
information. Despite these locating efforts, however, the post office invariably will return some
advance letters because the family no longer lives at the given address or because the address
was insufficient or nonexistent. Likewise, some telephone numbers will be out of service or not
answered. For this reason, data collectors will engage in additional locating efforts during the
data collection period as they attempt to schedule the home visits. Field locating efforts may
include speaking with local postal employees and other local officials, asking neighbors at the
families’ last known address, and contacting family members who were identified by the study
families during prior rounds as persons who would always know there whereabouts.
Given that the home visit is the crux of the data collection effort, field staff will follow a set
of standard procedures that will guide their behaviors and actions. Parents must give their
consent before they and the child may participate in the study. Children also will have to assent
to participate in the study. In addition, the study requires the parent to sign one permission form
to allow the parent and child to be videotaped and sign a separate form to allow contact with the
child’s teacher. Data collectors will fully explain the study to the parent, including the child
interview and assessment, the videotaped observation, and teacher data collection.
All
procedures related to obtaining the child’s assent to participate must be completed in the parent’s
presence, and must include an explanation of the study, answers to questions, and the child (and
the child’s parent) signing the assent form.
Once parents have consented to participate, the data collector immediately will begin the
home visit. The home visit involves four components: (1) the child assessment, (2) the child
44
interview, (3) the observations, and (4) the maternal (or primary caregiver) interview. Data
collectors will be instructed to follow a preferred sequence of activities during the home visit:5
assess the child, interview the child, videotape the mother-child interaction, complete the home
observational scales, and interview the mother. The sequence has been designed to consolidate
the child’s activities so that the he or she will not have to be present for the entire visit. (Many
children are unable to sit for long periods, and home visits may occur on weeknights when
children must complete homework. Also, to afford the mother privacy, it is advisable for the
child to leave the room before the maternal interview.) To grant the child privacy, the data
collector will tell the mother that she is free to attend to other matters in the house while the child
is assessed and interviewed, and that she will be called back when needed. Although activities
should follow the preferred order during the home visit, data collectors will be trained to
accommodate special circumstances, such as a mother’s unexpected absence, a temporary lack of
privacy, other factors warranting the reordering of activities, and even the occasional need to
structure the home visit as two visits.
For the child assessment component, the data collector will administer the Peabody Picture
Vocabulary Test-III (PPVT-III) and Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Cohort
(ECLS-K) math and reading assessments to the child by using a CAPI mode. All assessments
will be administered in English only, and decisions about whether to assess a child with a
disability will conform to a standardized protocol. Within the assessment component, the child
should be administered the PPVT-III first, the ECLS-K math test second, and the ECLS-K
reading test third. Administration of the PPVT-III first is important because it begins with
relatively easy items that most children can answer, and so it can set the tone for the rest of the
5
Our description of the home visit assumes that only one field staff member conducts all activities. This may
not always be the case at all 17 sites.
45
visit, whereas the two ECLS-K tests involve a broader range of items, some of which could
prove frustrating to children struggling with reading or mathematics. The math assessment
should be completed second so that the two language/literacy assessments are not administered
in immediate succession. Such an approach also adds variety and provides a break for children
who find either type of assessment particularly challenging. The data collector will present the
assessment items to the child on an easel and will enter the child’s responses into a laptop
computer.
The second component, the child interview, also will be administered via CAPI. In the final
measure, the child will be asked about his or her pubertal development. They will be given the
option of responding on a paper form, which then can be sealed and returned to the data
collector. This common practice is useful in achieving accurate and honest responses for items
deemed sensitive by respondents.
The third component of the home visit, the observation, is two-fold. The first part is a
videotape of the mother and child engaging in an interaction task. The task will involve 12 cards
with topics that children and parents may disagree about, such as chores, manners, clean room,
or honesty. The data collector will direct the mother and child to pick out the three tasks on
which they most disagree and try to come to a resolution. After the data collector gives the
mother and child instructions, he or she will turn on the video camera and, ensuring that mother
and child are both in the frame, instruct them not to move out of video camera range, leave the
room, and return when the time is up. The second part of the observation is an adaptation of the
Homelife observational scales from the Project on Human Development in Chicago
Neighborhoods (Leventhal et al. 2004); these scales are an expanded version of the H.O.M.E.
Inventory. Some of the scales consist of questions that the data collector will ask the mother
following the mother-child interaction. Other scales consist of checklist-style items that the data
46
collector will complete based on observations of the home environment. The data collector will
enter the observations into the laptop immediately following the home visit.
The final component of the home visit is the maternal interview using CAPI. Mothers will
be asked about themselves, their families, and their child’s school, and will rate a number of their
child’s skills and behaviors.
Additional activities during the home visit will include administrative tasks, such as
retrieving completed contact information forms and reimbursing the mother and child for their
time. At the end of the home visit, the mother will receive $30 in cash for her participation, and
the child will be given $10 for his or her participation.
Identifying, Contacting, and Collecting Data from Teachers. To learn more about the
child’s classroom and school environment, data will be collected from each sampled child’s
teacher. The parent must consent to the teacher’s participation, and if she does so, will give the
data collector the name and address of the child’s school. To help parents who may have trouble
in providing such information, the data collectors will have access to a school database on their
computers. The database will use information available from the public and private school
universe files compiled by the NCES.
The data collector also will ask the parent to identify the child’s primary teacher. In most
cases, this is the teacher with whom the child spends most of the day. If the child does not have
a primary teacher, the parent will be asked to identify the person who teaches the child language
arts.6 For children who have a special education teacher for most of the day, the data collector
will ask for the name of that teacher. If the parent is unsure of the teacher's name, the child can
be consulted.
6
Another option would be to ask parents to name both their child’s language arts and mathematics teachers.
47
As soon as possible after completing each home visit, data collectors will electronically
transmit the school and teacher contact information, and the interview and assessment data to the
data collection contractor. An encrypted format will be used when transmitting any school and
teacher information electronically. Data collectors also will send copies of all consent and assent
forms by overnight mail.
Starting in March of each data collection year, each teacher will be sent a package by
second-day express mail that will include:7
• An explanation of the study and how teachers were identified, and information about
their participation in the study, including incentives
• Copies of the parent’s consent and child’s assent forms, and the Permission to
Contact the Teacher Form
• Instructions on how to complete the questionnaires, and a Web access address and
password to complete the questionnaire online
• A copy of the questionnaire
• A self-addressed envelope (third-day mail) in which to return the completed paper
version of the questionnaire
If the teacher has not completed the data collection on the Web or mailed back the
questionnaire within two weeks after the package was mailed, he or she will be sent a reminder
note or an e-mail message, or both. If there is no response within two weeks of the reminder
message, the data collector’s telephone followup will encourage the teacher to complete the
survey via the Web; however, data collectors will have the flexibility to complete the survey over
the telephone if the teacher prefers. Teachers will receive a check for $20 for completing the
questionnaire; those with more than one study child in their classroom will receive $20 for each
7
The approach to collecting teacher data may require some modifications in the different local Early Head
Start sites. In particular, in some sites, school and/or school district permission may be required before teachers will
consent to participate.
48
completed questionnaire. Those who complete the questionnaire via the Web will receive an
additional $2 per instrument completed.
3.
Methods for Maximizing Response Rates
The study will use carefully developed respondent materials (advance letters, study fact
sheets), data collection procedures and instruments designed to minimize respondent burden, and
small financial incentives to encourage participation.
Respondent Materials. Maximizing response rates begins at the point when families are
invited to participate in the research. Invitations to participate will be printed on colored paper
and will be worded and designed carefully so as to encourage participation. Families also will be
provided with a brief summary of some of the study’s earlier findings.
Home Visits. Field staff will work with parents to schedule the best time for the home
visits. Staff will be instructed to schedule them at times convenient for the families to maximize
the chances that parents will participate. Home visits will be scheduled for evenings or
weekends, when both the child and the child’s parent are more likely to be home.
Once in the home, staff will work as quickly as possible to complete the full set of tasks so
as to minimize the burden on the families. The preferred order of administration is designed to
help staff to minimize the time required by any one individual.
Also, the use of CAPI
instruments is intended to shorten the administration time of the parent and child interviews and
child assessments. Both parents and children will be paid a small amount to encourage their
participation and to acknowledge the burden that participation entails.
For the child assessments and interviews, procedures will be explained to each child, and
the assessor will spend the necessary time building rapport before starting the assessment.
When a field staff member first arrives at a home, she will introduce herself to the child and
others in the home. In the child assessment, it is important that the procedures are explained to
49
the child and, at the same time, to assess the child’s willingness or reluctance to participate. If
the child seems reluctant to participate, staff will spend time building rapport before
administering the battery of measures.
If the child becomes tired in the middle of the
assessment/interview, staff may pause or terminate the assessment and resume later in the home
visit. Finally, if a child is sick or unavailable when field staff arrives at the home, then the
interviewer may reschedule that portion of the protocol for another time. Children will be given
$10 to buy something special as an incentive for participation.
Teachers. We will maximize teacher response rates by reducing their burdens through the
use of technology. Use of the Web as the primary mechanism for collecting information will
allow them to complete the questionnaire more quickly and with fewer errors. This methodology
also enables teacher responsiveness to be monitored on a continuous basis, and will allow for
sending targeted reminders to the teachers to encourage their participation.
Locating. An important element in maximizing response rates is reducing nonresponse due
to the failure to locate sample members. In addition to an extensive effort to update contact
information on the full sample in fall 2006, contact information will be collected and updated at
each round of data collection for all sample members scheduled for a home visit in spring 2008
and 2009. To find and contact as many of the study families as possible, a combination of mail,
commercial database matching, telephone, and field locating methodologies will be used.
4.
Tests of Procedures to Minimize Burden
The measures proposed for use in the 5th-grade follow-up all have been used in other large-
scale studies or in previous rounds of the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project.
New procedures using electronic instruments are planned, and we are confident that these will
minimize burden on children, parents, and teachers. A small-scale pilot test of these instruments
and procedures will be conducted in late fall of 2006. The pilot will include home visits to about
50
20 5th graders and their families.
The children and families will be selected from the
Washington, DC area and will not include any children and families who will participate in the
main study. During the pilot parent interview, children’s teachers will be identified and project
staff will contact them and ask them to complete the Web-based teacher questionnaire.
5.
Identity of Persons Consulted on Statistical Aspects of Design, and Identity of
Contractors
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. and its subcontractors, the National Center for Children
and Families at Columbia University and the Educational Testing Service, designed the 5thgrade
follow-up
instruments,
procedures,
and
sample
under
contract
number
HHSP2332000025T.
Staff at Mathematica Policy Research
Daniel Kasprzyk, Director, Statistical Services
John Hall, Senior Statistician
Barbara Carlson, Senior Statistician
Jerry West, Senior Fellow
51
(202) 264-3482
(609) 275-2357
(609) 275-2374
(202) 484-4516
REFERENCES
Abidin, R. R. “Parenting Stress Index, Third Edition: Professional Manual.” Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc, 1995.
Achenbach, T. M. “Manual for the Child Behavior Checklist / 4-18 and Profile.” Burlington, VT:
University of Vermont, Department of Psychiatry, 1991.
Achenbach, T. M., and L. A. Rescorla. “Manual for the ASEBA School-Age Forms & Profiles.”
Burlington, VT: University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, & Families,
2001.
Administration for Children and Families. “Making a Difference in the Lives of Infants and
Toddlers and Their Families: The Impacts of Early Head Start.” Washington, DC: DHHS,
2002.
Administration for Children and Families. “Early Head Start Almanac.” Washington, DC:
DHHS, 2004.
Administration for Children and Families. “Preliminary Findings from the Early Head Start
Prekindergarten Followup.” Washington, DC: DHHS, 2006.
Bradley, R. H., R. F. Corwyn, B. M. Caldwell, L. Whiteside-Mansell, G. A. Wasserman, and I.
T. Mink. “Measuring the Home Environments of Children in Early Adolescence.” Journal
of Research on Adolescence, 10, 2000, pp.247-288.
Brooks-Gunn, J., M. P. Warren, J. Rosso, and J. Gargiulo. Validity of Self-report Measures of
Girls’ Pubertal Status. Child Development, 58, 1987, pp. 829-841.
Chazan-Cohen, R., E. Kisker, H. Raikes, J. Love, M. Klute, and C. Vogel. “Influences of Early
Care and Education Experiences Birth to Age 5 on Prekindergarten Outcomes.” Presented
at the Head Start Research Conference, Washington, DC, June, 2006.
Dunn, L. M. and L. M. Dunn. Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Third Edition. Circle Pines,
MN: American Guidance Service, Inc, 1997.
Ewing, J. A. (1984). “Detecting Alcoholism: The CAGE Questionnaire.” JAMA, 12, 1984, pp.
1905-1907.
Gresham, F. M. and S. N. Elliott. Social Skills Rating Scale – SSRS. Circle Pines, MN: American
Guidance Service, Inc, 1990.
Heckman, J.J. “A Broader View of What Education Policy Should Be.” In N.F. Watt, C.
Ayoub, R.H. Bradley, J.E. Puma, and W.A. LeBoeuf, eds. The Crisis in Youth Mental
Health: Critical Issues and Effective Programs. Vol. 4: Early Intervention Programs and
Policies. Westbury, CT: Praeger, 2006.
53
Leventhal, T., M. B. Selner-O’Hagan, J. Brooks-Gunn, J. B. Bingenheimer, and F. J. Earls. The
Homelife Interview from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods:
Assessment of Parenting and Home Environment for 3- to 15-year-olds. Parenting: Science
and Practice, 4, 2004, pp. 211-241.
Love, J., E.E. Kisker, C. Ross, H. Raikes, J. Constantine, K. Boller, J. Brooks-Gunn, R. ChazanCohen, L.B. Tarullo, C. Brady-Smith, A.S. Fuligni, P.Z. Schochet, D. Paulsell, and C.
Vogel. “The Effectiveness of Early Head Start for 3-Year-Old Children and Their Parents:
Lessons for Policy and Programs.” Developmental Psychology, vol. 41, 2005, pp. 885-901.
Marsh, H. W. (1990). The Self Description Questionnaire - I: SDQ I Manual. Sydney, Australia:
University of Western Sydney.
Marsh, H. W., I. D. Smith, J. Barnes, and S. Butler. “Self-concept: Reliability, Stability,
Dimensionality, Validity, and the Measurement of Change.” Journal of Educational
Psychology, 75, 1983, pp. 772-790.
Moos, R. H. (1974). Family Environment Scale – Form R. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Petersen, A. C., L. Crockett, M. Richards, and A. Boxer. “A Self-report Measure of Pubertal
Status: Reliability, Validity, and Initial Norms.” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17,
1988, pp. 117-133.
Pollack, J.M., S. Atkins-Burnett, M. Najarian, and D. A. Rock. “Early Childhood Longitudinal
Study,
Kindergarten Class of 1998–99 (ECLS–K), Psychometric Report for the Fifth Grade.” (NCES
2006–036). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics. 2006.
Princiotta, D., K. D. Flanagan, and E. Germino Hausken. “Fifth Grade: Findings from the FifthGrade Follow-Up of the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 199899 (ECLS-K).” (NCES 2006-038). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics. 2006.
Raikes, H., and R. Chazan-Cohen, chairs. “Early Head Start for Infants and Toddlers: What
Value Is Added to Developmental Outcomes by the Time Children Reach School Age?”
Presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development,
Atlanta, April 8, 2005.
Ross, C. E., J. Mirowsky, and J. Huber. “Dividing Work, Sharing Work, and In Between:
Marriage Patterns and Depression.” American Sociological Review, 48, 1983, pp. 809-823.
Stattin, H., and M. Kerr. “Parental Monitoring: A Reinterpretation.” Child Development, 71,
2000, pp. 1072-1085.
54
Straus, M. A., S. L. Hamby, D. Finkelhor, D. W. Moore, and D. Runyan. “Identification of Child
Maltreatment with the Parent-Child Conflict Tactics Scales: Development and Psychometric
Data for a National Sample of American Parents.” Child Abuse & Neglect, 22, 1998, pp.
249-270.
Ware, J. E., Jr., and C. D. Sherbourne. “The MOS 36-item Short-form Health Survey (SF-36).”
Medical Care, 30, 1992, pp. 473-483.
Whiteside-Mansell, L. (2005). Unpublished tabulations.
Whiteside-Mansell, L., C. Ayoub, L. McKelvey, R. A. Faldowski, A. Hart, and J. Shears.
“Parenting Stress of Low-Income Parents of Toddlers and Preschoolers: Psychometric
Properties of a Short Form of the Parenting Stress Index.” Manuscript submitted for
publication, 2005.
World Health Organization. “Composite International Diagnostic Inventories (CIDI). » Short
Form and scoring rules can be found at: www.who.int/msa/cidi/cidisf.htm. Accessed on:
December 8, 2005.
55
APPENDIX A
CHILD INTERVIEW
Early Head Start 5th Grade Follow-Up Study
Child Interview
CD1
ALL
Before we get started, I would like to make sure that I have your name
correct.
What is your first name?
PROBE: How do you spell that?
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD HAS DIFFICULTY SPELLING NAME YOU CAN HELP
HIM/HER SPELL IT.
FIRST NAME OF CHILD
DK
STRING OF
15
d
REF
r
CD2
CD2
ALL
Do you have a middle name?
PROBE: How do you spell that?
INTERVIEWER: IF NO MIDDLE NAME, ENTER ‘99’.
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD HAS DIFFICULTY SPELLING NAME YOU CAN HELP
HIM/HER SPELL IT.
MIDDLE NAME OF
CHILD
DK
REF
STRING OF
15
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.1
CD3
CD3
ALL
And, what is your last name?
PROBE: How do you spell that?
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD HAS DIFFICULTY SPELLING NAME YOU CAN HELP
HIM/HER SPELL IT.
LAST NAME OF
CHILD
DK
REF
STRING OF 15
CD4
d
r
CD4
ALL
And you are called [FIRST NAME OF CHILD] or do you have a nickname
that you want me to call you by?
INTERVIEWER: IF NICKNAME, CHANGE NAME; OTHERWISE CONTINUE.
NICKNAME
DK
REF
STRING OF 15 =
[CHILD]
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.2
CD4.1
CD4.1
ALL
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING WHETHER [CHILD] IS MALE OR FEMALE.
MALE
FEMALE
1
2
CD5
CD5
ALL
How old are you?
AGE OF CHILD
DK
REF
FF
d
r
CD6
CD6
ALL
And what is your birth date?
BIRTH DATE OF CHILD
DK
REF
MM/DD/YYYY
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.3
CD7
CD7
ALL
First, I would like to ask you some questions about your parents or the
adults who live with you and take care of you.
Who they are?
Probe: When we talk about adults we mean adults who are responsible
for you and taking care of you?
INTERVIEWER: RESPONSE CAN BE A FIRST NAME OR RELATIONSHIP TO
CHILD SUCH AS “MOM OR DAD.”
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD PROVIDES TWO NAMES, START WITH THE FIRST
PERSON. YOU WILL ENTER THE SECOND PERSON LATER.
NAME OF FIRST
CARETAKER
DK
REF
STRING OF 15 = [FIRST
CARETAKER]
DK
REF
CD7.1
CD7 NE DK OR REF
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN.
MALE
FEMALE
1
2
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.4
CD7.2
CD7.2
CD7.1
CD15
CD7.2
CD7 NE REF OR DK
Is [NAME OF FIRST CARETAKER] your...
INTERVIEWER: STOP READING CATEGORIES IF CHILD ANSWERS QUESTION.
IF 7.1 = 1
Real or biological father
Stepfather
Adoptive father
Foster father
Father’s girl friend/partner
Grandfather
Someone else you are
related to like an uncle.
(Describe___________)
Some other person
(Describe_______)
DK
REF
IF 7.1 = 2
Real or biological mother
Stepmother
Adoptive mother
Foster mother
Mother’s boy friend/partner
Grandmother
Someone else you are
related to like an aunt.
(Describe_________)
Some other person
(Describe_______)
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
d
r
CD8
CD8
CD7 NE REF OR DK
INTERVIEWER: DO NOT ASK IF ALREADY KNOWN.
ENTER “YES” FOR CD8 AND WRITE NAME IN CD9.
Do you have another parent or someone else who is responsible for you
and taking care of you?
Again, think of a parent or someone else who lives with you all or most
of the time.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
DK
REF
CD9
CD10
CD9
CD8=1
Who is that person?
INTERVIEWER: RESPONSE CAN BE A FIRST NAME OR RELATIONSHIP TO
CHILD SUCH AS “MOM OR DAD”. ENTER NAME WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN.
IF CHILD NAME MORE THAN ONE PERSON PROBE: You can only pick one
other parent. Which one do you think takes care of you more often?
NAME OF SECOND
CARETAKER
DK
REF
STRING OF 15 =
[SECOND
CARETAKER]
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.6
CD9.1
??
CD9.1
CD8=1
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN.
MALE
FEMALE
1
2
CD9.2
CD9.2
CD8=1
Is [NAME OF SECOND CARETAKER] your...
INTERVIEWER: STOP READING CATEGORIES WHEN CHILD ANSWERS
QUESTION.
IF 9.1 = 1
Real or biological father
IF 9.1 = 2
Real or biological
mother
Stepfather
Stepmother
Adoptive father
Adoptive mother
Foster father
Foster mother
Father’s girl friend/partner Mother’s boy
friend/partner
Grandfather
Grandmother
Someone else you are
Someone else you are
related to like an uncle.
related to like an aunt.
(Describe____________) (Describe__________)
Some other person
Some other person
(Describe_______)
(Describe_______)
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
DK
REF
CD10
CD10
IF (CD7 NE DK OR REF)
PARENTS = [FIRST CARETAKER] AND [SECOND CARETAKER] IF (CD7 NE
DK OR REF) AND (CD9 NE DK OR REF)
PARENT = [FIRST CARETAKER] IF (CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND (CD8 NE YES)
your IF [PARENTS] IS/ARE NOT REAL NAMES
do IF (CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND (CD9 NE DK OR REF)
does IF (CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND (CD8 NE YES)
Now I have some questions about [your] [PARENT(S)]. There are no right
or wrong answers to these questions. We just like your opinion or what you
think about the question.
I will give you a card that has the answers you can pick from. You can just
point to the answer you want to give instead of saying it out loud if you like
that better.
And again, we will not tell anybody your answers to the questions.
[Do/Does] [your] PARENTS] [QUESTIONS A THROUGH C]. Is that
almost always, some of the time, not very often, or almost never?
Almost
always
a Know what you do
during your free time?
b Know who you have as
friends during your free
time?
c Know what you spend
your money on?
Some of Not very
the time
often
Almost
never
DK
REF CD1
2
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.8
CD12
(CD7 NE DK OR REF)
your IF [PARENTS] IS/ARE NOT REAL NAMES
PARENTS = [FIRST CARETAKER] and [SECOND CARETAKER] IF (CD9 NE DK OR
REF)
PARENT = [FIRST CARETAKER] IF (CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND (CD8 NE YES)
For E:
they IF (CD9 NE DK OR REF)
he IF (CD8 NE YES) AND (CD7.1 = 1)
she IF (CD8 NE YES) AND (CD7.1 = 2)
Sometimes children do things that are wrong, disobey their parents or make
their parent upset or angry.
I’m going to read you a list of things [your] [PARENT(S)] might have done
when this happened.
Please think about how often [your] [PARENT(S)] did these things in the past
year.
In the past year, when your parents thought you did you did something wrong,
how often did [your] [PARENT(S)] [STATEMENT A TO F]? Was it every day
or almost every day; a few times a week, a few times a month; about once a
month; less than once a month; or never?
Please look at the card when deciding on your answer.
a Explain why something
was wrong
b Send you to your room,
took away privileges or
grounded you
c Call you dumb or some
other name like that, or
threatened to hit you,
but did not actually do it
Every
A few
day or
times a
almost
week
every day
A few
About
times a once
month a
month
Less
than
once a
month
Never
D
K
REF
5
4
3
2
1
0
d
r
5
4
3
2
1
0
d
r
5
4
3
2
1
0
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.9
d Shout, yell, scream,
5
swear or curse at you
e Say [they/he/she] would 5
send you away or kick
you out of the house
f Spank or hit you
5
4
3
2
1
0
d
r
4
3
2
1
0
d
r
4
3
2
1
0
CD13
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.10
CD13
I(CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND CD8=NO
your IF [FIRST CARETAKER] IS NOT REAL A NAME
Now I will read to you things about [your] [FIRST CARETAKER]. After I
read each one, please tell me whether it is very true, mostly true, a little bit
true, or not at all true. Please look at the card when deciding on your
answer.
[STATEMENT A THROUGH H] Is that very true, mostly true, a little bit true,
or not at all true.
a [FIRST CARETAKER]
understands me
b I like [FIRST CARETAKER]
c [FIRST CARETAKER] likes
me
d If I have children of my own, I
want to bring them up like
[FIRST CARETAKER] raised
me
e [FIRST CARETAKER] and I
spend a lot of time together
f [FIRST CARETAKER] is
easy to talk to
g I get along well with [FIRST
CARETAKER]
h [FIRST CARETAKER] and I
have a lot of fun together
Very
true
4
Mostly
true
3
A little
bit true
2
Not at
all true
1
DK R
EF
d
r
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
d
d
r
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
CD13.1 OR CD15
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.11
CD13.1
(CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND CD9 NE DK OR REF)
your IF [SECOND CARETAKER] IS NOT A REAL NAME
Now I will read to you things about [PARENT] and you. After I read each
one, please tell me whether it is very true, mostly true, a little bit true, or not
at all true. Please look at the card when deciding on your answer.
[STATEMENT A THROUGH H] Is that very true, mostly true, a little bit true,
or not at all true.
a [SECOND CARETAKER]
understands me
b I like [SECOND
CARETAKER]
c [SECOND CARETAKER]
likes me
d If I have children of my own, I
want to bring them up like
[SECOND CARETAKER]
raised me
e [SECOND CARETAKER]
and I spend a lot of time
together
f [SECOND CARETAKER] is
easy to talk to
g I get along well with
[SECOND CARETAKER]
h [SECOND CARETAKER]
and I have a lot of fun
together
DK REF
Very
true
4
Mostly
true
3
A little
bit true
2
Not at
all true
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
CD14.1 OR CD15
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.12
CD14.1
((CD7.2 NE 1 OR 3) AND CD7.1 = 1)) OR ((CD9.2 NE 1 OR 3) AND CD9.1 = 1))
your IF [PARENTS] IS/ARE NOT REAL NAMES
PARENTS = [FIRST CARETAKER] and [SECOND CARETAKER] IF (CD7 NE DK
OR REF) AND (CD9 NE DK OR REF
PARENT= [FIRST CARETAKER] IF (CD7 NE DK OR REF) AND (CD8 NE YES)
I would also like to ask you the same questions I just asked about you and
[your] [PARENT(S)] but now ask these questions about you and your real or
biological father
Do you know your real or biological father?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
DK
REF
CD14.2
CD14.3
CD14.2
CD14.2=YES
Then I will read to you some things about you and your real father and you
tell me whether it is very true, mostly true, a little bit true, or not at all true.
PROBE: Again, look at the card when deciding on your answer.
[STATEMENT A THROUGH H] Is that very true, mostly true, a little bit true,
or not at all true.
a
b
c
d
Very
true
My real father understands 4
me
I like my real father
4
My real father likes me
4
likes me
If I have children of my
4
own, I want to bring them
Mostly
true
3
A little
bit true
2
Not at
all true
1
DK
REF
d
r
3
3
2
2
1
1
d
d
r
r
3
2
1
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.13
up like my real father
raised me
e My real father and I spend
a lot of time together
f My real father is easy to
talk to
g I get along well with my
real father
h My real father and I have a
lot of fun together
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
CD15
CD14.3
CD14.1=NO,DK,REF
That is ok. Let’s continue with some other questions.
CONTINUE
CD15
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.14
CD15
ALL
Next, I will read you some things about you and how you are doing.
Each time tell me if what I read about you is not at all true, a little bit
true, mostly true, or very true.
PROBE: Please look at the card when deciding on your answer.
[STATEMENT A THROUGH PP] Is that not at all true, a little bit true, mostly
true, or very true?
Not at
all true
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
l
m
n
o
p
I often argue with other kids
It’s hard for me to pay attention
I get distracted easily
It’s hard for me to finish my school
work
I get in trouble for talking and
disturbing others
I get in trouble for fighting with other
kids
Work in math is easy for me
I cannot wait to do math each day
I get good grades in math
I am interested in math
I can do very difficult problems in
math
I like math
I enjoy doing work in math
I am good at math
I have lots of friends
I make friends easily
A
little
bit
true
Mostly
true
Very DK
true
REF
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
d
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
r
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
d
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.15
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
aa
bb
cc
dd
ee
ff
gg
hh
ii
jj
kk
ll
m
m
nn
oo
pp
I get along with kids easily
I am easy to like
Other kids want me to be their
friend
I have more friends than other kids
I get good grades in reading
I like reading
Work in reading is easy for me
I am interested in reading
I cannot wait to read each day
I am good at reading
I like reading chapter book
I enjoy doing work in reading
I feel angry when I have trouble
learning
I often feel lonely
I feel sad a lot of the time
I worry about taking tests
I worry about doing well in school
I worry about finishing my work
I worry about having someone to
play with at school
I feel ashamed when I make
mistakes in school
I am good at all school subjects
I enjoy doing work in all school
subjects
Work in all school subjects is easy
for me
I like all school subjects
I look forward to all school subjects
I get good grades in all school
subjects
CD16
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
d
d
d
r
r
r
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
d
d
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
r
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
d
d
r
r
4
3
2
1
d
r
4
4
4
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
d
d
d
r
r
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.16
CD16
ALL
Next, I’m going to ask you some questions about your experiences with kids
at school and in your neighborhood.
In the past month, how often have kids in your school or neighborhood
picked on your or said mean things to you?
PROBE: Please look at the card when deciding on your answer.
Would you say…
Every day or almost
every day
1
About 2 or 3 days
per week
2
About once a week
3
CD17
1 or 2 times last
month
4
Not in the past month
5
DK
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.17
CD17
ALL
In the past month, how often have kids in your school or neighborhood hit
you?
PROBE: Please look at the card when deciding on your answer.
Would you say…
Every day or almost
every day
1
About 2 or 3 days
per week
2
About once a week
3
CD18
1 or 2 times last
month
4
Not in the past month
5
DK
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.18
CD18
ALL
In the past month, how often have kids in your school or neighborhood
taken your things, like your money or lunch, without asking?
PROBE: Please look at the card when deciding on your answer.
Would you say…
Every day or almost
every day
1
About 2 or 3 days
per week
2
About once a week
3
CD19
1 or 2 times last
month
4
Not in the past month
5
DK
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.19
CD19
ALL
In the past month, how often have kids in your school or neighborhood
purposely left you out of your friends’ activities?
Would you say…
Every day
1
Almost every day
2
About 2 or 3 days
per week
3
About once a week
4
1 or 2 times last
month
5
Not in the past month
6
DK
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.20
CD20
OR
CD22
CD20
CD4.1=MALE
I would like to talk next about changes in your body you may have
noticed.
Have you noticed any skin changes, especially pimples?
Please look at the card to choose your answer. This time I will not
read them to you unless you ask me to do so. Just look at the card
and point at the answer that you want to give.
DEVELOPMENT COMPLETED
1
YES, DEFINITELY
2
YES, BARELY
3
NO
4
DK
D
REF
R
CD21
CD21
CD4.1=MALE
Have you noticed a deepening of your voice?
Again, just look at the card and point at your answer.
DEVELOPMENT COMPLETED
1
YES, DEFINITELY
2
YES, BARELY
3
NO
4
DK
D
REF
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.21
CD22
CD22
CD4.1=MALE
Have you begun to grow facial hair?
DEVELOPMENT COMPLETED
1
YES, DEFINITELY
2
YES, BARELY
3
NO
4
DK
D
R
R
END
CD23
CD4.1 = FEMALE
I would like to talk next about changes in your body you may have
noticed.
Have your breasts begun to grow?
Please look at the card to choose your answer. This time I will not
read them to you unless you ask me to do so. Just look at the card
and point at the answer that you want to give.
DEVELOPMENT COMPLETED
1
YES, DEFINITELY
2
YES, BARELY
3
NO
4
DKI
D
REF
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.22
CD24
CD24
CD4.1 = FEMALE
Have you begun to menstruate or did you start having your period?
DEVELOPMENT COMPLETED
1
YES, DEFINITELY
2
YES, BARELY
3
NO
4
DK
D
REF
R
CD25
END
CD25
CD24 = 1 OR 2 OR 3
How old were you when you started menstruating or had your period for the
first time?
AGE OF CHILD
DK
REF
FF
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.23
CD26
END
CD26
CD25<>DK, REF
Had you just [ANSWER in CD25], were you about [ANSWER in CD25] and a
half, or were you almost [ANSWER in CD25+1] when you started menstruating
or first had your period?
..
END
Just
1
[ANSWER
in CD25]
[ANSWER
2
in CD25]
and a half
Almost
3
[ANSWER
in CD25+1]
DK
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix A, Child Interview, 8/30/2006, p.24
APPENDIX B
MOTHER-CHILD INTERACTION AND HOME OBSERVATIONS
Early Head Start 5th Grade Follow-Up Study
Videotaped Maternal-Child Interaction
(Italics = Read Aloud)
I. SCRIPT
Activity 1: Disagreement Task
These cards contain different topics that kids and parents often disagree about, such as
homework, chores, television and so on (show cards, but don’t give them yet). I would
like you to go through these cards and choose your TOP THREE AREAS of disagreement
or difficulty. After you’ve found your top three, talk together about each one and try to
resolve some of your disagreements. We’d like to hear from both of you. You may not
have time to thoroughly discuss all three issues but you will have 8 MINUTES to try to
make some progress. Do you have any questions?
Give cards to child.
I’ll come back in when the time for this activity has ended. You can begin now.
Start timer for 8 minutes. Leave room after the first 30-60 seconds if it is apparent
they understand the task. Stay within earshot if possible.
PROBE (if parent or child ends the task early): Can you talk a little more about one
or more of your disagreements? You have some extra time.
When time is up, enter and say,
Time is up for this activity. [CHILD’S NAME], can you tell me how you solved some of
your problems? (stay in room and allow child to respond)
Thank you both so much for your willingness to discuss these issues. All families have
conflict and it is normal. We know it is sometimes hard to talk about conflict and
appreciate you taking the time to do so. This next activity is one that many families find
entertaining…
Activity 2: Stacrobats
Place the blue Stacrobat standing firmly in the black base and place it in between
parent and child.
The next activity is called Stacrobats. The object of the game is to stack as many of these
pieces onto the structure without letting them touch the table or fall. Let me demonstrate
with the first piece.
8/30/2006, p. 1 of 13
Hold the second Stacrobat so that it is parallel to the table. Firmly attach him to the
first one by placing the leghole through the curved head of the first piece. The
second piece should still be parallel to the table, as though it is lying on its back with
hands and feet outstretched.
Now, I’m going to give you 3 minutes to get as many Stacrobats on the structure as
possible without having them fall over or touch the table. Do you have any questions?
Ready, set, go. (start timer)
When time is up, enter and say,
Thank you so much. You guys did a great job.
II. MATERIALS
- One set of Family Issues cards (laminated, 3” by 5” cards with a single “family issue” statement on
each card). The following topics should be written on the cards (15 in each set):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Friends or classmates
Playing computer, video games
TV
Respect for others
Honesty or lying
Manners
Sports or after-school activities
Eating habits
Getting up in the morning or to school on time
Chores
Pets
School, homework
Clean room
Personal appearance
Fighting with sisters or brothers
The set of cards should be shuffled between each mother-child dyad to prevent any set order of
presentation of the cards.
- The Stacrobats game, made by Ravensburger (available from Amazon.com), which is a stacking
game with plastic pieces shaped like elves that hook on to one another. There are 33 pieces and a base,
but not all pieces are necessary so long as there is a minimum of about 20.
- Stopwatch, video camera, signboard, pen.
8/30/2006, p. 2 of 13
III. VIDEOTAPING
•
•
•
•
The activities should be conducted at a low table, approximately 24” by 36” and 36” high.
Chairs should be provided for the mother and the child. The location of the camera should be
indicated to the parent and child and they should be asked to orient themselves so that they can
be seen by the camera. A clock should be present in the room, visible so that parent and child
can check the time if they wish.
Use the tripod to get a relatively straight angle view of the parent and child wherever they
position themselves. Keep both the parent and child in view. Film enough in (visually) to be
able to see facial expressions, but not so close that you miss gestures, body position changes,
etc. Try to get both partners’ facial expressions simultaneously; this is best achieved if mother
and child are situated at right angles from each other. Make sure the camera is turned on so that
the interaction is filmed from the moment the parent and child begin the disagreement task.
As part of the set-up procedures, film a sign on which you have written the subject ID and
date. The sign should appear before the videotaped interaction.
Labels for the tapes will be provided.
IV. SCALES (all 7-point scales)
CHILD
1. Positive Regard
Corresponds to:
•
•
“Affection Towards Parent” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of
NICHD SECC.
“Warmth/Support” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale reflects whether there was a substantial period of positive regard and sharing of happy
feelings of the child toward the mother during the discussion and the Stacrobats game. Although
the child also might become angry or avoid the mother elsewhere in the session, a high rating still
could be given if some portions of the session met the criteria of this scale. The criteria of this scale
are evidences that the child approached and attempted to share positive affects with the mother. In
addition, affection toward the mother includes the ability of the child to elicit positive expression
from the mother such that a continued reciprocal interaction can be maintained. It is not the
intensity of expression that is particularly relevant, but rather the frequency with which the child
shares positive affect – looking at mother, making eye contact and smiling, sharing successes and
other “approach” behavior affectively. At the lower end of the scale, the child may direct a few
positive expressions to the mother and may elicit a positive expression in return. However, he or
she does not sustain a “bout” of shared expressions with the mother.
2. Negative Regard
Corresponds to:
•
“Negativity towards Parent” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
8/30/2006, p. 3 of 13
•
•
“Negativity” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of NICHD SECC.
“Hostility/Aggression” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale assesses the overall level of externalizing negative affect demonstrated by the child.
Externalizing negative affect can be anger, hostility, frustration, or oppositional defiance. Specific
behaviors than demonstrate this can include: a) repeatedly disagreeing with mother in a
disrespectful manner; b) using sarcasm or interrupting parent; c) using annoying tone of voice; d)
bossy demands; e) name calling; f) throwing things; g) back-talk; h) goofing around in a
noncompliance manner; i) using an angry tone of voice; j) hitting or kicking; k) glowering face; l)
showing anger or resistant expression; m) being unreasonably demanding or critical; n) losing
his/her temper; o) gloating. The lower end of this scale is characterized by an absence of negative
affect behaviors; the child may express internalizing negative affect, positive affect, or little affect
at all.
The degree to which the child negatively regards his/her mother should reflect the quality of the
mother-child relationship in general, as well as any aggression and hostility evoked by the
Disagreement Task (and possibly Stacrobats). The degree to which the child experiences a high
level of negative arousal in response to feeling threatened by his/her mother may interfere with
his/her executive functioning, which is responsible for inhibiting aggressive responses (Zillmann,
1988). Thus children who tend to show lower levels of negative regard may have fewer obstacles
to the kind of self-regulating behavior needed to resolve socially threatening situations.
3. Perspective-Taking
Corresponds to:
•
“Listener Responsiveness” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale assesses the extent to which the child attunes to, acknowledges and legitimizes the
mother’s perspective during the discussion. Specific behaviors include repeating back to the
mother, nodding, or otherwise confirming what has just been said. The higher end of this scale is
characterized by: a) the ability to paraphrase, rather than merely repeat, what the mother has said;
b) statements acknowledging the legitimacy of the mother’s desires, needs, reasons, or motives
(e.g., “I can see why you would want that”); c) an attempt to view the situation from the mother’s
point of view.; d) an attempt to balance the competing interests of the mother and child, or to
reframe the problem as one of non-competing interests. The child who scores high on this scale
must demonstrate sensitivity to the mother’s needs, moods and reasoning. The child who scores
low on this scale communicates only his/her own interests and does not stop to consider the
mother’s interests.
Children's ability to take another person's perspective has been associated both cross-sectionally
and longitudinally with decreased aggressive behavior (Miller & Eisenberg, 1988; Brooks-Gunn &
Zahakavitch, 1989) and increased prosocial (helping and sharing) behavior (Eisenberg, 1991).
4. Engagement
Corresponds to:
8/30/2006, p. 4 of 13
•
•
•
“Sustained Attention” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Persistence” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of NICHD SECC.
“Passivity” (reverse-coded) from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale measures the extent to which the child is involved in the discussion and Stacrobats
game. At the low extreme, the child shows no engagement, refuses to become involved, and either
flees or spends her/his time in off-task activities. At the high end, the child is actively engaged with
both the discussion and the game, and works either directly on her/his own or through the mother’s
mediating suggestions (regardless of how good the child or mother’s skills really are). Engagement
does not necessarily indicate enjoyment or lack of frustration. The child may be responsive or not
to the mother’s directions as long as s/he shows engagement with the tasks. The observer should
consider this rating to reflect the child’s engagement regardless of the degree to which mother was
instrumental in fostering it.
This scale is expected to tap self-regulation, since some degree of effortful control will be required
to sustain involvement in both tasks. The Disagreement Task has the potential to be frustrating and
even embarrassing, particularly if the mother is controlling, didactic or punitive. The Stacrobats
game requires planning and motor control in order to avoid toppling the structure. In addition,
some children may find it difficult to sit still and concentrate on these tasks for 10 minutes without
a break. Therefore, both tasks will require that the child exercise control over his/her impulses,
emotion and attention.
5. Defiance
Corresponds to:
•
“Defiance” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale measures the extent to which the child actively disobeys or ignores the mother. It also
measures the extent to which the child is unwilling to cooperate. At the high end of this scale, the
child ignores his/her mother's directives and/or engages in activities contrary to the mother's
requests. It is important to consider nonverbal communication such as facial expression, body
posture and actions (e.g., simply walking away), verbal communication (e.g., "No!"), and
emotional expressions (e.g., yelling, inappropriate laughter, eye-rolling). At the low extreme of the
scale, the child does not display any instances of unwillingness to comply with the mother's
requests. In between the two scale poles, the score is determined by the frequency and intensity of
defiant behaviors. Ignoring requests, ignoring directives, actively engaging in prohibited activities,
showing reluctance to comply, making negative statements, and requiring multiple reminders
should all be considered indications of defiance.
Defiance may reflect oppositional behavior, which was found by Nagin and Tremblay (1999) to be
specifically predictive of theft rather than physical aggression. In addition, defiance aimed at the
mother is likely to reflect insecure attachment, which in turn places the child at increased risk of
antisocial behavior (van Ijzendoorn, 1997).
6. Use of Reasoning
Corresponds to:
8/30/2006, p. 5 of 13
•
“Justification” from Laible & Thompson, 2002
This scale assesses the child's use of reasoning to justify her position on one or more of the topics
of disagreement during the discussion task. The use of reasoning is a strategy for putting an end to
the conflict caused by the disagreement by resolving the conflict through persuasion. To change the
mother's mind, the child explains the rationale behind his/her position on the topic of disagreement.
For example, a child could justify his position on bedtime as a source of disagreement by arguing
that an older sibling was allowed to have the desired bedtime when s/he was his/her age. As
another example, in discussing how the child treats his/her younger sibling, the child could say that
the mother is unaware of what the younger sibling does to provoke him/her.
When facing social problems, aggressive children and youth are deficient at problem definition,
goal selection, information seeking, prediction of consequences and generation of multiple
solutions (Dodge, 1980; Richard & Dodge, 1982; Dodge, Bates, & Pettit, 1990; Slaby & Guerra,
1988; Guerra & Slaby, 1990). All of these skills are marshaled in the service of reasoning, a
strategy children will draw on to varying degrees with their mothers during the Disagreement Task.
The high-scoring child will be able to explain his/her position on an issue through the use of logic
and clarification. Although this skill is important in the context of the family, a child who reasons
with his/her mother should be more likely to do so with peers, given the continuity in children's
conflict resolution skills with parents and peers (Putallaz, 1987).
MOTHER
1. Positive Regard
Corresponds to:
•
•
•
“Positive Regard” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Supportive Presence” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of NICHD
SECC.
“Warmth/Support” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
A mother scoring high on this scale expresses positive regard and emotional support to the
child. She should show general involvement in the interaction and affirm the child as a
person. A mother scoring low on this scale fails to provide supportive cues; she might be
passive, uninvolved, aloof, or otherwise unavailable to the child. Such a mother also might
give observers the impression that she is more concerned about her own adequacy rather than
concerned about the child’s emotional needs. A potential difficulty in scoring this scale is the
need to discount messages of parents that seemingly are supportive in verbal content but are
contradicted by other aspects of the communication; signs of such questionable support are
improper timing of support, mismatch of verbal and bodily cues, and failure to have the
child’s attention in delivering the message.
The parenting literature shows that authoritative parenting – the combination of warmth,
responsiveness, involvement, autonomy granting, inductive discipline, and expectations of
8/30/2006, p. 6 of 13
maturity – is associated with greater prosocial behavior and lower antisocial behavior in
children and adolescents (Baumrind, 1967; Darling & Steinberg, 1993; Maccoby & Martin,
1983; Kochanska, 1991; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbusch, 1991). With respect to
positive regard in particular, Putallaz (1987) found that more popular first graders had
mothers who demonstrated greater positive affect with them in an observed interaction.
2. Negative Regard
Corresponds to:
•
•
•
“Negative Regard” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Hostility” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of NICHD SECC.
“Hostility/Aggression” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale reflects the mother’s expression of anger, discounting or rejecting of the child or the
child's ideas. A mother scoring high on this scale would clearly and overtly reject the child, blame
her/him for mistakes, and otherwise make explicit the message that she does not support the child
emotionally. A rejecting mother may also show some supportive presence (and the inconsistency
of her behavior would be revealed by these two scores). Given the low frequency and the clinical
relevance of rejecting one's child during a videotaped session, any events which are clearly hostile
should be weighted strongly in this score. A mother scoring low on this scale may or may not be
supportive, but she does not blame or reject the child.
The rationale for measuring the mother's positive regard also applies to measuring her negative
regard. In addition, Hastings and colleagues (Hastings, Zahn-Wexler, Robinson, Usher, & Bridges,
2000) found that among 5-year-old children, those whose mother scored higher on negative affect
scored lower on a scale of interpersonal responsibility two years later.
3. Perspective-Taking
Corresponds to:
•
•
•
“Sensitivity” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Respect for Child’s Autonomy” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of
NICHD SECC.
“Listener Responsiveness” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale assesses the extent to which the mother attunes to, acknowledges and legitimizes the
child’s perspective during the discussion. Specific behaviors include repeating back to the child,
nodding, or otherwise confirming what has just been said. The higher end of this scale is
characterized by: a) the ability to paraphrase, rather than merely repeat, what the child has said; b)
statements acknowledging the legitimacy of the child’s desires, needs, reasons, or motives (e.g., “I
can see why you would want that”); c) an attempt to view the situation from the child’s point of
view; d) an attempt to balance the competing interests of the mother and child, or to reframe the
problem as one of non-competing interests. The mother who scores high on this scale must
demonstrate sensitivity to the child’s needs, moods and reasoning. The mother who scores low on
this scale communicates only his/her own interests and does not stop to consider the child’s
interests.
8/30/2006, p. 7 of 13
The mother's ability to take the child's perspective should reflect her sensitivity to the child's needs
and emotions, and a willingness to validate the child's individuality. Mothers' use of perspectivetaking during discipline encounters (discussing the effects of their child's actions on others) is an
instantiation of inductive reasoning, one of the features of authoritative parenting described above,
and has been found to result in greater internalization of parental values among children (Hoffman,
1983).
4. Engagement
Corresponds to:
•
•
“Detachment” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Passivity” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale measures the extent to which the mother gets involved in the discussion and Stacrobats
game. At the low extreme, the mother shows no engagement, refuses to become involved, leaves or
spends her time in off-task activities. With the discussion task, the mother would not participate in
selecting the topics for discussion, but would merely observe the child doing so. A very unengaged
mother may avoid discussion of the topics by claiming that none of the topics are sources of
disagreement, failing to state her opinion or doing so quietly, hesitantly and without making eye
contact with the child. A very unengaged mother may mumble, smile or laugh inappropriately
when the child expresses hostility or non-compliance. A very unengaged mother may refuse to
play Stacrobats because she does not like to play games or says she cannot understand the rules. At
the high end, the mother is actively engaged with both the discussion and the game. She
participates in selection of the topics for disagreement and in the discussion itself. She is willing to
learn how to play Stacrobats and becomes engaged in the game with her child.
Engagement corresponds to the detachment scale used in previous waves, which may be an
indication of neglect. Adolescents whose parents are neglectful are at particularly pronounced risk
of antisocial behavior (Steinberg, Lamborn, Darling, Mounts, & Dornbusch, 1994).
5. Dominance
Corresponds to:
•
•
“Intrusiveness” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Dominance” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in GBHDS.
This scale assesses the mother's attempt to dominate or control the discussion and the Stacrobats
task. Dominant behaviors include lecturing the child, criticizing the child, interrupting the child,
changing the subject, and failing to respond to the child's questions, wishes or comments. Other
strategies include changing the subject, going on to the next topic, opting out of the activity or
simply ending the task. A highly dominant mother usually automatically takes the Family Issues
cards out of the child's hands at the beginning of the discussion task. She may unilaterally decide
that a topic is worth considering as one of the top 3 areas of disagreement even when the child says
it is not. She may also be unable to accept directions or tips from the child on how to stack pieces
during the Stacrobats game. At the low end of this scale, the mother allows the child to direct the
flow and pace of the discussion task. She accepts that a topic is an area of disagreement if the child
8/30/2006, p. 8 of 13
says it is. During the discussion task, she lets the child speak freely until s/he feels s/he has been
heard. During Stacrobats, she plays as an equal partner with the child rather than trying to control
the action by taking the pieces out of the child's hand, undoing the child's last move, making up
rules or directing the child how to play.
Dominance is an age-appropriate version of the Intrusiveness scale used in past waves, which
assessed the degree to which the mother controlled the child's play. Here, this scale will reflect the
degree to which the mother controls the discussion by grabbing the cards out of the child's hands,
choosing the topics for discussion unilaterally, changing the subject, etc. Overcontrolling behavior
is an authoritarian parenting technique that conveys mistrust in the child's judgment and thus fails
to promote independent thought and behavior. In Putallaz's (1987) study cited above, children who
were less popular had mothers who displayed more controlling behavior during an observed
interaction task.
6. Use of Reasoning
Corresponds to:
•
“Justification” from Laible & Thompson, 2002
This scale assesses the mother's use of reasoning to justify her position on one or more of the topics
of disagreement during the discussion task. The use of reasoning is a strategy for putting an end to
the conflict caused by the disagreement by resolving the conflict through persuasion. To change the
child's mind, the mother explains the rationale behind her position on the topic of disagreement.
For example, a mother could justify her position on bedtime as a source of disagreement by
explaining that when the child stays up after 9 pm s/he has a hard time getting up in time for school
in the morning. As another example, in discussing how the child treats his/her younger sibling, the
mother could say she has concerns about both children's safety when they wrestle or fist fight.
Since maternal use of reasoning is associated with prosocial behavior in children, it may be key to
understanding whether the program group is at lowered risk of adolescent antisocial behavior. With
a sample of children aged 6-13, FitzGerald and White (2003) found that mothers who used
reasoning about others' feelings (i.e., perspective-taking) to discipline their children had children
who themselves demonstrated greater perspective-taking, which was in turn associated with more
prosocial behavior and less aggression. With a sample of 6th and 7th graders, Krevans and Gibbs
(1996) found that children whose parents used inductive reasoning rather than power-assertive
discipline displayed more prosocial behaviors. However, these two studies were cross-sectional
and thus need replication.
7. Use of Coercion
Corresponds to:
•
“Aggravation” from Laible & Thompson, 2002
This scale assesses the mother's use of coercion, or force, to support her position on one or more of
the topics of disagreement during the discussion task. The use of coercion is a strategy for putting
an end to the conflict caused by the disagreement by merely cutting it off through the exercise of
parental authority. The mother scoring high on this scale reminds the child that she is the mother
8/30/2006, p. 9 of 13
and that the child is obliged to obey her. At the highest extreme, the mother uses physical force to
subdue the child. More commonly used coercive techniques include: a) assertions of power (e.g.,
"Because I'm the mother, that's why"; b) threats of violence; c) threats of withholding (e.g., "If you
don't practice violin I'm going to take your Game Boy away"); d) simple prohibitions and
commands (e.g., "You are not allowed to play with Jimmy anymore"; e) indications of
unwillingness to listen (e.g., "That's the end of this discussion. We're done talking about this.").
This scale is meant to capture power-assertive techniques consistent with the authoritarian
parenting typology (Baumrind, 1967). Research has demonstrated that parents who use such
strategies during conflicts with their children generally fail to imbue their children with their stated
values. According to Hoffman (1983), forceful discipline induces anxiety and fear in children that
interferes with their ability to process the underlying message. Moreover, children who are forced
to comply with their parents' wishes are likely to attribute that compliance to their parents' use of
power rather than internal factors such as their own beliefs and values.
DYAD
1. Mutuality
Corresponds to:
•
•
“Mutuality” from 3-Bag task at prior waves of the EHS Study.
“Felt Security/Affective Mutuality” from Maternal-Child Discussion Task in 5th grade wave of
NICHD SECC.
This scale assesses the level of emotion exchanged and reciprocated between mother and child
during the discussion and the Stacrobats game. The high-scoring dyad demonstrates synchrony
between the interests, energy levels and affective states of the mother and child. The mood is
harmonious. The mother and child enjoy each other's company. There is an emphasis on joint
attention, or mutual focus. The high end of the scale is characterized by a mother and child working
toward a common goal who are responsive to each other's cues and who share the same affect.
Both parties should demonstrate a genuine concern and positive regard for one another. The low
end of the scale is characterized by a mother and child who are engaged in different or parallel
activities, strive towards different goals, make little eye contact, demonstrate different emotional
states, and generally fail to reflect each other's emotions back to one another. Note that energy or
activity level is not a determining factor in this scale. For example, both a high-energy dyad and a
relatively calm dyad could be given high scores as long as they seem "in sync" throughout the
interaction. If the energy level of the dyad seems mismatched, however (e.g., a calm child with an
excited parent), the dyad would not be considered synchronous.
Criss, Shaw and Ingoldsby (2003) observed 10-year-old boys and their mothers during a
disagreement task nearly identical to ours. Each dyad's synchrony was rated according to its degree
of reciprocity, give and take, harmony and joint attention. Results showed an association between
this synchrony and the aggressiveness of the child's responses to a problem-solving task, even after
accounting for the child's antisocial behavior at age 8. Among younger children, Kochanska has
shown that children whose relationship with their mother is characterized by cooperation and
mutual positive affect are more likely to internalize prosocial norms (Kochanska, 1997; Kochanska
& Murray, 2000).
8/30/2006, p. 10 of 13
2. Competitiveness
This scale assesses the degree to which the mother and child turn Stacrobats into a competitive
game. Examples of competitive behaviors include: a) voluntarily choosing colors; b) counting how
many pieces each player has put on; c) trying to distract or intimidate the other player in the hope
of making them topple the structure; d) criticizing the other player's performance; e) trying to
invoke rules that would disqualify the other player; f) gloating as the winner or expressing shame
as the loser at the conclusion of the game; g) appearing anxious because of a serious desire to win.
Examples of non-competitive behaviors include: a) ignoring the colors of the pieces; b) ignoring
turn-taking rules; c) providing advice or guidance to each other on the best possible moves; d)
praising the other player's performance; e) failure to identify a winner or loser at the end of the
game; f) expressing amusement rather than disappointment or frustration when the structure
topples over. The overall level of competitiveness between the dyad, by itself or in combination
with other factors such as parent negative regard, may serve as a risk factor for child aggression or
antisocial behavior.
Key:
EHS = Early Head Start Study
NICHD = NICHD Study of Early Child Care, 5th Grade wave
GBHDS = Girls and Boys Health and Development Study
REFERENCES:
Baumrind, D. (1967). Child care practices anteceding three patterns of preschool behavior. Genetic
Psychology Monographs, 1, 43-88.
Brooks-Gunn, J., & Zahaykevich, M. (1989). Parent-daughter relationships in early adolescence: A
developmental perspective. In K. Kreppner & R. Lerner (Eds.), Family systems and life-span
development (pp.223-246). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Criss, M. M., Shaw, D. S., & Ingoldsby, E. M. (2003). Mother-son positive synchrony in middle
childhood: Relation to antisocial behavior. Social Development, 12, 379-400.
Darling, N., & Steinberg, L. (1993). Parenting style as context: An integrative model. Psychological
Bulletin, 113, 487-496
Dodge, K. A. (1980). Social cognition and children's aggressive behavior. Child Development, 51, 162170.
Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., & Pettit, G. S. (1990, December 21). Mechanisms in the cycle of violence.
Science, 250, 1678-1683.
Eisenberg, N. (1991). Meta-analytic contributions to the literature on prosocial behavior. Personality
and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 273-282.
FitzGerald, D. P., & White, K. J. (2003). Linking children's social worlds: Perspective-taking in parentchild and peer contexts. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 509-522.
8/30/2006, p. 11 of 13
Guerra, N. G., & Slaby, R. G. (1990). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: II.
Intervention. Developmental Psychology, 26, 269-277.
Hastings, P. D., Zahn-Wexler, C., Robinson, J., Usher, B., & Bridges, D. (2000). The development of
concern for others in children with behavior problems. Developmental Psychology, 36, 531546.
Hoffman, M. (1983). Affective and cognitive processes in moral internalization. In E. T. Higgins, D.
Ruble, & W. Hartup (Eds.), Social cognition and social development: A sociocultural
perspective (pp. 236-274). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kochanska, G. (1991). Socialization and temperament in the development of guilt and conscience.
Child Development, 62, 1379-1392.
Kochanska, G. (1997). Mutually responsive orientation between mothers and their young children:
Implications for early socialization. Child Development, 68, 94-112.
Kochanska, G., & Murray, K. T. (2000). Mother-child mutually responsive orientation and conscience
development: From toddler to early school age. Child Development, 71, 417-431.
Krevans, J., & Gibbs, J. C. (1996). Parents’ use of inductive discipline: Relations to children’s empathy
and prosocial behavior. Child Development, 67, 3263-3277.
Laible, D. J., & Thompson, R. A. (2002). Mother-child conflict in the toddler years: Lessons in
emotion, morality, and relationships. Child Development, 73, 1187-1203.
Lamborn, S., Mounts, N., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. (1991). Patterns of competence and
adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful
families. Child Development, 62, 1049-1065.
Maccoby, E. E., & Martin, J. A. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child
interaction. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.) & E. M. Hetherington (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child
psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 1-101).
New York: Wiley.
Miller, P., & Eisenberg, N. (1988). The relation of empathy to externalizing/antisocial behavior.
Psychological Bulletin, 103, 324-344.
Nagin, D., & Tremblay, R. E. (1999). Trajectories of boys' physical aggression, opposition, and
hyperactivity on the path to physically violent and nonviolent juvenile delinquency. Child
Development, 70, 1181-1196.
Putallaz, M. (1987). Maternal behavior and children's sociometric status. Child Development, 58, 324340.
Richard, B., & Dodge, K. A. (1982). Social maladjustment and problem-solving in school-aged
children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 787-793.
Slaby, R.G., & Guerra, N. G. (1988). Cognitive mediators of aggression in adolescent offenders: 1.
Assessment. Developmental Psychology, 24, 580-588.
8/30/2006, p. 12 of 13
Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over-time
changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian,
indulgent and neglectful families. Child Development, 65, 754-770.
van Ijzendoorn, M.H. (1997). Attachment, emergent morality, and aggression: Toward a
developmental socioemotional model of antisocial behaviour. International Journal of
Behavioral Development, 21, 703-728.
Zillmann, D. (1988). Cognition-excitation interdependencies in aggressive behavior. Aggressive
Behavior, 14, 51-64.
8/30/2006, p. 13 of 13
EHS 5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP STUDY
HOME ENVIRONMENT
OBSERVATION
EHS 5th Grade Follow- Up Study, Appen dix B, Home Environment Observation, 8/30/2006, p.1
1. PARENTAL WARMTH
YES
a. Parent talks twice to CHILD during visit (beyond correction and
introduction).
b. Parent answers one of CHILD’s questions or requests verbally.
c. Parent encourages CHILD to contribute to the conversation during the
visit.
d. Parent helps CHILD demonstrate some achievement during visit or
mentions a particular skill, strength, or achievement.
e. Parent spontaneously praises CHILD’s behavior or qualities twice
during visit.
f. Parent uses some term of endearment or some diminutive for CHILD’s
name when talking about or to him/her at least twice during visit.
g. Parent’s voice conveys positive feeling when speaking of or to CHILD.
h. Parent caresses, kisses, or cuddles CHILD once during visit.
i.
Parent shows some positive emotional responses to praise of CHILD by
visitor.
EHS 5th Grade Follow- Up Study, Appen dix B, Home Environment Observation, 8/30/2006, p.2
NO
2. PARENTAL LACK OF HOSTILITY
YES
NO
YES
NO
a. Parent shouts at CHILD during visit.
b. Parent expresses overt annoyance with or hostility toward
CHILD- complains, describes him/her as “bad”, says he won’t
mind, etc.
c. Parent slaps or spanks child during visit.
d. Parent scolds, derogates or criticizes CHILD more than once.
3. PARENTAL VERBAL SKILLS
a. Parent’s speech is distinct, clear, and audible to the interviewer.
b. Parent initiates verbal exchanges with visitor, asks questions,
makes spontaneous comments.
c. Parent expresses ideas freely and easily uses statements of
appropriate length.
d. Parent appears to readily understand the interviewer’s questions.
EHS 5th Grade Follow- Up Study, Appen dix B, Home Environment Observation, 8/30/2006, p.3
4. INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
YES
NO
YES
NO
a. House or apartment is free of potentially dangerous structural or
health hazards (exposed outlets, broken windows, windows
without screens or guards, leaking radiator, pots hanging over
edge of stove)
b. House or apartment has at least 100 square feet of living space
per person
c. House or apartment is clean; all visible rooms of the home are
reasonably clean and minimally cluttered
d. In terms of available floor space, the rooms are not overcrowded
with furniture
e. The interior of the house or apartment is not dark or perceptually
monotonous
f. House or apartment is not overly noisy – from noise in the house
(television, shouts of children, radio)
g. House or apartment is not overly noisy – from noise outside the
house (train, cars, people, music)
h. There are no obvious signs of recent alcohol or non-prescription
drug consumption in the home (drug paraphernalia, beer cans,
liquor bottles)
EHS 5th Grade Follow- Up Study, Appen dix B, Home Environment Observation, 8/30/2006, p.4
5. EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
Well kept,
good repair
Fair
condition
Poor
condition
Badly
deteriorated
Moderate evidence
kept in good
repair
Fair –
minor
repairs
needed, but
not rough
surface
Poor potholes and
other
evidence of
neglect
None, or
almost
none
Yes, but
not a lot
Yes, quite a
bit
Yes, just
about
everywhere
None, or
almost
none
Yes, but
not a lot
Yes, quite a
bit
Yes, just
about
everywhere
a. How would you rate the general
condition of most of the housing
units or other buildings in the
face-block?
Very good recent
resurfacing,
smooth
b. How would you rate the
condition of the street in the
face-block?
c. Is there garbage, litter, or
broken glass (except beer/liquor
bottles) in the street or on the
sidewalk (including around the
dwelling unit and neighboring
houses)?
d. Are there drug-related
paraphernalia, condoms, beer
or liquor containers or
packaging, cigarette butts or
discarded cigarette packages in
the street or on the sidewalk?
EHS 5th Grade Follow- Up Study, Appen dix B, Home Environment Observation, 8/30/2006, p.5
No traffic
permitted
Very
light
Light
Moderate
Very
Heavy heavy
e. How would you rate the
volume of traffic on the
face-block?
No children visible
or all in yards
Yes, one or
two children
Yes, three or
more children
f. Are there children playing on the
sidewalks or in the street of the
face-block?
No persons
observed
in the
street or
sidewalk
None
observed
behaving
in hostile
way
Yes, one or
two
behaving in
a hostile
manner
Yes, three or
more
behaving in
a hostile
manner
g. Are there any adults or
teenagers in the street or on the
sidewalk arguing, fighting,
drinking, or behaving in any
kind of hostile or threatening
way?
Very
comfortable:
can imagine
living/
Comfortable:
it seems to be
working/
shopping
a safe and
friendly place
here
Fairly safe
and
comfortable
I would be
uncomfortable
living/
working/
shopping here
h. How did
you feel
parking,
walking or
waiting at
the door in
the faceblock?
EHS 5th Grade Follow- Up Study, Appen dix B, Home Environment Observation, 8/30/2006, p.6
I felt
afraid
for my
personal
safety
APPENDIX C
MATERNAL INTERVIEW
EHS 5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP STUDY
MATERNAL INTERVIEW
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.1
SECTION 1
FAMILY DEMOGRAPHICS
FD1
ALL
Thank you for agreeing to participate in this study (once again).
Let me begin by confirming the name of the child we will be talking about
today.
The child’s first name is [FILL FOR FIRST NAME OF CHILD FROM FILE].
Is that correct?
INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT GIVES DIFFERENT NAME, MAKE SURE YOU
ARE TALKING ABOUT THE RIGHT CHILD.
FIRST NAME OF
CHILD=CHILD
STRING
OF 15
FD2
FD2
ALL
And [CHILD]’s last name is [FILL FOR LAST NAME OF CHILD FROM
FILE], correct?
INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT GIVES DIFFERENT NAME, MAKE SURE YOU
ARE TALKING ABOUT THE RIGHT CHILD.
LAST NAME OF
CHILD=CHILD
STRING
OF 15
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.2
FD3
FD3
ALL
Is [CHILD] male or female?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING.
MALE
FEMALE
DK
R
1
2
D
R
FD4.1
FD4.1
ALL
What is [CHILD]’s birth date?
CHILD’S BIRTH DAY
DK
R
MM/DD/YYYY
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.3
FD4.2
FD4.2
ALL
INTERVIEWER: DETERMINE IF RESPONDENT IS REPORTING ON RIGHT CHILD.
FILE:
FIRST NAME CHILD
LAST NAME OF CHILD
BIRTH DAY OF CHILD
CORRECT CHILD
NOT CORRECT CHILD
REPORTED BY RESPONDENT:
FIRST NAME CHILD
LAST NAME OF CHILD
BIRTH DAY OF CHILD
1
2
FD4.4
FD4.3
FD4.3
IF FD4.2=2
I’m sorry, it appears there is a problem with our records. I need to contact
my supervisor and I will contact you again to reschedule an appointment.
INTERRUPT INTERVIEW AND CONSULT SUPERVISOR
FD4.4
ALL
I also would like to make sure that I have your name correctly. What is
your first name?
RESPONDENT’S FIRST NAME
DK
R
STRING
0F 15
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.4
FD4.5
FD4.5
ALL
What is your last name?
RESPONDENT’S LAST NAME
STRING
0F 15
D
R
DK
R
FD4.6
FD4.6
ALL
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING. IS RESPONDENT MALE OR FEMALE?
MALE
FEMALE
1
2
FD7
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.5
FD7
ALL
How are you related to [CHILD]?
INTERVIEWER: PROBE FOR TYPE OF PARENT
BIOLOGICAL/BIRTH
PARENT
STEP PARENT
ADOPTIVE PARENT
FOSTER PARENT
GRANDPARENT
GREAT GRANDPARENT
PARENT’S/ BOY OR
GIRLFRIEND
OTHER RELATIVE
(SPECIFY:___________)
OTHER NON-RELATIVE
(SPECIFY:___________)
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.6
FD9
FD9
ALL
Now I have some questions about the people [CHILD] lives with.
Do you currently live with [CHILD] …
All or almost all of the
time,
About half of the time,
Some of the time, or
None of the time?
DK
REF
1
FD10
2
3
4
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.7
FD10
ALL
you and IF FD9<4
Not including [you and] [CHILD], how many other people lived in the same
household during the past 30 days?
ENTER TOTAL
NUMBER
DK
REF
FF
d
r
IF = 0 FD17.
ELSE FD12
FD17
BEGIN LOOP FOR FD12
LOOP [ANSWER IN FD10] TIMES TO GET INFORMATION FOR ALL
PEOPLE IN HOUSEHOLD
LOOP=NUMBER IN THE LOOP
FD12.1
IF FD10 NE 0, D, OR R AND LOOP LE FD10
you and IF FD9<4
Oldest IF LOOP=1 AND FD10>1
second oldest, third oldest, etc IF LOOP>1.
(IF FD10>1 AND LOOP=1) Starting with the oldest person that lived with
[you and] [CHILD] during the past 30 days, is this person a male or a
female?
(IF FD10>1 AND IF LOOP>1) Now thinking about the [second, third, etc.
oldest] person, is this person a male or a female?
(IF FD10=1) Is this person a male or a female?
MALE
FEMALE
1
2
FD12.2
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.8
FD12.2
IF FD10 NE 0, D, OR R AND LOOP LE FD10
he IF FD12.1 =MALE; she IF FD12.1 =FEMALE
How old is [she/he]?
PROBE: Your best estimate is fine.
INTERVIEWER: IF LESS THAN 1 YEAR OLD ENTER ZERO
AGE
DK
REF
FF
D
R
FD12.3
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.9
FD12.3
IF FD10 NE 0, D, OR R AND LOOP LE FD10
he IF FD12.1 =MALE; she IF FD12.1 =FEMALE
Oldest IF LOOP=1
second oldest, third oldest, etc IF LOOP>1.
you and IF FD9<4
reduce the categories? Too many
And, how is [she/he] related to [CHILD]?
PROBE: This is the [oldest/second oldest etc] who lived with [you and]
[CHILD] in the past 30 days?
INTERVIEWER: PROBE FOR TYPE OF PARENT OR SIBLING
IF FD12.1=FEMALE
MOTHER
GRANDMOTHER
GREAT GRANDMOTHER
MOTHER’S
PARTNER/BOYFRIEND
SISTER
NIECE
COUSIN
AUNT
OTHER RELATIVE
(SPECIFY:___________)
OTHER NON-RELATIVE
(SPECIFY:___________)
OTHER (SPECIFY)
DK
REF
IF FD12.1=MALE
FATHER
GRANDFATHER
GREAT GRANDFATHER
FATHER’S
PARTNER/BOYFRIEND
BROTHER
NEPHEW
COUSIN
UNCLE
OTHER RELATIVE
(SPECIFY:___________)
OTHER NON-RELATIVE
(SPECIFY:___________)
OTHER (SPECIFY)
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.10
1
2
3
FD12.4.1
FD12.4
4
5
6
7
8
FD12.4.2
FD12.4
FD12.4
9
11
12
d
r
FD12.4
FD12.4.1
IF FD12.3=1
he IF FD12.1=MALE; she IF FD12.1=FEMALE
father IF FD12.1=MALE; mother IF FD12.1=FEMALE
Is [she/he] [CHILD]’s biological step, adoptive of foster [father/mother]?
BIOLOGICAL OR BIRTH
STEP
ADOPTIVE
FOSTER
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
D
R
FD12.5
FD12.4.2
IF FD12.3 =2
he IF FD12.1=MALE; she IF FD12.1=FEMALE
brother IF FD12.1=MALE;sister IF FD12.1=FEMALE
Is [she/he] [CHILD]’s full, half, step, adoptive, or foster [brother/sister]?
FULL
STEP
ADOPTIVE
FOSTER
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
D
R
FD12.5
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.11
FD12.4
IF FD12.2 <18
he IF FD12.1=MALE; she IF FD12.1=FEMALE
Has [she/he] ever attended a Early Head Start Program?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
D
R
FD12.5
FD12.5
IF LOOP=FD10
you and IF FD9<4
Was there anybody else living with you and [CHILD] in the same household
in the past 30 days that you did not mention yet?
YES
1
NO
DK
REF
2
D
R
FD10=FD10+1 AND
CONTINUE LOOP
FD13
END LOOP FD12
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.12
FD13
ALL
Final version of question still pendin;may change order of this question and ask later
The next question is about your educational background. What is the
highest grade or year of school that you have completed or what are the
highest degrees, diplomas or certificates you have received?
IF RESPONDENT SAYS, “NONE”, ASK: Did you complete an elementary,
middle or junior high school program?
IF RESPONDENT SAYS, “ HIGH SCHOOL OR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA”, ASK: Did
you receive a high school diploma or GED?
PROBE FOR OTHER DEGREES.
NONE
1
UP TO 8TH GRADE /ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
11 AND 12TH GRADE
12TH GRADE BUT NO HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
GED CERTIFICATE
HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
2
VOC/TECH PROGRAM AFTER HIGH SCHOOL
BUT NO VOC/TECH DIPLOMA
VOC/TECH DIPLOMA
SOME COLLEGE BUT NO DEGREE
ASSOCIATE’S DEGREE
BACHELOR’S DEGREE
GRADUATE OR PROFESSIONAL
SCHOOL BUT NO DEGREE
MASTER’S DEGREE (MA, MS)
DOCTORATE DEGREE (PHD, EDD)
PROFESSIONAL DEGREE AFTER BACHELOR’S
DEGREE (MEDICINE/MD; DENTISTRY/DDS;
LAW/JD/LLB; ETC.
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.13
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
2
R
FD17
FD17
ALL
Are you currently attending school, participating in any training program or
taking any classes? Please include GED classes, vocational or trade
school, job skills training or programs, Job Corps and college courses?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FD18
FD18
ALL
Are you currently working at a job or business for pay? This includes
temporary jobs, working in your own business, being in the military, or any
other type of work you get paid for.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FD19
FD18.1
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.14
FD18.1
IF FD18<>YES
Are you currently…
Unemployed,
Looking for work, or
laid off
Disabled or retired,
Not working,
Or are you doing
something else?
(DESCRIBE)
IN PRISON/JAIL
DK
REF
1
FD24
2
3
4
6
d
r
FD19
IF FD18= 1
How many different jobs do you currently have?
ENTER TOTAL
NUMBER
DK
REF
FF
FD20
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.15
FD20
IF FD18=1
adding up the hours from all your current jobs IF FD19>1
[Adding up the hours from all your current jobs], about how many hours
per week do you usually work for pay??
PROBE IF HOURS VARY: What are the average number of hours per week
you work?
.
ENTER TOTAL
HOURS
DK
REF
FF
FD21
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.16
FD21
IF FD18=1
(IF MORE THAN 1 JOB FD19>1) Thinking about the job where you work
the most hours per week, do you regularly work….
(IF ONE JOB FD19=1) Do you regularly work…
a
b
c
d
e
Weekdays?
Evening (6PM TO 11 PM)?
Nights (11PM TO 7 AM)?
Weekends?
Different times each week?
DK
REF
YES
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NO
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
DK
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
REF
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
FD22
FD22
IF FD18=1
any of IF FD19>1; [s] IF FD19>1
Are you eligible for any of the following benefits at [any of] your job[s]? By
eligible we mean the benefit is available to you now, even if you have
decided not to receive it or do not need it. What about…
a
b
c
Health insurance?
Sick leave?
Paid vacation?
YES
1
1
1
NO
2
2
2
DK
d
d
d
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.17
R
r
r
r
FD22.1
FD22.1
IF FD18=1
What are your earnings before taxes and other deductions? Please include
in the amount tips, commissions, and regular overtime pay from all the jobs
you currently have.
Probe: You can give me the amount per hour, per week, per two weeks,
per two times a month, per month, or per year.
INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT CAN ONLY REPORT EARNINGS AFTER TAXES
ENTER THE AMOUNT OF EARNINGS AFTER TAXES AND CONTINUE.
AMOUNT
DK
REF
FFF,FFF.FF
d
r
FD23
FD23
IF FD18=1 and FD22.1 NE DK, REF
Is this amount …
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN.
Per hour,
Per day,
Per week,
Per two weeks,
Per two times a
months
Per month, or
Per year?
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
FD23.3
6
7
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.18
FD23.3
IF FD23<>DK OR REF
Comment: spit question to maker reporting easier
Just to confirm, this amount is before taxes?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN.
INTERVIEWER: IF ‘NO’ CONFIRM IF AFTER TAXES
YES, BEFORE TAXES
NO, AFTER TAXES
DK
REF
1
2
D
R
FD24
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.19
FD24
ALL
Now I would like to ask you about types of income and support you or
members of your household may currently be receiving. Do you or any
other members of your household currently receive income or a check
from…
a
b
c
e
f
g
h
i
j
[STATE FOR TANF=TANF BOX] or
welfare
General Assistance, General Relief or
[LOCAL NAME]?
Security Retirement Disability, SSI,
SSDI, Survivor’s Benefits or SSA?
Unemployment insurance benefits?
Food stamps?
WIC?
Child support payments?
Medicaid,[state fill for CHIP] or any other
government medical assistance? or
Did you receive some other type of
assistance I did not mention?
(Specify:________)
YES NO
1
2
DK
d
R
r
1
2
d
r
1
2
d
r
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
d
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
r
1
2
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.20
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
TANF box
STATE WELFARE AGENCIES
Nebraska
FA (Family Assistance Program)
Nevada
ATAP (Alaska Temporary Assistance
Program)
New
EMPOWER (Employing and Moving
People Off Welfare and Encouraging
Hampshire
Responsibility)
New Jersey
FAP (Family Assistance Program),
financial aid for work exempt
families
NHEP (New Hampshire
Employment Program), financial aid
for work-mandated families
WFNJ (Work First New Jersey)
New Mexico
NM Works
FA (Family Assistance Program)
Work First
Colorado
Connecticut
TEA (Transitional Employment
Assistance)
CALWORKS (California Work
Opportunity and Responsibility for
Kids)
Colorado Works
JOBS FIRST
Delaware
ABC (A Better Chance)
New York
North
Carolina
North Dakota
District of
Columbia
Florida
Georgia
TANF
Ohio
Welfare Transition Program
TANF
Oklahoma
Oregon
Hawaii
Idaho
TANF
Temporary Assistance For Families in
Idaho
TANF
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
California
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Massachusetts
TANF, cash assistance, IMPACT
(Indiana Manpower Placement and
Comprehensive Training, TANF work
program
FIP (Family Investment Program)
Kansas Works
K-TAP (Kentucky Transitional
Assistance Program)
FITAP (Family Independence
Temporary Assistance Program) cash
assistance
STEP (Strategies to Empower People)
TAFDC (Transitional Aid to Families
with Dependent Children), cash
assistance
ESP (Employment Services Program),
Employment First
TANF
South
Carolina
South
Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
TEEM (Training, Employment,
Education Management)
OWF (Ohio Works First)
TANF
JOBS (Job Opportunities and Basic
Skills)
Pennsylvania TANF
FIP (Family Independence
Program)
Family Independence
TANF
Families First
Texas Works (Department of
Human Services), cash
assistance
Choices (Texas Workforce
Commission, TANF work program
FEP (Family Employment Program)
Vermont
ANFC (Aid to Families with Needy
Children), cash assistance
Reach Up, TANF work program
Virginia
VIEW (Virginia Initiative for
Employment, Not Welfare)
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.21
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
TANF work program
FIP (Family Independence Program)
MFIP (Minnesota Family Investment
Program)
TANF
Beyond Welfare
Washington
West Virginia
WorkFirst
West Virginia Works
Wisconsin
Wyoming
W-2 (Wisconsin Works)
POWER (Personal Opportunities
With Employment Responsibility)
FAIM (Families Achieving
Independence in Montana)
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.22
FD25
ALL
In the past 12 months, what was your household’s total income before
taxes and other deductions? Please include your own income and the
income of every person living in your household. Please also include the
money you may have told me about from jobs and public assistance
programs, child support payments as well as any other sources we haven’t
discussed such as income from rent, interest, and dividends. Was it…
PROBE: Your best estimate is fine.
$25,000 or less or
More than $25,000?
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FD26
FD27
FD28
FD28
FD26
IF FD25=1
Was it…
INTERVIEWER: YOU CAN STOP READING RESPONSE CATEGORIES IF
RESPONDENT PROVIDES ANSWER.
$5000 or less,
More than $5,000 but
less than $10,000,
More than $10,00 but
less than $15,000
More than $15,000 but
less than $20,000, or
More than $20,00 but
less than or equal to
$25,000?
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.23
FD28
FD27
IF FD25=2
Was it…
INTERVIEWER: YOU CAN STOP READING RESPONSE CATEGORIES IF
RESPONDENT PROVIDES ANSWER.
More than $25,000 but
less than $30,000,
More than $30,000 but
less than $35,000,
More than $35,000 but
less than $40,000,
More than $40,000 but
less than $50,000,
More than $50,000 but
less than $75,000,
More than $75,000 but
less than $100,000,
More than $100,000
but less than
$200,000, or
More than $200,000?
DK
REF
1
FD28
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
d
r
FD28
ALL
he If FD3 =MALE; she IF FD3=FEMALE
Since [CHILD] started first grade, in how many different places has [she/he]
lived for at least four months or longer? Please include the place where
[CHILD] is living now.
ENTER TOTAL
NUMBER
DK
REF
FF
(RANGE>0)
FD29
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.24
FD29
ALL
he If FD3 =MALE; she IF FD3=FEMALE
Since [CHILD] started first grade, has [he/she] ever been homeless?
PROBE: Being homeless includes staying at a shelter, living on the streets,
or staying for a period of time with friends or family without having a place
of your own.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CH1
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.25
SECTION 2
CHILD’S HEALTH
CH1
ALL
Now, I have a few questions about [CHILD]’s health.
In the past year, did you or someone else take [CHILD] for a well-child care
visit or regular checkups?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CH3
CH3
ALL
he If FD3 =MALE; she IF FD3=FEMALE
What kind of place does [CHILD] usually go to when [he/she] is sick? Is
it….
A doctor’s office (including an HMO)
The emergency room at a hospital,
A clinic or hospital outpatient
department, or
Some other place (DESCRIBE)
CHILD DOES NOT GET SICK OR GO
TO DOCTOR
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.26
1
2
3
4
5
d
r
CH4
ALL
How are [CHILD]’s health care services primarily covered or paid for right
now? Are they…
Covered by Medicaid, [LOCAL
NAME FOR CHIP], or any other
government program that pays for
[CHILD]’s healthcare,
Covered by a private insurance
through an employer or directly
purchased by you or some one else,
Do you or someone else mostly pay
for these services out of your own
pocket,
Are these services provided free of
charge, or
Are these services covered or paid
for some other way (specify)?
CHILD NEVER GOES TO THE
DOCTOR
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
6
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.27
CH5
CH5
ALL
In the past year did you or someone else take [CHILD] to visit a dentist for a
routine check-up or cleaning?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CH6
CH6
ALL
he If FD3 =MALE; she IF FD3=FEMALE
Take out blindness and deafness; still make a decision if ever question and treatment since 1st grade
Since [CHILD] started first grade, has [he/she] been diagnosed by a health
professional or any other professional with any of the following conditions?
(IF YES) Did [CHILD]
receive treatment for
this?
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
ADD or ADHD?
Allergies?
Chronic sinusitis ?
Asthma?
Diabetes?
Emotional problem?
A hearing problem?
Lead poisoning?
Obesity or being
overweight?
A vision problem which
requires glasses?
Injuries or accidents
requiring medical care?
YES
NO
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
1
2
1
2
DK REF
YES
NO
DK
REF
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
d
r
1
2
d
r
d
r
1
2
d
r
CH7
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.28
CH7
ALL
him If FD3 =MALE; her IF FD3=FEMALE
comment: word change
Does [CHILD] regularly take any medications prescribed to [him/her] by a
doctor?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CH8
CH9
CH9
CH8
IF CH7= 1
comment: word change
What is the medication prescribed for?
CODE ALL THAT APPLY.
ASTHMA
ADD/ADHD
OTHER
DK
REF
1
2
3
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.29
CH9
CH9
ALL
Overall, would you say [CHILD]’s health is…
Excellent,
Very Good,
Good,
Fair, or
Poor?
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
d
r
CE1
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.30
SECTION 3
CHILD’S EDUCATION
CE1
ALL
Now I would like to talk with you about [CHILD]’s school experiences.
Is [CHILD] currently attending or enrolled in school?
INTERVIEWER: IF THE CHILD IS HOME SCHOOLED ANSWER NO.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CE3
CE2
CE3
CE2
IF CE1=NO
What is the main reason [CHILD] is currently not attending or enrolled in
school?
BEING HOME SCHOOLED
ILLNESS/INJURY
SUSPENSION
EXPULSION FROM
SCHOOL
SCHOOL
VACATION/BREAK
OTHER REASON
(SPECIFY)
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
6
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.31
CE11
CE2.1
CE2.1
IF CE1=NO
How long has [CHILD] been out of school for this reason?
INTERVIEWER: ENTER WEEKS HERE AND MONTHS ON NEXT SCREEN. IF LESS
THAN ONE MONTH ENTER ZERO.
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD HAS NEVER BEEN IN SCHOOL, ENTER ‘99’
NUMBER OF WEEKS NOT IN
SCHOOL
DK
REF
FF
CE2.2
d
r
CE2.2
IF CE1=NO
INTERVIEWER: ENTER MONTHS HERE.
NUMBER OF YEARS NOT IN
SCHOOL
DK
REF
FF
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.32
CE3 OR
CE29
CE3
If CE1=1 OR (IF CE2<>1 AND CE2.1/CE2.2 < XX AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE
DETERMINED)
(IF CE1=1) What is the name of the school that [CHILD] is attending or
enrolled in now?
(IF CE2.1/CE2.21 AND CE2.1/CE2.2 < XX AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE
DETERMINED
What is the school’s address?
INTERVIEWER: PROBE FOR AS MUCH ADDRESS INFORMATION AS YOU CAN
(NUMBER AND STREET NAME).
ADDRESS SCHOOL
DK
REF
STRING OF 30
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.33
CE5
CE5
If CE1=1 OR IF CE2<>1 OR CE2.1/CE2.2 < XX AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE
DETERMINED
What city is that school in?
INTERVIEWER: CODE IF ALREADY KNOWN.
NAME OF CITY
DK
REF
STRING
OF 15
d
r
CE6
CE6
If CE1=1 OR IF CE2<>1 OR CE2.1/CE2.2 < XX AMOUNT OF TIME TO BE
DETERMINED
considering taking these questions and get info from unified school files
Is this a public or private school?
PUBLIC
PRIVATE
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CE6.1
CE8
CE8.1
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.34
CE6.1
IF CE6=1
Did you or someone else choose this school for [CHILD] or was [CHILD]
assigned to this school?
INTERVIEWER: IF ASSIGNED SCHOOL IS ALSO CHOSEN SCHOOL CODE
‘ASSIGNED’.
SCHOOL CHOSEN
SCHOOL ASSIGNED
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CD7
CE7
IF CE6=1
Is this public school….
A regular school,
A school with a magnet
program such as a
science, math or a
foreign language
immersion program,
A charter school,
A special education
school which primarily
serves children with
disabilities, or
Some other type of
public school (specify)?
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.35
CE9
CE8
IF CE6=2
Is this private school…
A Catholic school,
A school with another
religious background
or affiliation,
A non-religious school
without a religious
background or
affiliation, or
Some other private
school (specify)?
DK
REF
1
2
CE8.1
3
4
d
r
CE8.1
If CE6=2
Is this a special education school, which primarily serves children with
disabilities?
INTERVIEWER: DO NOT ASK IF ALREADY KNOWN.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.36
CE9
CE9
IF CE6=1,2
What is the lowest grade taught at this school?
INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT ANSWERS 1ST GRADE, PROBE IF SCHOOL HAS
A KINDERGARTEN OR NURSERY/PREKINDERGARTEN PROGRAM.
PRE KINDERGARTEN
(INCLUDE HEAD START)
KINDERGARTEN
1ST
2ND
3RD
4T
5TH
6TH
7TH
8T
9TH
10TH
11TH
12TH
SCHOOL DOES NOT HAVE
GRADES
DK
N
CE10
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
99
CE12
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.37
CE10
IF CE9 <>99
What is the highest grade taught at this school?
KINDERGARTEN
1ST
2ND
3RD
4T
5TH
6TH
7TH
8T
9TH
10TH
11TH
12TH
DK
REF
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
d
r
CE11
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.38
CE11
(IF CE1=YES OR CE2=1 OR (CE2.1/2.299
(IF CE1=YES) What grade is [CHILD] currently enrolled in?
(IF CE1=N0) What grade was [CHILD] most recently enrolled in?
(IF CE2=1) At what grade level is [CHILD] currently taught?
KINDERGARTEN
1ST
2ND
3RD
4TH
5TH
6TH
7TH
8TH
9TH
10TH
11TH
NOT IN A GRADE
DK
REF
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
99
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.39
CE12
IF CE1=YES OR CE2.1/2.2REF
(IF CE12=1) What is the name of [CHILD]’s primary or main teacher?
(IF CE12=2,3, OR DK) What is the name of the teacher who teaches
[CHILD] reading or English?
Please give me the teacher’s first and last name if you can.
IF CHILD DOES NOT HAVE ENGLISH TEACHER PROBE: You can also give me
the name of the teacher who teaches [CHILD] math or social sciences.
INTERVIEWER: THE CHILD CAN BE CONSULTED IF RESPONDENT IS NOT SURE
OF THE TEACHER’S NAME
NAME OF TEACHER
DK
REF
STRING OF 30
CE12.2 OR CE 13
d
r
CE18
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.41
CE12.2
If CE12=2
What subject(s) does this teacher teach?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN
SUBJECT
DK
REF
STRING OF 30
d
r
CE13
CE13
IF CE12.1 <> REF
Is this teacher male or female?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN
MALE
FEMALE
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
CH17
CE17
IF CE12.1 <> REF
Including [CHILD] about how many students are in the class with this
teacher?
PROBE: Your best estimate is fine.
TOTAL NUMBER OF STUDENTS
DK
REF
FF
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.42
CE18
CE18
IF CE1=YES OR CE2.1/2.21
Now I would like to talk about other schools [CHILD] has attended since
starting first grade.
Since [CHILD] started first grade, how many different schools has [CHILD]
attended? Please include the [current/most recent] school that [CHILD] is
attending in your count.
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD HAS BEEN HOMESCHOOLED COUNT THE
HOMESCHOOL AS A SEPARATE SCHOOL.
ENTER NUMBER OF DIFFERENT
SCHOOLS
DK
REF
FF
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.48
CE42.1
or
CE48.1
CE42.1
IF CE41>1
(CE1=1) Which school has [CHILD] attended the longest since first grade?
Is it the school [he/she] is currently attending or is it another school?
(IF CE2.1/2.21
(CE42.1=1) Including the grade the child is currently attending, how many
grades has [CHILD] attended at his/her current school since starting first
grade?
(CE42.1=2) How many grades did CHILD attend at this other school since
starting first grade?
INTERVIEWER: IF CHILD ATTENDED PART OF A GRADE IN THIS SCHOOL
INCLUDE THIS GRADE IN THE COUNT.
NUMBER OF GRADES
DK
REF
FF
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.50
CE47
If CE42.1=2
What is the lowest grade taught at this other school?
INTERVIEWER: IF RESPONDENT ANSWERS 1ST GRADE, PROBE IF SCHOOL HAS
A KINDERGARTEN OR NURSERY/PREKINDERGARTEN PROGRAM.
NURSERY/PRESCHOOL,
PREK, HEAD START
KINDERGARTEN
1ST
2ND
3RD
4T
5TH
6TH
7TH
8T
9TH
10TH
11TH
12TH
SCHOOL DOES NOT HAVE
GRADES
DK
N
CE48
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
99
CE48.1
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.51
CE48
If CE47<>99
What is the highest grade taught at this other school?
KINDERGARTEN
1ST
2ND
3RD
4T
5TH
6TH
7TH
8T
9TH
10TH
11TH
12TH
SCHOOL DOES NOT
HAVE GRADES
DK
REF
K
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
99
CE48.1
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.52
CE48.1
ALL
Has [CHILD] ever been required to attend summer school?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
0
d
r
CE49
CE49.1
CE49
IF CE48.1= 1
How many times did [he/she] attend summer school?
NUMBER OF
SUMMERS
DK
REF
FF
CE49.1
D
R
CE49.1
ALL ?
Has [CHILD] ever repeated any grades?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
D
R
CE50
CE51
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.53
CE50
IF CE49=1
Which grades did [CHILD] repeat?
CODE ALL THAT APPLY
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
KINDERGARTEN
1ST
2ND
3RD
4TH
5TH
6TH
YES
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
NO
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
DK
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
REF
R
R
R
R
R
R
R
CE51
CE51
IF CE1=YES OR CE2.1/2.2’88’ OR ‘99’
Are you and [BIO OTHER] currently
Married,
Divorced,
Separated, or
Have you never been married to each
other?
MARRIAGE ANNULLED
WIDOWED
DIED
DK
1
2
3
4
FA4
FA4
FA4
FA7
5
6
7
d
FA4
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.83
FA3.1
FA7
FA3.1
IF FA3=7 OR FA1=’99’
Were you and [BIO OTHER] ever married?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
D
R
FA4
FA7
FA4
IF FA3=1,2,3,5,6 OR FA3.1=YES
When did you and [BIO OTHER] get married?
INTERVIEWER: YOU WILL ENTER THE MONTH HERE AND YEAR ON THE
NEXT PAGES.
INTERVIEWER: IF NEVER MARRIED CODE ‘99’.
Year
DK
FF
d
REF
r
FA5
FA5
IF FA3=1,2,3,5,6 OR FA3.1=YES
INTERVIEWER: ENTER THE YEAR HERE
MONTH
DK
REF
FFFF
d
FA6
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.84
FA6
(IF FA3=1,2,3,5,6 OR FA3.1=YES) OR IF FA4<>99
Did you and [BIO OTHER] get married before or after [CHILD] was
born?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF ALREADY KNOWN
BEFORE
CHILD WAS
BORN
AFTER
CHILD WAS
BORN
1
FA9
2
FA7
FA7
(IF FA1<>’88’ OR FA6<>1) OR FA4=99
(If FD4.6=2) When [CHILD] was born, did [BIO OTHER] sign a birth
certificate or document that identifies him as the legal father of [CHILD]?
(If FD4.6=1) When [CHILD] was born, did you sign a birth certificate or
document that identifies you as the legal father of [CHILD]?
YES, SIGNED BIRTH
CERTIFICATE
NO
DK
REF
1
FA9
2
d
r
FA7.1
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.85
FA7.1
IF FA7=NO,DK
Has a court ever ruled that you are [CHILD]’s father?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF ALREADY KNOWN
YES
NO
DK
REF
FA9
1
2
d
r
FA9
IF FA2<>’88’
(IF FD7 =1) Including [CHILD],
[H/h]ow many children do you have with [BIO OTHER]?
NUMBER OF
OTHER CHILDREN
DK
REF
FF
FA10
RANGE>0
D
R
FA10
IF FA2<>’88 ,‘99’ OR FA3<>.6,7 and FA9<>1
Already asked in FD10. If we ask we should use we should use same categories as in
FD9
Do you and [BIO OTHER] currently live together all or most of the time?
INTERVIEWER: CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF KNOWN
YES
NO
DK
1
2
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.86
FA10.1
FA10.2
FA10.1
If FA10=YES OR FA9=1
Added this question to make it easier to respond
Have you and [BIO OTHER] always lived together?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
d
REF
r
FA29
FA14
FA10.2
If FA10=NO
Added this question to make it easier to respond
Have you and [BIO OTHER] ever lived together?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
d
REF
r
FA14
FA16
FA14
IF FA10.1=NO OR FA10.2=YES
problematic to calculate for the respondent as well as for us to determine how many years of total year
since first grade father lived with child?
How many years since [CHILD] started first grade, have you, [BIO
OTHER], and [CHILD] lived together?
INTERVIEWER: IF LESS THAN 1 YEAR ENTER ZERO
NUMBER OF YEARS
DK
REF
FF
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.87
FA15
OR
FA16
FA15
If FA10.2=YES
How old was [CHILD] when you, [BIO OTHER], and [CHILD] last lived
together?
AGE OF CHILD
DK
REF
FF
D
FA16
R
FA16
IF FA10=NO
In the past three months, how often has [CHILD] stayed overnight with
[BIO OTHER]? Was it…
INTERVIEWER: INCLUDE NIGHTS [BIO OTHER] STAYED WITH RESPONDENT
Every night or almost every night
A few times a week
A few times a month
About once a month,
Less often than that, or
Never in the past three months?
DK
1
2
3
4
5
6
D
REF
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.88
FA17
FA17
IF FA10=NO
In the past three months, how often has [CHILD] seen [BIO OTHER]? Was
it…
Every day or almost every day,
A few times a week,
A few times a month,
About once a month,
Less often than that, or,
Never in the past three months?
DK
1
2
3
4
5
6
D
FA19
REF
R
FA20
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.89
FA20
FA19
IF FA17=4,5,6,DK
REVISIT CATEGORIES
Why was [BIO OTHER] unable to see [CHILD] more often?
INTERVIEWER: PROBE FOR ADDITIONAL REASONS
CHECK ALL THAT APPLY
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
LIVES TOO FAR AWAY
IS SICK OR DISABLED
IS IN THE MILITARY
IS IN JAIL OR PRISON
DOESN’T HAVE ENOUGH
TIME.
I WON’T LET SEE (HIM/HER)
NOT INTERESTED IN SEEING
CHILD
THE HOURS HE/SHE HAS TO
WORK INTERFERE
HAS A COURT ORDER
PREVENTING [HIM/HER] TO
SEE OUR CHILD/DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE
MY HUSBAND/BOYFRIEND
DOESN’T LIKE [HIM/HER]
MY FAMILY DOESN’T LIKE
HIM/HER OR HIS/HER FAMILY
DISCOURAGES [HIM/HER] TO
SEE CHILD
SOME OTHER REASON?
(SPECIFY:
DK
ref
YES
YES
YES
YES
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.90
FA19.1
FA19.1
FA10=NO
In the past three months, how often has [CHILD] talked on the telephone,
received a letter, or email from [BIO OTHER]? Was it…
Every day or almost every day,
A few times a week,
A few times a month,
About once a month,
Less often than that, or
Never?
DK
1
2
3
4
5
6
D
REF
R
FA19.2
OR
FA21.1
FA19.2
IF FA17=Never in the past three months
you IF RESP=BIO; MOTHER OF CHILD IF RESP=OTHER FEMALE
he If FD3 =MALE; she IF FD3=FEMALE
How old was [CHILD] when [he/she] last saw [BIO OTHER]?
CODE WITHOUT ASKING IF ALREADY KNOWN
IF ‘NEVER SEEN CHILD, ENTER ‘99’
IF ‘at birth’ ENTER ‘0’ AND ‘0’ ON THE NEXT SCREEN
ENTER YEARS HERE AND MONTHS ON NEXT SCREEN
MONTHS
DK
REF
FF
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.91
FA19.2
FA19.2
IF FA17<>Never in the past three months
ENTER MONTHS HERE
IF ‘at birth’ ‘ENTER ‘0’
IF AGE IS JUST PROVIDED IN YEARS, ENTER ‘0’
YEARS
DK
REF
FF
D
FA20
R
FA21.1
IF FA10=NO
Is [CHILD] currently covered by a court order or legal agreement that
determines who [CHILD] lives with?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
FA21.2
FA22
FA22
FA21.2
IF FA21.1=YES
Is the agreement that [CHILD] …
Lives with you all of the time,
Lives with [BIO OTHER] all of the
time,
Partially lives with you and partially
lives with [BIO OTHER],
[CHILD] lives with other family
member, or
[CHILD] lives with someone else?
DK
1
2
REF
r
3
4
5
d
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.92
FA22
FA22
IF FA10=N0
Has [CHILD] ever been covered by a court order or legal agreement that
requires [BIO OTHER] to pay child support for [CHILD]?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
D
FA23
FA24
R
FA23
FA22=YES
During the past year, were you supposed to receive any child support
payments for [CHILD]?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FA23.1
FA24
FA23.1
IF FA23=YES
During the past year, have you received these child support payments
regularly so that you could almost always count on getting them?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.93
FA24
FA24
IF FA10=NO
extra IF FA23.1=YES
(IF FA23.1=YES) Not counting the child support you already told me about,
During the past year, did [BIO OTHER] give you [extra] money to help out
with the cost of raising [CHILD]?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
FA27
FA27
IF FA10=NO
him If FD3 =MALE; her IF FD3=FEMALE
In the past year, how often has [BIO OTHER] bought clothes, toys, or
presents for [CHILD] or gave him/her money?
Did [BIO OTHER] do this…
Often
Sometimes, or
Never
DK
REF
1
2
3
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.94
FA27.1
FA27.1
IF FA10=NO
his If FD3 =MALE; her IF FD3=FEMALE
In the past year, how often has [BIO OTHER] paid [CHILD]’s medical
insurance, doctors bills, or for [his/her] medicines?
Did [BIO OTHER] do this…
Often
Sometimes, or
Never
DK
REF
1
2
3
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.95
FA29.1
FA29.1
FA3<>6,7 OR FA1=’’88’, ‘99’
The next question is about [BIO OTHER]’s educational background.
What is the highest grade or year of school that [BIO OTHER] has
completed or what is the highest degrees, diplomas or certificates [BIO
OTHER] has received or the highest grade or year of school that [BIO
OTHER] has completed?
PROBE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS, “NONE”, ASK: Did [BIO OTHER] complete an
elementary, middle or junior high school program?
PROBE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS, “HIGH SCHOOL OR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA”,
ASK: Did [BIO OTHER] receive a high school diploma or a GED program?
PROBE FOR OTHER DEGREES.
NONE
1
UP TO 8TH GRADE /ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
11 AND 12TH GRADE
12TH GRADE BUT NO HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
GED CERTIFICATE
HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
2
VOC/TECH PROGRAM AFTER HIGH SCHOOL
BUT NO VOC/TECH DIPLOMA
VOC/TECH DIPLOMA
SOME COLLEGE BUT NO DEGREE
ASSOCIATE’S DEGREE
BACHELOR’S DEGREE
GRADUATE OR PROFESSIONAL
SCHOOL BUT NO DEGREE
MASTER’S DEGREE (MA, MS)
DOCTORATE DEGREE (PHD, EDD)
PROFESSIONAL DEGREE AFTER BACHELOR’S
DEGREE (MEDICINE/MD; DENTISTRY/DDS;
LAW/JD/LLB; ETC.
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.96
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
2
R
FA29.2
FA29.2
FA3<>6,7 OR FA1=’’88’, ‘99’
Is [BIO OTHER] currently attending school, participating in any training
program or taking any classes? Please include GED classes, vocational or
trade school, job skills training or programs, Job Corps and college
courses?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FA29.3
FA29.3
FA3<>6,7 OR FA1=’’88’, ‘99’ OR FA19=4
he IF FD4.6=2;she IF FD4.6=1
Is [BIO OTHER] currently working at a job or business for pay? This
includes temporary jobs, working in his own business, being in the military,
or any other type of work [he/she] gets paid for.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FA30
FA29.4
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.97
FA29.4
IF FA29.3<>1
he IF FD4.6=2;she IF FD4.6=1
Is [BIO OTHER] currently…
Unemployed,
Looking for work, or
laid off,
Disabled or retired,
Not working,
Or is he/she doing
something else?
(DESCRIBE)
IN PRISON
DK
REF
1
FA30
2
3
4
5
d
r
FA30
IF FA10=YES
On a typical day, do you, [BIO OTHER] and [CHILD] get to eat
together?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
d
REF
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.98
FA30.1
FA30.2
FA30.1
IF FA28=YES
Which meals do you, [BIO OTHER] and [CHILD] eat together on a
typical day?
YES
NO
DK
REF
Breakfast?
1
2
d
r
Lunch?
Dinner?
1
1
2
2
d
d
r
r
FA30.2
FA30.2
IF FA2<> ‘99’,’88’ OR FA3<>6,7
Which of the following statements best describes your relationship
with [BIO OTHER] right now?
We generally get along pretty well,
We don’t get along too well,
We fight a lot and do not get along
well,
We avoid seeing each other
We have no contact with each other,
or
I have no idea where he is.
DK
1
2
3
REF
r
4
5
6
d
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.99
FA31
Section on Father Figure
FA31
IF FA10=NO AND FD4.6=FEMALE
father IF RESP=FD4.6=2; mother IF FD4.6=1
him IF CHILD IS MALE;her IF CHILD IS FEMALE
The next questions are about a father or father figure who is no the
[CHILD]’s biological father. This person may or may not live with the
[CHILD] in the same household.
Is there someone (else) who is like a [father] to [CHILD]? This should be
someone who spends time with [CHILD], takes care of [CHILD] and, in
general does the kind of things a person who is close to a child might do
with him or her?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
FA32
END
FA32
IF FA31=YES
Just so I can refer to him by name, what is his first name?
NAME OF FATHER
FIGURE=[FATHER FIGURE]
DK
REF
STRING
OF 20
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.100
FA34
FA34
IF FA31=YES
How is [FATHER FIGURE] related to [CHILD]?
STEP PARENT
MOTHER’S BOY FRIEND/PARTNER
MATERNAL GRANDPARENT
PATERNAL GRANDPARENT
OTHER RELATIVE (DESCRIBE)
NON RELATIVE (DESCRIBE)
DK
REF
1
2
3
4
5
6
d
r
FA34.1
FA38
FA34.1
IF FA34=1,2
Are [FATHER FIGURE] and you currently married?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
FA36
FA36
IF FA34=1 OR 2
Do you have any children with [FATHER FIGURE]?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.101
FA37
FA38
FA38
FA37
IF FA36=YES
How many children do you have with [FATHER FIGURE]?
NUMBER OF
CHILDREN
DK
REF
FF
FA38
D
R
FA38
IF FA31=YES
For comment on these questions see BIO OTHER section
Do you, [CHILD], and [FATHER FIGURE] currently live together all or most
of the time?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
D
R
FA38.1
FA38.2
FA45
FA38.1
IF FA38=YES
For comment on these questions see BIO OTHER section
Have you, [CHILD], and [FATHER FIGURE] always live together?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.102
FA40
FA39
FA38.2
IF FA38=NO
For comment on these questions see BIO OTHER section
Have you, [CHILD], and [FATHER FIGURE] ever live together?
YES
NO
DK
1
2
D
REF
R
FA39
FA40
FA39
IF FA38.1=NO OR FA38.2=YES
you IF RESP=BIO; MOTHER OF CHILD IF RESP=OTHER FEMALE
For comment on these questions see BIO OTHER section
Since [CHILD] started first grade, about how many years have you,
[CHILD] and [FATHER FIGURE] lived together?
NUMBER OF YEARS
NO
DK
REF
FF
2
D
FA40
OR
FA39
R
FA39
IF FA38.2=YES
For comment on these questions see BIO OTHER section
How old was [CHILD] when you, [CHILD] and [FATHER FIGURE] last lived
together?
AGE OF CHILD
DK
REF
FF
D
R
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.103
FA40
FA40
FA31=YES
The next question is about [FATHER FIGURE]’s educational background.
What is the highest grade or year of school that [FATHER FIGURE] has
completed or what is the highest degrees, diplomas or certificates
[FATHER FIGURE] has received or the highest grade or year of school that
[FATHER FIGURE] has completed?
PROBE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS, “NONE”, ASK: Did [FATHER FIGURE]
complete an elementary, middle or junior high school program?
PROBE: IF RESPONDENT SAYS, “HIGH SCHOOL OR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA”,
ASK: Did [FATHER FIGURE] receive a high school diploma or a GED
program?
PROBE FOR OTHER DEGREES.
NONE
1
UP TO 8TH GRADE /ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE OR
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
11 AND 12TH GRADE
12TH GRADE BUT NO HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
GED CERTIFICATE
HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA
2
VOC/TECH PROGRAM AFTER HIGH SCHOOL
BUT NO VOC/TECH DIPLOMA
VOC/TECH DIPLOMA
SOME COLLEGE BUT NO DEGREE
ASSOCIATE’S DEGREE
BACHELOR’S DEGREE
GRADUATE OR PROFESSIONAL
SCHOOL BUT NO DEGREE
MASTER’S DEGREE (MA, MS)
DOCTORATE DEGREE (PHD, EDD)
PROFESSIONAL DEGREE AFTER BACHELOR’S
DEGREE (MEDICINE/MD; DENTISTRY/DDS;
LAW/JD/LLB; ETC.
DK
REF
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.104
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
2
R
FD42
FA42
FA31=YES
Is [FATHER FIGURE ] currently attending school, participating in any
training program or taking any classes? Please include GED classes,
vocational or trade school, job skills training or programs, Job Corps and
college courses?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FA42.1
FA42.1
FA31=YES
Is [FATHER FIGURE] currently working at a job or business for pay? This
includes temporary jobs, working in his own business, being in the military,
or any other type of work he gets paid for.
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FA43
FA42.2
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.105
FA42.2
IF FA42<>1
he IF FD32=2;she IF FD32=1
Is [FATHER FIGURE] currently…
Unemployed,
Looking for work, or
laid off,
Disabled or retired,
Not working,
Or is he doing
something else?
(DESCRIBE)
IN PRISON
DK
REF
1
FA30
2
3
4
5
d
r
FA43
IF FA38=YES
On a typical day, do you, [FATHER FIGURE] and [CHILD] get to eat
together?
YES
NO
DK
REF
1
2
d
r
FA44
IF FA43=YES
Which meals do you, [FATHER FIGURE] and [CHILD] eat together
on a typical day?
YES
NO
DK
REF
Breakfast?
1
2
d
r
Lunch?
Dinner?
1
1
2
2
d
d
r
r
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.106
FA45
FA45
IF FA31=YES
Which of the following statements best describes your relationship
with [FATHER FIGURE] right now?
We generally get along well,
We don’t get along too well,
We fight a lot and do not get along well,
We avoid seeing each other,
We have no contact with each other, or
I have no idea where he is.
DK
1
2
3
4
5
6
d
REF
r
FA46
FA46
ALL
I have no more questions. Thank you very much for participating
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Maternal Interview, 8/31/2006, p.107
APPENDIX D
TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE
EHS 5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP STUDY
TEACHER QUESTIONNAIRE
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.1
SECTION 1
CHILD’S CLASSROOM
A11.
What grade is the child in?
_______
¨ Not enrolled in a grade
¨ Refused
¨ Don’t know
A2
In which subject(s) do you instruct the child?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
¨ Language Arts
¨ Math
¨ Social Studies
¨ Science
¨ Other (Specify: _________________)
A2.1
Has the child been in your class since the beginning of this school year?
¨ Yes
¨ No (Number of months child was in your class since the beginning of the school year: _______)
A3.
Including the child, what is the number of students you teach in the child’s class?
_________Students
A4.
Including you, how many adults (teachers and aides) are usually in the child’s class?
__________Adults
A9.
In a typical week, how many paid aides usually assist in the child’s class by working directly with
children on instructional tasks?
_______ Number of regular aides
_______ Number of special education aides for whole class
_______ Number of special education aides assigned to one single child
_______ Number of ESL or bilingual education aides
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.2
A10.
What is the highest level of education completed for the paid aide who spends the most time in
the child’s class?
MARK ONLY ONE
¨ Less than high school
¨ High school diploma or GED
¨ Associate’s degree
¨ Bachelor’s degree or above
¨ Don’t know
¨ No paid aides assist in my classroom
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.3
SECTION 2
CHILD CHARACTERISTICS
Please rate the degree the child displays the following characteristics.
G1A
Pays attention well.
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
G1B
Persists in completing tasks.
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
G1C Shows eagerness to learn new things.
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
G1D Works independently.
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
G1F
Keeps belongings organized.
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
H1A
Respects the property rights of others
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.4
H1B
Accepts peers’ ideas for group activities
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
H1C
Responds appropriately to peer pressure
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
H1D
Forms and maintains friendships
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
H1E
Gets along with people who are different
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
H1F
Comforts or helps other children
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
H1G
Is sensitive to feelings of others
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Often
¨ Very often
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.5
Please rate the degree the child displays the following characteristics.
E1A.
Uses free time in an acceptable way
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1B.
Keeps desk clean and neat without being reminded
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1C.
Puts away work materials or other school property
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1D.
Uses time appropriately while waiting for your help with homework or some other task
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1F.
Finishes class assignments within time limits
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1G.
Produces correct schoolwork
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1H.
Follows your directions
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.6
E1I.
Ignores peer distractions when doing class work
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1J.
Attends to your instructions
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
E1K.
Easily makes transition from one classroom activity to another
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.7
Please rate the degree the child displays the following characteristics.
F1A.
Responds appropriately when hit or pushed by other children
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1B.
Receives criticism well
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1C.
Controls temper when arguing with other children
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1D.
Controls temper in conflict situations with adults
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1E.
Responds appropriately to teasing from friends or relatives of his or her own age
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1F.
Compromises in conflict situations by changing own ideas to reach agreement
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1I.
Cooperates with peers without prompting
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
F1J.
Gets along with people who are different
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
th
EHS 5 Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.8
D2A.
Disturbs ongoing activities
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
D2B.
Fidgets or moves too much
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
D2C.
Acts impulsively
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
D2D.
Doesn’t listen to what others say
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
D2E.
Is easily distracted
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
D2F.
Interrupts conversations of others
¨ Never
¨ Sometimes
¨ Very often
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.9
Please rate the degree the child displays the following characteristics.
D1A.
Argues a lot
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1B.
Cruelty, bullying, or meanness to others
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1C.
Defiant, talks back to staff
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1D.
Demands a lot of attention
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1E.
Destroys his/her own things
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1F.
Destroys property belonging to others
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1G.
Disobedient at school
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1H.
Gets in many fights
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.10
D1I.
Physically attacks people
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1J.
Explosive and unpredictable behavior
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1K.
Demands must be met immediately, easily frustrated
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1L.
Screams a lot
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1M.
Stubborn, sullen, or irritable
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1N.
Sudden changes in mood or feelings
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1O. Sulks a lot
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1P.
Suspicious
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.11
D1Q.
Teases a lot
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1R.
Temper tantrums or hot temper
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1S. Threatens people
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
D1T. Unusually loud
¨ Not true
¨ Somewhat or sometimes true
¨ Very true or often true
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.12
SECTION 3
CHILD’S USE OF SPECIAL SERVICES
I6.
Is the child receiving any special education or related services because of Attention
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADD/ADHD)?
Do NOT include going to the nurse’s office to get medication dispensed.
¨ Yes
¨ No
I7.
Has the child received any of the following services this year at school during the school day?
A. Individual tutoring in reading/math.............................. ............ ¨ Yes ¨ No
B. Pull out or “push in” small group program in reading/math ....... ¨ Yes ¨ No
C. Pull out English as a Second Language (ESL)
program (instructional program designed to teach listening,
speaking, reading and writing English language skills) ............ ¨ Yes ¨ No
D. In-class English as a Second Language (ESL) program ......... ¨ Yes ¨ No
E. Learning a language other than English .................................. ¨ Yes ¨ No
F. Gifted and talented program ...................................... ............ ¨ Yes ¨ No
G. Counseling or psychological services...................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
H. Audiology ............................................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
I. Occupational therapy................................................................ ¨ Yes ¨ No
J. Physical therapy ..................................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
K. Health services ....................................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
L. Special transportation.............................................................. ¨ Yes ¨ No
M. Speech or language therapy................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
N. Orientation services ................................................................ ¨ Yes ¨ No
O. Mobility services .................................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
P. Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP), in or out of the classroom .... ¨ Yes ¨ No
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.13
I8.
Has the child participated in any of the following Federally funded Tile I programs or services
offered by the school during this school year?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY.
A. Title I reading/English/language arts
¨Yes, individually
¨Yes, class-wide
¨ No; not offered
B. Title I ESL/Bilingual
¨Yes, individually
¨Yes, class-wide
¨ No; not offered
C. Title I handicapped/special education
¨Yes, individually
¨Yes, class-wide
¨ No; not offered
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.14
SECTION 4
YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CHILD’S PARENTS/GUARDIANS
C1.
During the school year, did the child’s parents/guardians attend a parent/teacher conference to
talk about the child’s progress?
¨ Yes
¨ No
C2.
If you had a problem with the child, how comfortable would you feel talking to his/her
parents/guardians about it?
¨ Not at all
¨ A little
¨ Somewhat
¨ A lot
¨ A great deal
C3.
How often do the child’s parents/guardians ask questions or make suggestions about the child?
¨ Not at all
¨ A little
¨ Somewhat
¨ A lot
¨ A great deal
C4.
How much do you feel the child’s parents/guardian have the same goals for their child that the
school does?
¨ Not at all
¨ A little
¨ Somewhat
¨ A lot
¨ A great deal
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.15
SECTION 5
SCHOOL CHARACTERISTICS
The following questions are about the child’s school.
A2.
Is this a public or private school?
¨ Public GO TO QUESTION A2.1
¨ Private GO TO QUESTION A2.2
A2.1
Is this public school a…
A. Regular public school (do not include a magnet school or school of choice).............. ¨Yes ¨ No
B. School with a magnet program
(e.g. science/math school, foreign language immersion school) ............................... ¨Yes ¨ No
C. School of choice (charter school, open enrollment, non-specialized curriculum) ....... ¨Yes ¨ No
D. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) or tribal school ........................................................... ¨Yes ¨ No
E. Special Education school (primarily serves children with disabilities) ....................... ¨Yes ¨ No
A2.2
Is this private school a…
A. Catholic school ........................................................................................................ ¨Yes ¨ No
B. Private school not accredited by NAIS...................................................................... ¨Yes ¨ No
C. Private school accredited by NAIS ........................................................................... ¨Yes ¨ No
D. Special Education school (primarily serves children with disabilities) ........................ ¨Yes ¨ No
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.16
A3.
Circle the lowest grade taught in this school:
¨ Programs for special needs children
¨ Prekindergarten
¨ Regular kindergarten
¨ 1st
¨ 2nd
¨ 3rd
¨ 4th
¨ 5th
¨ 6th
¨ 7th
¨ 8th
¨ 9th
¨ 10th
¨ 11th
¨ 12th
A3.1.
Circle the highest grade taught in this school:
¨ Programs for special needs children
¨ Prekindergarten
¨ Regular kindergarten
¨ 1st
¨ 2nd
¨ 3rd
¨ 4th
th
¨5
¨ 6th
¨ 7th
¨ 8th
¨ 9th
th
¨ 10
¨ 11th
¨ 12th
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.17
SECTION 6
SCHOOL CLIMATE
Indicate how much you agree or disagree with the following statements about school climate:
J1A.
Parents are actively involved in this school’s programs
¨ Strongly disagree
¨ Disagree
¨ Neither agree nor disagree
¨ Agree
¨ Strongly agree
J1B.
Teacher absenteeism is a problem at this school
¨ Strongly disagree
¨ Disagree
¨ Neither agree nor disagree
¨ Agree
¨ Strongly agree
J1C.
Teacher turnover is a problem at this school
¨ Strongly disagree
¨ Disagree
¨ Neither agree nor disagree
¨ Agree
¨ Strongly agree
J1D.
Child absenteeism is a problem at this school
¨ Strongly disagree
¨ Disagree
¨ Neither agree nor disagree
¨ Agree
¨ Strongly agree
J1E.
Order and discipline are maintained satisfactorily in the building(s)
¨ Strongly disagree
¨ Disagree
¨ Neither agree nor disagree
¨ Agree
¨ Strongly agree
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.18
J1F.
Overcrowding is a problem at this school
¨ Strongly disagree
¨ Disagree
¨ Neither agree nor disagree
¨ Agree
¨ Strongly agree
J2.
Have any of the following types of problems happened during this school year at this school?
A. Children bringing weapons to school ...................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
B. Things being taken directly from children or teachers by force
or threat of force at school or on the way to school...................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
C. Children or teachers being physically attacked ...................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
D. Children involved in physical fights ........................................ ¨ Yes ¨ No
E. Children bringing in or using alcohol at school ........................ ¨ Yes ¨ No
F. Children bringing in or using drugs at school .......................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
G. Vandalism of school property................................................. ¨ Yes ¨ No
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.19
SECTION 7
TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS
The following questions are about you as a teacher.
A4.
How do you classify your main assignment at this school, that is, the activity at which you spend
most of your time during this school year?
¨ Regular classroom teacher
¨ Special education teacher
¨ Itinerant teacher (i.e. your assignment requires you to provide instruction/related services at more than
one school)
¨ Long-term substitute (i.e., your assignment requires that you fill the role of a teacher
on
a long term basis, but you are still considered a substitute)
¨ Teacher aide
¨ Other (Specify: _____________________________)
A5.
Which category best describes the way your class(es) at this school (is/are) organized?
¨ Self-contained class – you teach multiple subjects to the same class of children all or most of the day
¨ Team teaching – you collaborate with one or more teachers in teaching multiple subjects to the same
class of children
¨ Departmentalized instruction –you teach subject matter courses (e.g. language arts, mathematics,
science) to several classes of different children all or most of the day
¨ “Pull-Out” Class – you provide instruction (e.g. special education, reading) to certain students who are
released from their regular classes
K1.
What is the highest level of education you have completed?
MARK ONLY ONE RESPONSE.
¨ High school diploma or GED
¨ Associate’s degree
¨ Bachelor’s degree
¨ At least 1 year of coursework beyond a bachelor’s, but not a graduate degree
¨ Master’s degree
¨ Education specialist or professional diploma based on at least one year of course work
past a Master’s degree level
¨ Doctorate
¨Other (please specify: ___________)
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.20
K2.
Counting this school year, how many years have you been a schoolteacher, including part-time
teaching?
________Years
K3.
What kind of teaching certification do you have?
¨ None
¨ Temporary or emergency certification
¨ Probational, provisional or transitional, certification
¨ Certification for completion of an alternative certification program
¨ Regular certification but less than the highest available
¨ The highest certification available (permanent or long term)
K4.
Are you certified in the following areas?
A. Elementary education ............................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
B. Early childhood education ......................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
C. Secondary education ................................................ ¨ Yes ¨ No
D. Reading specialist certification .................................. ¨ Yes ¨ No
E. Elementary mathematics........................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
F. Middle/junior high school or secondary mathematics . ¨ Yes ¨ No
G. Elementary science .................................................. ¨ Yes ¨ No
H. Middle/junior high school or secondary science......... ¨ Yes ¨ No
I. ESL certification ......................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
J. Special education ...................................................... ¨ Yes ¨ No
K. Other (please specify: _______________) ................ ¨ Yes ¨ No
K5.
What is your gender?
¨ Male
¨ Female
K6.
What is your date of birth?
________/ ________/ ___________
Mo.
Day
Year
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.21
K7.
Are you of Hispanic or Latino origin?
¨ Yes
¨ No
K8.
Which describes your race?
PLEASE MARK ALL THAT APPLY.
¨ American Indian or Alaska Native
¨ Asian
¨ Black or African American
¨ Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
¨ White
¨ Other (please specify: _____________________________)
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.22
SECTION 8
CHILD’S SCHOOL RECORD SECTION
To answer the question in the following section, we would like you to consult the child’s school records
if necessary.
S1.
For this school year, date the child entered this school?
___/___/____
S2
Is the child currently still attending or enrolled in this school?
¨ Yes ¨ No
S3.
(IF NO LONGER IN SCHOOL) Date child left this school?
___/___/____
S4
(IF NO LONGER IN SCHOOL) Reason child left this school?
¨ Transfer
¨ Expulsion
¨ End of School Year
¨ Other Reason. Please Describe __________________
S5
For this school year, record in the table below the total number of absences for the child.
Please also indicate how many of these absences were excused and unexcused absences
Check if school does not maintain these records
¨
Number
Total Number of Absences
Number of Excused
Absences
Number of Unexcused
Absences
S6
For this school year, record in the table below the total number of times this child came late to
school and indicate how many of these times were excused and unexcused.
Check if school does not maintain these records
¨
Number
Total Number of Times Late
for School
Number of Excused Times
Late for School
Number of Unexcused
Times Late for School
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.23
S7
In this school year, how many times was this child suspended from school?
______ Number of Times Suspended
S8
(IF SUSPENDED) How many total days was this child suspended in this school year?
______ Number of Days Suspended
S9.
In this school year did the child receive special education services through an Individualized
Education Program (IEP)?
¨ Yes
¨ No IF NO SKIP TO QUESTION S14.
S10.
What is the child’s primary disability as identified on the child’s IEP?
MARK ONLY ONE
¨ Learning disability
¨ Serious emotional disturbances
¨ Speech or language impairment
¨ Mental retardation
¨ Blind/Visual impairment
¨ Deaf/Hard of hearing
¨ Health impairment
¨ Orthopedic/Physical impairment
¨ Multiple impairments
¨ Deaf/blind
¨ Developmental delay
¨ Autism
¨ Traumatic brain injury
¨ No classification is given
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.24
S11.
Which of the following best describes the IEP goals for the child during this school year?
MARK ALL THAT APPLY
Academics
¨ Reading
¨ Mathematics
¨ Language arts
¨ Science
Speech and Language
¨ Auditory processing
¨ Listening comprehension
¨ Oral expression
¨ Voice/speech articulation
¨ Language pragmatics
Social
¨ Social skills
¨ Behavior goals
Life Skills
¨ Adaptive behavior or self-help skills
¨ Fine motor skills
¨ Gross motor skills
¨ Orientation and mobility
¨ Other (Specify: __________________________)
S12.
Approximately how many hours per week of direct special education and related services (that is,
services provided directly to the child from a teacher or another adult), is the child receiving in
this school year?
_______ Hours per week
S13.
Was the child’s primary placement in this school year in a general education classroom?
¨ Yes
¨ No
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.25
S14. Please provide the child’s test scores for the most recently administered standardized test.
Name of Test such as
the CAT or ITBS
Description of
Assessment or
Subject
Test Score
Type of
Score such
as Raw,
Scaled, or
T-Score
Grade
Level
Date
Administered
1
__/___/____
2
__/___/____
3
__/___/____
4
__/___/____
EHS 5th Grade Follow-Up Study, Appendix D, Teacher Questionnaire, 8/30/2006, p.26
APPENDIX E
OMB HISTORY
40127
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 2006 / Notices
other forms of information technology to
minimize the information collection
burden.
We are, however, requesting an
emergency review of the information
collection referenced below. In
compliance with the requirement of
section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, we have
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) the following
requirements for emergency review. We
are requesting an emergency review
because the collection of this
information is needed before the
expiration of the normal time limits
under OMB’s regulations at 5 CFR part
1320. If these events do not occur
according to the statutorily mandated
timeline, other statutory requirements
will not be able to be met. Section
6001(c) of the Deficit Reduction Act of
2005 (DRA) requires CMS and the Office
of Inspector General to analyze and, if
appropriate, redefine the Average
Manufacturer Price (AMP). We have
determined that this information
collection is needed because we do not
currently collect the necessary data
needed to perform the AMP data
analysis as mandated by the DRA.
1. Type of Information Collection
Request: New collection; Title of
Information Collection: Voluntary
Sample Average Manufacturer Price
(AMP) Collection; Use: Section 1927 of
the Social Security Act requires each
participating drug manufacturer to
report quarterly product and pricing
information to CMS. The DRA modified
parts of Section 1927 to require that
AMP be analyzed and redefined; Form
Number: CMS–10205 (OMB#: 0938NEW); Frequency: Reporting—As
needed; Affected Public: Business or
other for-profit; Number of
Respondents: 550; Total Annual
Responses: 550; Total Annual Hours:
11,000.
CMS is requesting OMB review and
approval of this collection by July 31,
2006, with a 180-day approval period.
Written comments and recommendation
will be considered from the public if
received by the individuals designated
below by July 29, 2006.
To obtain copies of the supporting
statement and any related forms for the
proposed paperwork collections
referenced above, access CMS’ Web Site
address at http://www.cms.hhs.gov/
regulations/pra or E-mail your request,
including your address, phone number,
OMB number, and CMS document
identifier, to Paperwork@cms.hhs.gov,
or call the Reports Clearance Office on
(410) 786–1326.
Interested persons are invited to send
comments regarding the burden or any
other aspect of these collections of
information requirements. However, as
noted above, comments on these
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements must be
mailed and/or faxed to the designees
referenced below by July 29, 2006:
CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and
Regulatory Affairs, Division of
Regulations Development—A, Attn:
Melissa Musotto (CMS–10205), Room
C4–26–05, 7500 Security Boulevard,
Baltimore, MD 21244–1850
and,
OMB Human Resources and Housing
Branch, Attention: Katherine Astrich,
New Executive Office Building, Room
10235, Washington, DC 20503. Fax
Number: (202) 395–6974.
Dated: July 10, 2006.
Michelle Shortt,
Director, Regulations Development Group,
Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory
Affairs.
[FR Doc. 06–6191 Filed 7–10–06; 1:18 pm]
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
Proposed Information Collection
Activity; Comment Request
Proposed Projects
Title: Early Head Start Research and
Evaluation Project: 5th Grade FollowUp.
OMB No.: 0970–0143.
Description: The Administration for
Children and Families (ACF) within the
Department of Health and Human
Services (HHS) is requesting comments
on plans to collect 5th-grade follow-up
data on children recruited into the Early
Head Start Research and Evaluation
study. This study is being conducted to
assess children and families when the
children in the study will be 5th graders
or attending the 6th year of their formal
schooling. Because of the way children
and families were initially recruited for
the study, it will take three years to
collect 5th-grade data from the full
sample of children. About 30 percent of
the sample will be 5th graders in spring
2007, 50 percent in spring 2008, and 20
percent in spring 2009. Data will be
collected on a sample of approximately
1,900 children and families across all 17
of the Early Head Start research sites.
Data collection will include a child
assessment and a child interview, an
interview with the child’s primary
caregiver (usually the child’s mother),
videotaping of mother-child interactions
and a set of home observations, and a
questionnaire to be completed by the
child’s 5th-grade teacher.
This data collection is necessitated by
the mandates of the 1998
reauthorization of Head Start (Head
Start Act, as amended, October 27, 1998,
Section 649(d) and (e)).
Respondents: Individuals or
households.
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES
Number of
respondents
Instrument
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Year 1 (2007):
Parent Interview ........................................................................................
Child Assessment .....................................................................................
Child Interview ..........................................................................................
Mother-Child Interaction ...........................................................................
Teacher Questionnaire .............................................................................
Year 1 Total .......................................................................................
Year 2 (2008):
Parent Interview ........................................................................................
Child Assessment .....................................................................................
Child Interview ..........................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Jul 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Number of
responses per
respondent
Average
burden hours
per response
Total burden
hours
570
570
570
1,140
570
1
1
1
1
1
1.00
1.16
0.25
0.25
0.50
570
661
143
285
285
3,420
........................
........................
1,944
950
950
950
1
1
1
1.00
1.16
0.25
950
1,102
238
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
40128
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 135 / Friday, July 14, 2006 / Notices
ANNUAL BURDEN ESTIMATES—Continued
Average
burden hours
per response
Total burden
hours
Mother-Child Interaction ...........................................................................
Teacher Questionnaire .............................................................................
1,900
950
1
1
0.25
0.50
475
475
Year 2 Total .......................................................................................
Year 3 (2009):
Parent Interview ........................................................................................
Child Assessment .....................................................................................
Child Interview ..........................................................................................
Mother-Child Interaction ...........................................................................
Teacher Questionnaire .............................................................................
5,700
........................
........................
3,240
380
380
380
760
380
1
1
1
1
1
1.00
1.16
0.25
0.25
0.50
380
441
95
190
190
Year 3 Total .......................................................................................
2,280
........................
........................
1,296
Estimated Total Burden Hours: 6,480.
In compliance with the requirements
of Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
Administration for Children and
Families is soliciting public comment
on the specific aspects of the
information collection described above.
Copies of the proposed collection of
information can be obtained and
comments may be forwarded by writing
to the Administration for Children and
Families, Office of Administration,
Office of Information Services, 370
L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington,
DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance
Officer. E-mail address:
infocollection@acf.hhs.gov. All requests
should be identified by the title of the
information collection.
The Department specifically requests
comments on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency, including
whether the information shall have
practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information; (c)
the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (d)
ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on
respondents, including through the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to
comments and suggestions submitted
within 60 days of this publication.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Number of
responses per
respondent
Number of
respondents
Instrument
Dated: July 10, 2006.
Robert Sargis,
Reports Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 06–6227 Filed 7–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184–01–M
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:44 Jul 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and
Families
Privacy Act of 1974, as Amended;
Computer Matching Program
ACF, HHS.
Notice of a computer matching
program.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: In compliance with the
Privacy Act of 1974, as amended by
Pub. L. 100–503, the Computer
Matching and Privacy Protection Act of
1988, we are publishing a notice of a
computer matching program. The
purpose of this computer match is to
identify specific individuals who are
receiving benefits from the VA and also
receiving payments pursuant to various
benefit programs administered by both
HHS and Department of Agriculture.
ACF will facilitate this program on
behalf of the State Public Assistance
Agencies (SPAAs) that participate in the
Public Assistance Reporting Information
System (PARIS) for verification of
continued eligibility for public
assistance. The match will utilize
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
records and SPAA records.
DATES: ACF will file a report of the
subject matching program with the
Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs of the Senate and
the Committee on Government Reform
of the House of Representatives, and the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs within the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB). The dates for the
matching program will be effective as
indicated below.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
comment on this notice by writing to
the Director, Office of Financial
Services, Office of Administration, 370
L’Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington,
DC 20047. All comments received will
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
be available for public inspection at this
address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Director, Office of Financial Services,
Office of Administration, 370 L’Enfant
Promenade, SW., Washington, DC
20047. Telephone Number (202) 401–
7237.
Pub. L.
100–503, the Computer Matching and
Privacy Protection Act of 1988,
amended the Privacy Act (5 U.S.C. 552a)
by adding certain protections for
individuals applying for and receiving
federal benefits. The law regulates the
use of computer matching by federal
agencies when records in a system of
records are matched with other federal,
state and local government records.
Federal agencies which provide or
receive records in computer matching
programs must:
1. Negotiate written agreements with
source agencies;
2. Provide notification to applicants
and beneficiaries that their records are
subject to matching;
3. Verify match findings before
reducing, suspending, or terminating an
individual’s benefits or payments;
4. Furnish detailed reports to
Congress and OMB; and,
5. Establish a Data Integrity Board that
must approve matching agreements.
This computer matching program
meets the requirements of Pub. L. 100–
503.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: June 21, 2006.
Curtis L. Coy,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Administration, ACF.
Notice of Computer Matching Program
A. Participating Agencies
VA and the SPAAs.
B. Purpose of the Match
To identify specific individuals who
are receiving benefits from VA and also
E:\FR\FM\14JYN1.SGM
14JYN1
[Federal Register: August 18, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 47814]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18au06-98]
----------------------------------------------------------------------DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Administration for Children and Families
Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request
Title: Early Head Start Research and Evaluation Project: 5th-Grade
follow-Up.
OMB No.: 0970-0143.
Description: The Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is requesting
comments on plans to collect 5th-grade follow-up data on children
recruited into the Early Head Start Research and Evaluation study. This
study is being conducted to assess children and families when the
children in the study will be 5th graders or attending the 6th year of
their formal schooling. Because of the way children and families were
initially recruited for the study, it will take three years to collect
5th-grade data from the full sample of children. About 30 percent of
the sample will be 5th graders in spring 2007, 50 percent in spring
2008, and 20 percent in spring 2009. Data will be collected on a sample
of approximately 1,900 children and families across all 17 of the Early
Head Start research sites. Data collection will include a child
assessment and a child interview, an interview with the child's primary
caregiver (usually the child's mother), videotaping of mother-child
interactions and a set of home observations, and a questionnaire to be
completed by the child's 5th-grade teacher.
This data collection is necessitated by the mandates of the 1998
reauthorization of Head Start (Head Start Act, as amended, October 27,
1998, Section 649 (d) and (e)).
Respondents: Individuals or households.
Annual Burden Estimates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Number of
Average
Number of
responses per
burden hours
Total burden
respondents
respondent
per response
hours
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Year 1 (2007):
Parent Interview............................
570
1
1.00
570
Child Assessment............................
570
1
1.16
661
Child Interview.............................
570
1
0.25
143
Mother-Child Interaction....................
1,140
1
0.25
285
Teacher Questionnaire.......................
570
1
0.50
285
--------------------------------------------------------------Year 1 Total............................
3,420 .............. ..............
1,944
Year 2 (2008):
Parent Interview............................
950
1
1.00
950
Child Assessment............................
950
1
1.16
1,102
Child Interview.............................
950
1
0.25
238
Mother-Child Interaction....................
1,900
1
0.25
475
Teacher Questionnaire.......................
950
1
0.50
475
--------------------------------------------------------------Year 2 Total............................
5,700 .............. ..............
3,240
Year 3 (2009)
Parent Interview............................
380
1
1.00
380
Child Assessment............................
380
1
1.16
441
Child Interview.............................
380
1
0.25
95
Mother-Child Interaction....................
760
1
0.25
190
Teacher Questionnaire.......................
380
1
0.50
190
--------------------------------------------------------------Year 3 Total............................
2,280 .............. ..............
1,296
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Instrument
Estimated Total Burden Hours: 6,480.
Additional Information: Copies of the proposed collection may be
obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families,
Office of Administration, Office of Information Services, 370 L'Enfant
Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACF Reports Clearance
Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the
information collection. E-mail address: infocollection@acf.hhs.gov.
OMB Comment: OMB is required to make a decision concerning the
collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of
this document in the Federal Register. Therefore, a comment is best
assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed
information collection should be sent directly to the following: Office
of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reducing Project, 725 17th Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20503, attn: Desk Officer for ACF, e-mail address:
mailto:Katherine_T._Astrich@omb.eop.gov
Katherine_T._Astrich@omb.eop.gov.
Dated: August 14, 2006.
Robert Sargis,
Reports Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 06-7014 Filed 8-17-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-M
APPENDIX F
LETTERS AND CONSENT FORMS
Dear <[NAME OF PARENT]>:
[LOCAL UNIVERSITY] and Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. invite you and your
child,<[NAME OF CHILD]>, to participate in the 5th-Grade Early Head Start Follow-Up study.
This study is part of the Early Head Start Study that <[NAME OF CHILD]> and <[his/her]>
family have been a part of for many years. We appreciate the assistance you already have
provided for this study and look forward to talking with you and <[NAME OF CHILD]> again in
the near future.
When <[NAME OF CHILD]> is in 5th grade, or in <[his/her]> sixth year of school, a
member of our research team will contact you to schedule a visit at a time convenient for both
you and <[NAME OF CHILD]>. As in the past, we will ask the child to participate in a set of
activities, interview the child’s mother, and videotape the mother and child.
To help plan for this follow-up, it is important that we have your current address and
telephone number. We also would like to verify when <[NAME OF CHILD]> started
kindergarten, and in which grade <[he/she]> is in now.
Please complete the enclosed form and return it in the postage-paid envelope as
soon as possible. Your information will be kept strictly confidential, and we will use it only to
contact you for the study.
If you have any questions, please contact us at XXX-XXX-XXXX. You can also send us
an e-mail at XXX@XXX.com with this information.
Sincerely,
5th-Grade Early Head Start Follow-Up Study Information Sheet
1. Child’s Name: <[NAME OF CHILD]>
If this is not correct, please write the correct name: ____________________________
2. Child’s Current Grade in School: <[GRADE]>
If this is not correct, please write the correct grade __________
3. Number of years Child has attended school since kindergarten. Please include the
kindergarten year and the current school year in your count.
Number of years Child has attended school__________
4. Parent/Guardian Name: <[PARENT NAME]>
If this is not correct, please write the correct name: _______________________
5. Address: <[ADDRESS]>
If this is not correct, please write the correct address below:
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
___________________________________________
6. Telephone number(s) where you can be reached: <[PHONE]>
If this is not correct, please write the correct number(s) (including cell phone numbers)
where you can be reached. Please include the area code with the seven-digit number:
(_________)_________________
(_________)_________________
(_________)_________________
OMB Control No:
Expiration Date:
5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP OF THE EARLY HEAD START STUDY
PARENT CONSENT FORM
WHAT THE STUDY IS ABOUT
The 5th Grade Follow-up Study wants to learn how parents and children who earlier participated in the Early
Head Start Study are doing now that the children are in fifth grade or in the sixth year of their formal
education. You and your child are invited to be part of this study because your child was a participant in the
Early Head Start Study.
The 5th Grade Follow-up Study is conducted by a research team from
and Mathematica Policy Research, Inc in Princeton NJ for the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. About 2,700 children and their parents are asked to be in the study.
WHAT IS EXPECTED OF YOU IF YOU DECIDE TO PARTICIPATE
If you decide to participate in this study, a member of the research team will ask you some questions about
yourself, how things have gone for you, and about your relationship with your child. The interview will take
about 55 minutes to complete.
If you agree for your child to be in the study, your child will also be asked to sign an agreement to
participate. You will be asked to sign this agreement as well. We will ask your child questions about him or
herself. We will also do some activities with your child to see how he or she is growing up. For your child to
complete the interview and the activities it will take about 85 minutes.
In addition, we will ask you and your child to do an activity together to see how the two of you work on a
task. To do this activity it will take about 15 minutes. We will ask you to sign a separate permission form to
videotape this activity.
All interviews and activities will be done in your child’s home.
As part of the study, we will ask your permission to contact one of the child’s teachers. If the teacher
agrees to participate in the study, this person will be asked to provide information about him or herself and
asked questions about how your child is doing in school, including questions about attendance and test
scores. We will ask you to sign a separate permission form for us to contact the child’s teacher.
THE INFORMATION YOU PROVIDE WILL BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL
Everything you tell the research team will be kept strictly confidential and will not be shared with anybody
else. The research team will not share any information you share with us with your child’s teacher, and we
will not share with you the information that the teacher will give us. Only the research team will be able to
see the information you give them and nothing will ever be said about you or your child as individuals.
Information about you will be combined with information about everybody else in the study, so the
researchers can say things like “half of the families in the study have more than one child.” However, if a
member of the research team observes child abuse, it must be reported as required by law.
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Page 1
YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THE STUDY IS VOLUNTARY
Your participation in the study is completely voluntary. You and your child only have to participate in the
study if you want to. If you decide to be in the study, you can withdraw at any time.
RISKS AND BENEFITS OF PARTICIPATING IN THE STUDY?
There are no known risks of participating in this study except for the potential discomfort of answering
sensitive questions or participating in activities. Your participation in the study may provide information that
could help other children and their families in the future.
YOU WILL BE COMPENSATED FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE STUDY
You will receive $30 for participating in the study. Your child will also receive $10 for participating in the
activities.
IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STUDY
If you have questions about the study or your rights as a research volunteer, you can call toll-free at xxxxx.
If you agree to participate, please sign this form.
Name of Participant (Printed)
Signature of Participant
Date
Name of Person Administering this Form (Printed)
Signature of Person Administering this Form
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Date
Page 2
600 Maryland Ave. S.W., Suite 550
Washington, DC 20024-2512
Telephone (202) 484-9220
Fax (202) 863-1763
www.mathematica-mpr.com
July 17, 2006
Dear :
We are contacting you again to invite you and to participate in the 5 th Grade
Early Head Start Follow-up Study. Now that is a little older, we would like
to learn how things have gone for you and since we talked to you the last
time. The follow-up study is conducted by and
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Like before, a member of the research team will contact you soon to set up an appointment with
you and . This time, we will ask you as well as the child to participate in an
interview. We will also do some activities with and ask you to do an activity
together that we will videotape. You will receive $30 for participating and
will receive $10 for participating as well.
We are very much looking forward to talking with you and again and
learning about all the important things that have been happening in your lives.
If you have any questions or if your telephone number or address has changed, please contact us at
XXX-XXX-XXXX. It is very important for the success of the study to let us know where you are.
You can also send us an e-mail with this information if you like. Our email address is
XXX@XXX.com.
Sincerely,
An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer
OMB Control No:
Expiration Date:
5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP OF THE EARLY HEAD START STUDY
PARENT CONSENT TO BE VIDEOTAPED
As part of the 5th Grade Follow-up of the Early Head Start study, the research team will use a video camera to
record you and your child working on a task together.
The activities filmed by the video camera are strictly confidential. The videotapes may be edited and copies
will be made for research purposes only.
Even though images of you and your child, your voices, and your first names will be on the videotape,
identifying information such as your full names and address will not be given to anyone unless it is required by
law. The research staff who will see the videotape will sign a promise of confidentiality that says that they
agree with these rules.
Your participation in this study and the videotaping is voluntary. You may stop participating in the videotaped
activities at any time. You will not receive any additional compensation for being videotaped.
Please sign this form if you agree to allow the voices and images of yourself and your child to be
videotaped in your child’s home and the videotapes to be used for research purposes only.
Name of Participant (Printed)
Signature of Participant
Date
Name of Person Administering this Form (Printed)
Signature of Person Administering this Form
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Date
Page 1
5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP OF THE EARLY HEAD START STUDY
PARENT CONSENT FOR VIDEO TO BE USED FOR ADDITIONAL
RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL USES
By signing this additional form, you will give permission for the videotape to be reproduced and shown for
educational purposes at conferences and workshops, and to be used for training researchers and
interviewers with the understanding that no identifying information will be used. You will not receive any
additional compensation for giving this permission.
Name of Participant (Printed)
Signature of Participant
Date
Name of Person Administering this Form (Printed)
Signature of Person Administering this Form
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Date
Page 2
OMB Control No:
Expiration Date:
5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP OF THE EARLY HEAD START STUDY
CHILD ASSENT FORM
WHAT IS THE STUDY ABOUT?
You are asked to be in Early Head Start 5th Grade Follow-up Study because we are trying to
learn more about how children your age and their parents are doing. The study might find out
things that will help children like you with growing up and parents with raising children. We are
inviting you to be in the study because you have been part of another research study called the
Early Head Start Study before. We explained the study to your parent and your parent said that
we could ask you if you want to be in it.
IF YOU DECIDE TO BE IN THE STUDY WHAT WILL HAPPEN?
If you decide to be in this study, we will ask you some questions about yourself. We will also do
some activities with you to see how you are growing up. It will take about 30 minutes for you to
complete the interview and the activities. We will also ask you to do an activity together with
your parent to see how the two of you work on a task. We will film this activity on a video
camera. The filming will take about 15 minutes. Your teacher will also be asked some questions
about how you are doing in school.
DO YOU HAVE TO BE IN THE STUDY?
You do not have to be in the study. No one will be upset if you don’t want to do this study. If
you don’t want to be in this study, you just have to tell us. It's up to you. You can also take
more time to think about being in the study.
WHO WILL SEE THE INFORMATION ABOUT YOU?
The information collected about you during this study will be kept safely locked up. Nobody will
be able to know or look at it except the people doing the research. So, what you tell us will not
be given to your parents or your teachers.
.
WILL ANY PART OF THE STUDY MAKE ME FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE?
It is possible that some of the questions or activities may make you feel bad. You can let us
know this, and it is ok to stop answering the questions or doing the activity at any time.
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Page 1
WILL YOU BE COMPENSATED FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE STUDY?
You will receive $10 for participating in the study.
WHAT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE STUDY?
You can ask any questions that you have about the study. If you have a question later that you
didn’t think of now, you can call [insert study telephone number]
If you agree to participate, please sign this form.
Name of Child (Printed)
Signature of Child
Date
Name of Parent (Printed)
Signature of Parent
Date
Name of Person Administering this Form (Printed)
Signature of Person Administering this Form
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Date
Page 2
OMB Control No:
Expiration Date:
5TH GRADE FOLLOW-UP OF THE EARLY HEAD START STUDY
PERMISSION TO CONTACT TEACHER CONSENT FORM
My child and I have voluntarily agreed to be in a research study that wants to learn how
parents and children who participated in the Early Head Start Study are doing now that the
children are in fifth grade or in their sixth year of their formal education. The study also wants
to learn from the child’s teacher how the child is doing in school.
The study is conducted by a research team from <LOCAL RESEARCH INSTITUTION> and
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. in Princeton NJ for the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services. About 2,700 children and their parents all over the country have been asked
to participate in the study.
I have agreed for the study team to collect information on how my child is doing in school.
Therefore, I give the research team permission to contact my child’s teacher to answer
questions about how my child is doing in school, including questions about attendance and test
scores.
I understand that the information my child’s teacher will give to the research team will be kept
strictly confidential and will not be shared with me, my child or anybody else.
I also give permission for my child’s teacher to call <LOCAL RESEARCH INSTITUTION> at
xxxxx or Mathematica Policy Research at xxxxx if my child’s teacher has any questions about
the study or my being in the study.
Please sign this form if you agree to allow the research team to contact the child’s teacher.
__________________________________________
__________________
Print Parent’s Name
Date
_________________________________________
Print Child’s Name
___________________
Date
______________________________________________ _____________________
Name of Person Administering this Form
Date
_________________________________________ ____________________
Signature of Person Administering this Form
Date
Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
(7-1-06)
Page 1
APPENDIX G
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT
CONFIDENTIALITY PLEDGE
I understand that the names, and any other identifying facts or information, of individuals,
businesses, organizations, and families participating in projects conducted by Mathematica, Inc. or its
subsidiaries are confidential information. I agree that I will not reveal such confidential information,
regardless of how or where I acquired it, to any person unless such person has been authorized by the
cognizant Mathematica Project Director or the Mathematica Project Manager to have access to the
information.
I further understand that the unauthorized access to, use, or disclosure of any confidential
information is a breach of the terms of my employment, or my consultant agreement with Mathematica
and may subject me to court action by any interested party or to other sanctions by Mathematica. I
acknowledge that this agreement shall continue to bind me even after the project(s) is (are) completed
and/or even though my employment or my consultant agreement with Mathematica has terminated.
In addition, in the course of my employment I may have access to personal information, electronic
and otherwise, about fellow employees. I agree that I will treat that information as having the highest
confidentiality, and not communicate it to fellow employees or others outside Mathematica. Final
determination of whether or not there is a business purpose requiring that I access a fellow employees.
records will be made in consultation with the Director of Human Resources. Failure to uphold this
standard is a breach of trust and may subject me to disciplinary action, including termination of
employment.
Other than in the course of my authorized employment or my consultant agreement, I further agree
that I will not use, nor facilitate the use by any third party, in any way any information deemed
confidential by the terms of any contract or other written agreement between Mathematica and any other
organization, except by written authorization by both parties. It is my understanding that Mathematica
and the contracting organization(s) have the exclusive right to all information acquired or developed
under such a contract or other written agreement. I acknowledge that I acquire no right, title, or interest in
and to any data or information to which I have access by reason of my employment or my consultant
agreement and that I may not remove such data from my assigned work location without prior
authorization.
I agree to promptly notify the cognizant Mathematica Project Director or Project Manager, the
Survey Operations Center Manager or Supervisor for survey work, and the Mathematica Security Officer
of any unauthorized disclosure, use, or alteration of confidential information that I observe.
Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent divulgence of information to any court or governmental
agency, provided such divulgence is required by law. However, if I am subpoenaed, or if I have reason to
believe that I may be called upon to make such divulgence, I agree to notify the President of Mathematica
promptly in writing and, upon his request, to cooperate in all lawful efforts to resist such divulgence.
Name:
Signature:
Date:
</pre><Table class="table"><tr><Td>File Type</td><td>application/pdf</td></tr><tr><Td>File Title</td><td>EHS Grade 5-OMB package main text-FINAL_0083106.doc</td></tr><tr><Td>Author</td><td>APitt</td></tr><tr><Td>File Modified</td><td>2006-09-06</td></tr><tr><Td>File Created</td><td>2006-08-30</td></tr></table></div></div></div><hr>
© 2024 OMB.report | <a href="/privacy_policy.php" rel="nofollow">Privacy Policy</a>
<hr >
</div>
</body>
<script defer async src="/js/instant.page.3.0.0.js" type="module" data-cfasync="false"></script>
</html>