Evaluation 2008 Banner

Return to search form  

Contact emails are provided for one-to-one contact only and may not be used for mass emailing or group solicitations.

Session Title: Economics Focused Meta-Analysis of Early Childhood Services and of Class Size Reduction Initiatives
Multipaper Session 563 to be held in Centennial Section H on Friday, Nov 7, 10:55 AM to 11:40 AM
Sponsored by the Costs, Effectiveness, Benefits, and Economics TIG
Chair(s):
Brian Yates,  American University,  brian.yates@mac.com
Meta-Analysis of Economic Studies of Early Childhood Services
Presenter(s):
Sarah Heinemeier,  Compass Consulting Group LLC,  sarahhei@mindspring.com
Abstract: This paper will present condensed findings from a meta-analysis of economic studies of services focused on very young children and their families. Many states now have initiatives to support young children and their families. These initiatives range from direct subsidies in support of child care costs to family support and outreach programs to health services. In addition, many states also fund or support some form of prekindergarten programming for children. This presentation will present the findings of a meta-analysis of economic studies, with data drawn from existing studies of these varied programs and services. The methodology used to conduct the analysis also will be presented as will the implications of this type of analysis for evaluation studies. Finally, this presentation will address how to apply such an analysis to an evaluation design or question.
The Cost-Effectiveness of Class Size Reduction
Presenter(s):
Stuart Yeh,  University of Minnesota,  yehxx008@umn.edu
Abstract: The cost-effectiveness of class size reduction (CSR) was compared with the cost-effectiveness of rapid assessment, a promising alternative for raising student achievement. Drawing upon existing meta-analyses of the effects of student-teacher ratio, evaluations of CSR in Tennessee, California, and Wisconsin, and RAND cost estimates, CSR was found to be 124 times less cost effective than the implementation of systems that rapidly assess student progress in math and reading two to five times per week. Analysis of the results from California and Wisconsin suggest that the relative effectiveness of rapid assessment may be substantially underestimated. Further research regarding class size reduction is unlikely to be fruitful, and attention should be turned to rapid assessment and other more promising alternatives.

 Return to Evaluation 2008

Add to Custom Program