Tests carried out on young children who took part in a pilot pre-school project have shown no difference in their cognitive and scholastic performance in comparison to children who did not take part in the project.
The Minister for Education, Mr Martin, told the Dail last week that the forthcoming White Paper on Early Childhood Education would take into account the evaluation report on the Early Start project, which was introduced as a pilot project in 40 schools in disadvantaged areas in 1994-96.
The project was largely funded by the EU because of Ireland's position as the member-state with the lowest provision of institutional education for children of four and under. Each Early Start class consisted of 15 children cared for by both a teacher and a childcare worker.
The project's evaluation report included the results of tests to assess children's performance in areas such as language skills, motor development, reading vocabulary and comprehension, mathematical concepts and problem-solving. Mr Martin said: "There were no significant differences between the cognitive attainment of the experimental and control groups on the tests."
The evaluation report expressed particular surprise that, given the Early Start project's emphasis on language development, "its effects were not reflected in participants' test performance." However, it did note that the language performance of the second cohort of Early Start pupils was "significantly better" than that of the first cohort.
However, teachers' perceptions of Early Start pupils when they had moved into the first year of primary school were more positive than the test results. Many of the teachers interviewed thought that Early Start pupils' cognitive ability, social and emotional maturity, adaptability to classroom procedures, ability to concentrate and creativity were superior to other young pupils.
The evaluation report suggested a number of reasons Early Start pupils had not done better in the tests. Compared with the earlier Rutland Street project in one school in Dublin, there was less emphasis on cognitive development; activities were less standardised; and the training of the teachers was less intensive.
The report also expressed concern that educational and childcare programmes had grown independently of each other and there had been only limited communication between the two disciplines. It suggested a clearer definition of the roles of teachers and childcare workers in classroom situations. The balance in Early Start between the emphasis on scholastic skills by the former and the stress on personal, social and creative development by the latter was not always satisfactory.
It also expressed concern at the lack of opportunity for teachers to visit other Early Start classrooms. It suggested that the Department officials in charge of the programme be supported by a small team of experts.