alterable predictors of child well-being in the chicago longitudinal study

Children and Youth Services Review26 (2004) 1–14

0190-7409/04/$ - see front matter� 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2003.11.005

Alterable predictors of child well-being in theChicago longitudinal study

Arthur J. Reynolds, Suh-Ruu OuWaisman Center and School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin-Madison,

1500 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705, USA

Abstract

The Chicago Longitudinal Study investigates the life course development of 1539 children(93% African American and 7% Hispanic) who were born in 1979–1980, grew up in thehighest-poverty neighborhoods in Chicago, and attended early childhood intervention pro-grams beginning in preschool. The goals of the study are to determine the effects ofparticipation in the Child–Parent Center Program, document patterns of child and familywell-being over time and identify child, family, school and community factors that canpromote children’s well being. We describe major intervention findings of the study andsummarize the contributions of a variety of personal, family, and school experiences inpromoting long-term educational and social success.� 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Child development; Child well-being; Poverty; Education; Longitudinal research

1. Introduction

In this special issue, the impact of early childhood, family support, and school-related experiences on later well being is investigated for over 1500 inner-cityminority youth in the Chicago Longitudinal Study. The contributions of earlychildhood intervention, parental involvement, child maltreatment, child and familyrisk factors and school mobility to educational attainment, school competence andjuvenile delinquency are emphasized. These alterable, policy-relevant predictors ofwell-being were measured in the first decade of life and can be a focus of a widevariety of preventive interventions and social programs. Exploration of the policy-relevant factors that promote well-being in urban settings is timely given the

E-mail address: [email protected](A.J. Reynolds).

2 A.J. Reynolds, S. Ou / Children and Youth Services Review 26 (2004) 1–14

increasing evidence that targeted investments in children and families can preventproblem behavior and promote healthy development(U.S. Department of Healthand Human Services, 2001; Committee for Economic Development, 2002; Romer,2003).The economic and social costs of not adequately addressing the needs of children

at risk are high. The National Science and Technology Council(1997) estimatedthat the annual cost to the nation of school dropout was $250 billion in lostproductivity, tax revenues, and health comprising behaviors. Similarly, the annualcost of crime in the United States is estimated at $100 billion in treatment andadministration as well as tangible and intangible costs to crime victims(Cohen,1998). Annual state and federal expenditures for child welfare services includingsubstitute care and school remedial services including special education and graderetention total in excess of $50 billion(see Courtney, 1998; Teague, Thorne, Luckey& Hoerger, 1998). Consequently, the identification of investment strategies andinterventions that reduce the societal costs of later treatment services is greatlyneeded(McLoyd, 1998; Weissberg & Greenberg, 1998). A major goal of the articlesin this special issue is to identify child and family experiences in the first decadeof life that can be a basis for the utilization of effective interventions and policiesfor children and youth who are at risk of poor outcomes because of economicdisadvantage and associated factors.

2. Chicago Longitudinal Study

The Chicago Longitudinal Study(CLS, 1999; Reynolds, 1999, 2000) is aninvestigation of the educational and social development of a same-age cohort 1539African American(93%) and Hispanic(7%) children who grew up in high-povertyneighborhoods in central-city Chicago and graduated from government-fundedkindergarten programs in 1985–1986. Born between 1979 and 1980, children inthis on-going 18-year study participated in the Child–Parent Center Program, acomprehensive school-based early childhood intervention(ns989) or participatedin the comparison group from randomly selected schools in high poverty neighbor-hoods(ns550). The comparison group enrolled in kindergarten programs, whichwas the treatment as usual. Together, the sample well represents young childrenfrom low-income families in central Chicago and most likely economically disad-vantaged children in many other urban contexts. Because they face social-environ-mental disadvantages, such as neighborhood poverty, family low-income status, andother economic and educational hardships, study children were at risk of schoolfailure and social difficulties.The CLS is guided by four major goals:

1. To document patterns of school performance and social competence throughoutthe school-age years, including their school achievement and attitudes, academicprogress, and psychosocial development.

2. To evaluate the effects of the Child–Parent Center Program on child and youthdevelopment. Children and families had the opportunity to participate in this

3A.J. Reynolds, S. Ou / Children and Youth Services Review 26 (2004) 1–14

unique Head Start-type early childhood intervention from ages 3 to 9(preschoolto third grade).

3. To identify and better understand the educational and psychosocial pathwaysthrough which the effects of early childhood experiences are manifested, andthrough which scholastic and social development proceeds.

4. To investigate the contributions to children’s educational and social well-being avariety of personal, family, school and community factors, especially those thatcan be altered by program or policy interventions to prevent learning difficultiesand promote healthy development.The first two goals have been addressed in many previous studies. For instance,

length of participation in the Child–Parent Center(CPC) program has been foundto be significantly associated with higher levels of school achievement, withenhanced parent involvement in children’s education, and with lower rates of graderetention and special education, lower rates of early school dropout, and with lowerrates of delinquent behavior(Reynolds & Temple, 1995, 1998; Reynolds, 2000;Temple, Reynolds, & Miedel, 2000). Children’s patterns of school and socialadjustment over time(Reynolds & Bezruczko, 1993; Reynolds & Gill, 1994;Reynolds, 2000; Reynolds, Temple, Robertson & Mann, 2001) as well as severalmethodological contributions(Reynolds & Temple, 1995; Reynolds, 1991, 1998a,b;Reynolds, Temple, Robertson and Mann, 2002) also have been reported. Examplesof studies addressing goals 3 and 4 are reported in a special issue of the Journal ofSchool Psychology(Reynolds, 1999) and elsewhere(Ou, 2003; Reynolds, Ou &Topitzes, 2003).Three major attributes of the Chicago Longitudinal Study make it appropriate to

address these goals. First, the CLS is one of the most extensive and comprehensivestudies ever of a low-income, urban sample. Data have been collected from birth toage 21 from a variety of sources, such as teacher surveys, child surveys andinterviews, parent surveys and interviews, school administrative records, standardizedtests, classroom observations, child welfare agencies and juvenile courts, collegesand universities, and public aid records. Therefore, the influence of variousindividual, family, and school-related factors can be investigated. A second uniquefeature of the CLS is that factors and experiences that are alterable by program orpolicy intervention both within and outside of schools are emphasized, although themain focus of the project is children’s life-course development. Many indicators ofwell-being also have been assessed. Finally, rates of sample recovery are high,which increases the validity of findings linking early childhood and familyexperiences to late adolescent and early adult outcomes. At age 21, for example,1315 participants(85.4%) were active in the study and provided information oneducational attainment. For the outcomes of child maltreatment and juveniledelinquency, over 1400 participants(over 91%) have data available. These rates ofsample recovery are rare for extensive longitudinal studies.

3. Social context and sample characteristics

Figure 1 shows the community areas in which children from the Chicago studyresided. Both CPC and comparison sites are identified. In 1990, 22 of the 24 centers


Fig. 1. Neighborhood context in the Chicago Longitudinal Study.


Table 1Selected characteristics of the CLS original sample and the follow-up sample at age 21

Sample characteristic Original Age 21sample sample

Number of children 1539 1314CPC preschool 989 858No CPC preschool 550 456

Sample recovery(%) 100 85.4CPC preschool(%) 64.3 65.3CPC follow-on program(%) 55.2 56.8African American(%) 92.9 93.7Girls (%) 50.2 51.0Low birth weight(less than 2500 gm) (%) 11.6 11.6If report abuseyneglect by child’s age 3(court) (%) 1.4 1.1From neighborhoods)60% low income(%) 76.0 75.2Live in single-parent home by age 8(%) 58.0 57.8From families with high-school degree or more at 56.7 57.5child’s age 8(%)

Eligible for free lunch by age 8 71.3 72.2Age at kindergarten entry in months(M) 63.4 63.3Word analysis score in kindergarten(M) 63.8 63.7(National averages60)

were located in one of the 20 poorest neighborhoods. Five of the six poorestneighborhoods have at least one Child–Parent Center. Study children were signifi-cantly more economically disadvantaged than children in the rest of Chicago. CLSchildren attended schools, for example, in which 67% of children resided in low-income families compared to 42% for all children in the Chicago schools.The Chicago Fact Book Consortium(1995) described the declining social

conditions of the West Garfield Park Community area, one of the neighborhoodsserved by the CPCs:

Between 1960 and 1970, more than 40 000 new African–Americans were added to the population of7000. With 40 000 whites relocating outside the area, West Garfield Park became predominantly blackduring the 1970s, bringing the community to the most pivotal decade in its most recent history. Allcommunity indices relating to previous vitality were reversed.

Between 1970 and 1980, the population decreased significantly by 30%. This change was accompaniedby a drop in housing units of 28%. Unemployment rose from 8 to nearly 21%. At the same time, thenumber of families living below the poverty line increased from 24 to 36% and female-headedhouseholds doubled to 58%. One major anomaly appeared as home ownership rose to 22% andsubsequently continued to rise.

By 1980, the landscape was transformed dramatically as large empty lots, formerly occupied by smalland medium-sized apartment buildings evidenced the loss of living space resulting from the withdrawlof investment, under-maintenance, and arson(p. 98).

Table 1 presents selected characteristics of the original study sample and thefollow-up sample at age 21 for whom high school completion status is known. The


study sample is evenly split between boys and girls, approximately three in fiveparents reported they graduated from high school, and over 90% of the childrenwere eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. Continuously promoted childrengraduated from high school in 1998. The characteristics of follow-up sample aresimilar to those of the original sample.

4. Child–Parent Center Program

Early childhood intervention programs use have been widely implemented in theUS for over four decades. The goal of these programs is to improve disadvantagedchildren’s skills so that they can begin school on an equal footing with their moreadvantaged peers(Zigler & Styfco, 2003). The positive associations between earlyintervention programs and school competence and achievement have been found inmany studies(Barnett, 1995; Durlak, 1997; Campbell et al., 2001). Findings havesuggested that such programs are effective in increasing the probability that a childcompletes high school(Oden, Schweinhart & Weikart, 2000; Reynolds et al., 2001).In addition to the positive associations with school achievement, associations withother domains have been shown as well, such as delinquency and economic well-being (Schweinhart, Barnes & Weikart, 1993; Yoshikawa, 1995; Reynolds et al.,2001). However, most of the findings are from studies of model programs withsmall sample sizes. Long-term effects of early intervention programs are needed forlarge-scale programs. Very few studies of model programs and no studies of large-scale programs have assessed impacts on early adulthood well-being.The Child–Parent Center(CPC) Program is a center-based early intervention that

provides comprehensive educational and family-support services to economicallydisadvantaged children from preschool to third grade. Funded by Title I of theElementary and Secondary Education Act, it is the second oldest(after Head Start)federally funded preschool program in the U.S. and is the oldest extended earlychildhood intervention. The program is designed to promote children’s academicsuccess and to facilitate parent involvement in children’ lives. The components ofthe CPC program include parental involvement, comprehensive services and a child-centered focus on the development of readingylanguage skills(Sullivan, 1971;Reynolds, Mavrogenes, Bezruczko & Hagemann, 1996). Currently, the CPC programis conducted in 23 centers throughout the Chicago public schools. Eighteen centersare located in separate buildings close to the elementary school, and five areattached to the wings of the parent elementary school(Reynolds, 2000).To be eligible for enrollment in the CPC program, children need to meet three

conditions. First, children must live in school neighborhoods that receive FederalTitle I funds. Second, children cannot be enrolled in another preschool program(e.g. Head Start). Third, parents must agree to participate in the program at leastone half-day per week(Reynolds, 2000).The components of this program include a structured half-day preschool program

for 3- and 4-year olds, a half-day or a full-day kindergarten program for 5-year-olds, with a child-centered focus on the development of readingylanguage skills, aswell as the provision of family support services. The center operates on the regular


Table 2Levels of program participation for Child–Parent Center and comparison groups

Sample characteristic CPC preschool group Comparison group(ns858) (ns456)

Preschool participation,% 100 15.6Number of cases, 1 year 392 32Number of cases, 2 years 466 39Mean number of years 1.54 0.24

Kindergarten participation,% 100 100Full-day program,% 59.6 100

School-age participation,% 71.4 29.6Number of cases, 1 year 107 25Number of cases, 2 or 3 years 506 110Mean number of years 1.49 0.69

Note: Preschool participation of the comparison group was in Head Start.

9-month school year calendar. An 8-week summer program is also provided. Theprogram is offered in different sites; however, it has no uniform curriculum. Eachsite tailors its program to children’s needs through a unified philosophy of literacyand a common core of activities that include individualized instruction, small groupactivities, and field trips.The comprehensive services include(a) attending to children’s nutritional and

health needs(i.e. free breakfasts and lunches and health screening), (b) coordinatedadult supervision, including a CPC head teacher, parent resource teacher, school-community representative, and a teacher aide for each class,(c) funds for centralizedin-service teacher training in child development as well as instructional supplies,and (d) emphasis on reading readiness through reduced class size, reading andwriting activities in the learning center, and reinforcement and feedback(Reynoldset al. 1996).Table 2 describes the levels of program participation for the preschool group and

the comparison group. The preschool group participated an average of 1.54; 220participated an average of 0.24 years in Head Start program but attended full-daykindergarten, an alternative educational enrichment program.Table 3 shows the similarity of the age 21 sample attributes for the preschool

group and the comparison group at the time of program entry or as soon afterwardsas possible. TheP-values for the original sample are provided for comparisonbetween the original and the age 21 samples. There were no significant differencesbetween the groups in most of the attributes, including the family risk index. Therewere significant differences between groups on gender, parent not employed atchild’s age 8, if ever reported abuseyneglect by child’s age 3, and school povertylevel. Two of these differences favored the preschool group and two did not.Because the comparison group received an alternative intervention and CPCparticipants reside in the highest poverty neighborhoods, estimates of programimpact are likely to be conservative(see Reynolds et al., 2001, 2002).


Table 3Characteristics of preschool group and comparison group(March, 2001,Ns1314)

Characteristics CPC No-preschool P-value Originalpreschool group Group Sample(Ns858) (Ns456) P-value

Percent girls 53.0 47.0 0.03* 0.12Percent black 94.2 92.8 0.32 0.95Percent parents not completed 40.6 46.2 0.08 0.02*high school at child age 8

Percent single parent at age 8 57.3 58.8 0.63 0.27Percent parent were teen(-19) 17.7 18.2 0.83 0.25at child’s birth

Percent parent not employed at 59.7 52.8 0.04* 0.27age 8

Percent ever reported receiving 73.7 69.3 0.09 0.79Free lunch at age 8

Percent childyneglect report by 1.2 2.6 0.05* 0.58age 3

Percent income level is 60%q 77.0 71.7 0.03* 0.04*poverty for school area

Percent missing data from 15.0 18.9 0.08 0.04*parent education or free lunch report

Family risk index(0–6) 3.1 3.0 0.45 0.28

*P-0.05.

5. Summary findings on indicators of child well-being

5.1. Prevalence rates of educational and social success

Fig. 2 displays the overall prevalence rates for five indicators of child and youthwell-being. Because they are cumulative rates for the CLS cohort, comparablecommunity and national rates are heuristic and should be interpreted with caution.By age 22, 61.8% of CLS youth completed high school(graduation or GED

status). A higher proportion of females completed high school than males(66.7 vs.50.8%). This overall rate is similar to that for youth in the Chicago public schoolsbut lower than 83.7% rate of high school completion for African American youthages 18–24 in 2000(National Center for Education Statistics, 2001, November).For delinquency, 20.4% of CLS youth were arrested and petitioned to juvenile

courts between the ages of 9 and 18. The cumulative arrest rate for males(33%)was much higher than for females(7.8%). Nationally, only annual data on juvenilearrests are available as between 7.1 and 9.9% of youth are arrested as 14- or 15-year-olds(Puzzanchera et al., 2000).The cumulative rates of grade retention(28%) and special education placement

(17.4%) among CLS youth are slightly higher than respective national rates of19.3% (kindergarten to eighth grade; Meisels & Liaw, 1993) and 13%(ages 0 to


Fig. 2. Prevalence rates for five measures of child well being in the Chicago Longitudinal Study.

21; National Center for Education Statistics, 2001). However, the national rates arenot cumulative.The overall rate of substantiated child abuse and neglect by age 17 for CLS

youth as reported by DCFS agencies was 9.4%. A slightly higher proportion offemales(10.3%) were victims than males(8.6%). The overall cumulative rate forthe CLS sample is very similar to the 8.3% cumulative rate for all children ages 0to 19 in Chicago(Goerge, Voorhis, Sanfilippo & Hardin, 1997). National rates ofsubstantiated maltreatment are reported in 1-year intervals. In 1997, 2.5% of AfricanAmerican children were victims of child abuse and neglect(Peddle & Wang, 2001).

5.2. Estimated effects of CPC preschool intervention

Previous studies in the CLS have found significant associations between programparticipation and higher school achievement, lower rates of grade retention andplacement of special education at age 15, lower rates of child maltreatment, andlower dropout rates and higher high school completion rates at age 20(Reynolds,2000; Temple, Reynolds & Miedel, 2000; Reynolds et al., 2001; Reynolds &Robertson, 2003). Fig. 3 summarizes findings regarding long-term effects of CPCpreschool participation for five major indicators of well being. The cumulative ratesfor program and comparison groups are adjusted for differences in family risk,gender, race, CPC school-age intervention and program sites.


Fig. 3. Adjusted group differences for measures of child well being in the Chicago Longitudinal Study.

As shown, CPC preschool participation was associated with substantial improve-ments in all five indicators of well being. The program group had a significantlyhigher rate of high school completion by age 22(65.3% vs. 55.1%), and significantlylower rates of official juvenile arrest by age 18(16.9% vs. 25.1%), grade retentionby age 15(23% vs. 38.4%), special education placement by age 18(14.4% vs.24.6%), and DCFS substantiated reports of child maltreatment by age 17(6.9% vs.14.2%). Improvements in performance over the comparison group ranged from 20%(high school completion) to 52% (child maltreatment prevention). These impactstranslate into an economic return to society of $7.14 for every dollar invested inthe CPC preschool component. School-age and extended intervention componentsalso led to benefits that exceed costs(Reynolds et al., 2002). This economic returnis greater than for most other social programs.The breadth of outcomes affected by CPC participation reflects the high quality

of the program and the dual emphasis on the development of child literacy activitiesand on intensive family support activities within and outside of the center.Several studies in the project have investigated the mechanisms that account for

the long-term effects of CPC participation(Reynolds, 1992, 1996; Reynolds et al.;2003 Ou, 2003). Findings indicate that hypotheses associated with cognitive-scholastic enrichment, enhanced family support behavior, and increased post-program


school support account for substantial amounts of the main effects of programparticipation (see the article, Research on early childhood interventions in theconfirmatory mode, this issue).

6. Summary of studies

In the rest of this overview, we summarize the unique features of the studies inthe special issue. In Research on Early Childhood Interventions in the ConfirmatoryMode, Reynolds(2004) discusses advances in knowledge in the prevention field ofearly childhood intervention. Confirmatory program evaluation is defined as atheory-based impact assessment in which a priori program theories are tested.Special emphasis is given to identification of the causal mechanisms or active useingredients that promote intervention effects. Examples from the Chicago Longitu-dinal Study show that participation in the Child–Parent Centers has been consistentlyassociated with greater levels of child well-being from ages 6 to 21, that theseeffects are mostly explained by the cognitive advantage, school support, and familysupport hypotheses, and that for some outcomes, children in the highest povertyneighborhoods benefit more from the program than other children. Implications forassessing the effects of social programs are discussed.In the article ‘Parent Involvement in Elementary School and Educational Attain-

ment’, Barnard(2004) explores for the first time links between parent involvementin elementary school and educational attainment. Results based on logistic regressionand hierarchical regression analyses indicated that parent involvement in school wassignificantly associated with lower rates of high school dropout, increased on-timegraduation, and highest grade completed even after controlling for child and familybackground characteristics.In ‘Longitudinal Relationships among Childhood Risk and Protective Factors and

Late Adolescent Adjustment: Evidence from the Chicago Longitudinal Study’,Smokowski, Mann, Reynolds and Fraser(2004) investigate the link betweenchildhood risk and protective factors and academic, social, and mental healthoutcomes in late adolescence. An ecological model including information on childcharacteristics, family processes, early childhood intervention participation, andmiddle childhood indicators of competence and problems was used to predictdepression, juvenile delinquency, and high school completion. Results indicated thatcumulative family risk from birth to age 12 significantly predicted a higher rate ofjuvenile court petitions and a lower rate of high school completion. Early childhoodintervention in preschool had protective effects on three adolescent outcomes.Finally, previous findings in the Chicago Longitudinal Study have indicated that

school mobility is a negative predictor of school achievement, educational attain-ment, and social competence more generally(Temple & Reynolds, 1999; Reynolds,2000). However, whether these findings can be generalized to other populationsrequires further investigation. In ‘School Mobility and Achievement: A Meta-Analysis,’ Mehana and Reynolds(2004) conduct the first meta-analysis of therelation between mobility and school achievement. Synthesizing the results of 26studies(sample sizes ranging from 62 to 15 000) published between 1975 and 1994,


including earlier studies in the Chicago Longitudinal Study, school mobility wasassociated with 3–4-month lower level of achievement in the elementary grades(0.25 S.D. units). Implications for improving children’s school transitions arediscussed.

7. Conclusion

The intervention, child, family and school factors investigated in the special issueare only some of the many influences on children’s well-being that need to be takeninto account in assessing needs and planning interventions. As Gray(1983) noted2 decades ago:

Relatively brief periods of intervention, or even more extended ones, cannot assume the whole burdenof care for society’s ills; they cannot reverse the downward spiral of progressively greater inadequacy,the fate of too many children whose homes have not been able to provide them with the manyadvantages...taken for granted in middle-income families(p. 81).

This caution extends well beyond interventions per se to include any single factoror experience in a child’s life. Expectations of progress in the human service fieldsshould be realistic. The total environment of the child needs to be considered toeffectively tailor services to the needs of children and families.

Acknowledgments

Preparation of this paper was supported by grants from the National Institute ofChild Health and Human Development(No. R01HD34294) and the U.S. Departmentof Education’s Office of Educational Research and Improvement(No.R305T990477). We thank the Chicago Public Schools, Juvenile Justice Division inthe Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois Department of Child and Family Services,Chapin Hall Center for Children at the University of Chicago, and the City Collegesof Chicago for cooperation and assistance in data collection.

References

Barnard, W. B.(2004). Parent involvement in elementary school and educational attainment.Childrenand Youth Services Review, 26.

Barnett, W. S.(1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes.The Future of Children, 5(3), 25–50.

Campbell, F. A., Pungello, E. P., Miller-Johnson, S., Burchinal, M., & Ramey, C. T.(2001). Thedevelopment of cognitive and academic abilities: growth curves from an early childhood educationalexperiment.Developmental Psychology, 37(2), 231–242.

Chicago Fact Book Consortium(Ed.) (1995). Local community fact book: Chicago metropolitan area,1990. Chicago: Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois.

Chicago Longitudinal Study(1999). Chicago Longitudinal Study: User’s Guide. (Vol. 6). Madison,WI: Waisman Center, University of Wisconsin.

Cohen, M. A. (1998). The monetary value of saving a high-risk youth.Journal of QuantitativeCriminology, 14, 5B33.


Committee for Economic DevelopmentCohen, M. A.(2002). Preschool for all: investing in a productiveand just society. New York: Research and Policy Committee.

Courtney, M. E.(1998). The costs of child protection in the context of welfare reform.The Future ofChildren, 8(1), 88B103.

Durlak, J. A. (1997). Successful prevention programs for children and adolescents. New York, NY:Plenum Press.

Goerge, R., Voorhis, J. V., Sanfilippo, L., & Hardin, A.(1997). Child welfare histories in Illinois,Michigan and Missouri. Chicago: Chapin Hall Center for Children, University of Chicago.

Gray, S. W. (1983). Enduring effects of early intervention: Perspectives and perplexities.PeabodyJournal of Education, 60, 70–84.

McLoyd, V. C. (1998). Socioeconomic disadvantage and child development.American Psychologist,53, 185–204.

Mehana, M., & Reynolds, A. J.(2004). School mobility and achievement: A meta-analysis.Childrenand Youth Services Review, 26.

Meisels, S. J., & Liaw, F.(1993). Failure in grade: do retained students catch up.Journal of EducationalResearch, 87, 69–77.

National Center for Education Statistics(2001). Digest of Education Statistics, 2000. Washington DC:U.S. Department of Education.

National Center for Education Statistics(2001, November). Dropout rates in the United States: 2000.Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Oden, S., Schweinhart, L., & Weikart, D. P.(2000). Into adulthood: a study of the effects of HeadStart. Ypsilanti, MI: HighyScope Press.

Ou, S. (2003). Mechanisms of effects of an early childhood intervention on educational attainment.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Madison:University of Wisconsin.

Peddle, N., & Wang, C.-T.(2001). Current trends in child abuse prevention, reporting, and fatalities:the 1999 fifty state survey. Working paper no. 808. Chicago: National Center on Child AbusePrevention Research, Prevent Child Abuse America.

Puzzanchera, C. et al.(2000). Juvenile court statistics: 1997. Washington, DC: Office of JuvenileJustice and Delinquency Prevention.

Reynolds, A. J.(1991). Early schooling of children at risk.American Educational Research Journal,28, 392–422.

Reynolds, A. J.(1992). Mediated effects of preschool intervention.Early Education and Development,3, 139–164.

Reynolds, A. J.(1998a). Confirmatory program evaluation: A method for strengthening causal inference.American Journal of Evaluation, 17, 21–35.

Reynolds, A. J.(1998b). Resilience among black urban youth: prevalence, intervention effects, andmechanism of influence.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 68, 84–100.

Reynolds, A. J.(Ed.). (1999). Schooling and high-risk populations: The Chicago Longitudinal Study.Journal of School Psychology, 37(4). Special Issue.

Reynolds, A. J.(2000). Success in early intervention: The Chicago Child–Parent Centers. Lincoln:University of Nebraska Press.

Reynolds, A. J.(2004). Research on early childhood interventions in the confirmatory mode.Childrenand Youth Services Review, 26.

Reynolds, A. J., & Bezruczko, N.(1993). School adjustment of children at risk through fourth grade.Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 47, 457–480.

Reynolds, A. J., & Gill, S.(1994). The role of parental perspectives in the school adjustment of inner-city black children.Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23, 671–691.

Reynolds, A. J., & Robertson, D. L.(2003). School-based early intervention and later child maltreatmentin the Chicago Longitudinal Study.Child Development, 74(1), 3–26.

Reynolds, A. J., & Temple, J. A.(1995). Quasi-experimental estimates of the effects of a preschoolintervention: psychometric and econometric comparisons.Evaluation Review, 19, 347–373.

Reynolds, A. J., & Temple, J. A.(1998). Extended early childhood intervention and school achievement:age 13 findings from the Chicago Longitudinal Study.Child Development, 69, 231–246.


Reynolds, A. J., Ou, S., & Topitzes, J. D.(2003). Paths of effects of early childhood intervention oneducational attainment and delinquency: A confirmatory analysis of the Chicago Child–ParentCenters. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Reynolds, A. J., Mavrogenes, N. A., Bezruczko, N., & Hagemann, M.(1996). Cognitive and family-support mediators of preschool effectiveness: a confirmatory analysis.Child Development, 67, 1119–1140.

Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Robertson, D. L., & Mann, E. A.(2001). Long-term effects of an earlychildhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest: a 15-year follow-up of low-income children in public schools.Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 2339–2346.

Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Robertson, D. L., & Mann, E. A.(2002). Age 21 cost-benefit analysisof the title I Chicago Child–Parent Centers.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 267–303.

Romer, D. (2003). Reducing adolescent risk: toward an integrated approach. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.

Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., & Weikart, D. P.(1993). Significant benefits: the HighyScope Perrypreschool study through age 27.Monographs for the HighyScope Educational Research Foundation,No. 10. Ypsilanti, MI: HighyScope Educational Research Foundation.

Smokowski, P. R., Mann, E., Reynolds, A. J., & Fraser, M.(2004). Longitudinal relationships amongchildhood risk and protective factors and late adolescent adjustment domains: in inner city minorityyouth.Children and Youth Services Review, 26.

Sullivan, L. M. (1971). Let us not underestimate the children. Chicago: Scott Foresman and Company.Teague, J.L, Thorne, J., Luckey, H. B., & Hoerger, T. J.(1998, September). Social costs of faltering

child development. Research Triangle Park, NC: Center for Research in Education.Temple, J. A., & Reynolds, A. J.(1999). School mobility and achievement: longitudinal findings froman urban cohort.Journal of School Psychology, 37, 355–378.

Temple, J. A., Reynolds, A. J., & Miedel, W. T.(2000). Can early intervention prevent high schooldropout? Evidence from the Chicago Child–Parent Centers.Urban Education, 35(1), 31–56.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services(2001). Healthy People in Healthy Communities: Acommunity planning guide using Healthy People 2010. Office of Disease Prevention and HealthPromotion, Office of Public Health and Science. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Weissberg, R. P., & Greenberg, M. T.(1998). School and community competence-enhancement andprevention programs. In W. Damon,(pp. 877–954) Handbook of child psychology: Child psychologyin practice, vol. 4. New York: Wiley.

Yoshikawa, H. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes anddelinquency.The Future of Children, 5(3), 51–75.

Zigler, E., & Styfco, S. J.(2003). The federal commitment to preschool education: lessons from andfor Head Start. In A. J. Reynolds, M. C. Wang, H. J. Walberg,Early childhood programs for a newcentury. Washington, DC: CWLA Press.

alterable predictors of child well-being in the chicago longitudinal study

Documents