Group items tagged

"Woodhead, M. (1988). "When psychology informs public policy." American Psychologist 43(6): 443-454."

Jenal Austin December 2010 "When Psychology Informs Public Policy" According to this article, there has been significant evidence that early childhood programs in the United States increase cognitive competence, school readiness, school achievement, social development, and health status in young children. Regardless, the government has not fully acknowledged the importance of such programs on the political agenda. Leaders should know that providing preschool education is a solid financial investment for the country. Children who attend these programs have shown promising long-term impact including higher high school completion rates, greater occupational aspirations, and improved employments rates and reductions in referrals to special education, juvenile delinquency, and teenage pregnancy. However, the author reminds us that there are limits to how much we can generalize these findings. He explains that this will not be a one-all, fix-all solution to our society's complex social and economic problems. It is also important to understand that the effects of early childhood intervention cannot be taken in isolation from the context in which it occurs and it may not be possible to replicate all aspects of an experiment of such programs on a national level. "..Effects are the result of a complex interaction of variables in home and school, throughout the school years and beyond, but also… the children themselves play an active part in the process through the images they project and the self-concept they acquire of themselves, either as competent and motivated, or apathetic, problematic, and unwilling." Governments should use the research on the positive impacts of preschool education when designing public policy; however they should not expect a simple solution. "..Where human development is concerned even an experimental approach can rarely yield definitive universally applicable statements about the extent to which a program is effec

"Metcalf, S. (2002). "Reading between the lines." The Nation" (Jan. 28): 18-22."

This article discusses the use of large-scale randomized trials to evaluate social policy. For decades, policy makers have rolled out changes without taking the time to conduct research to determine if the idea would be effective. One reason policy makers shun trials is the reality that the trials and experiments do not always support the ideas or policies. Rather than taking the time to conduct trials, policy makers prefer to "act swiftly" and propose policy. The article references the efforts of abstinence education, Scared straight programs, drug testing in prison populations, and school driving programs as examples of policies that have not worked--the research and data suggest the programs are not effective, yet policy makers continue to support the efforts.

Julie's point about not taking the time is a good one. This article was somewhat shocking in that it highlighted just how poor the research is behind many of our public policies and programs. Policy makers and politicians rush to gain political capital by moving decisively when they have only a kernel of research in support of their claims, without taking the time or making an effort to test the findings or dig deeper. After a policy or program is in place, it is not in their best interests to support research which may disprove the efficacy of what they have put in place. This could all tie back to our educational system, to whether or not we teach solid critical thinking and research skills.

I found this article to be very interesting. My favorite part was the study done in schools that polled the most influential peers, informed them on dangers of smoking, and attempted to decrease smoking by reverse peer pressure. I think this was a great idea!!!