Ellsworth, Jeanne and Ames, Lynda J. (Eds.) (1998). Critical Perspectives on Project Head Start: Revisioning the Hope and Challenge. Reviewed by Teresa R. Hardman

Ellsworth, Jeanne and Ames, Lynda J. (Eds.) (1998). Critical Perspectives on Project Head Start: Revisioning the Hope and Challenge. New York: State University of New York Press xvii + 352 pp. $21.95       ISBN 0-7914-3928-3 Reviewed by Teresa R. Hardman Marshall University Graduate College February 1, 1999       With more than three decades of implementation of this popular War on Poverty effort, the editors of this critical collection readily admit that an extensive body of research and evaluation already exists regarding Project Head Start. However, Ellsworth and Ames also indicate that the majority of this research has tended to focus on outcomes, "most often measuring and charting quantifiable changes in children." (p. ix) This collection of writings, by contrast, takes a more qualitative approach to analyzing the strengths and failings of one of the most popular governmental efforts in recent history. Comprised of fourteen chapters, the book draws on a variety of sources in an apparent attempt to analyze the value of the overall project, identifying areas in which the program needs to be improved or revitalized, while at the same time celebrating the positive results of the effort. It is obvious throughout the text that the various authors do indeed believe in the value of Project Head Start. These same authors, however, do not view the program through the proverbial "rose-colored glasses;" in almost every case strongly grounded examination of the failings of Head Start is evident.       Chapters one and two introduce the many issues related to Head Start by providing a history of its conception and an overview of the early years of the project. From the historian's point of view, Kathryn R. Kuntz discusses the motivation behind the creation of Head Start, with an emphasis on the original intention of promoting community action. Kuntz describes the juggling of political control, which ultimately affected the focus of Head Start programming. Kuntz emphasizes the impact of policy 70.2 in altering the power of the parents involved in Head Start by limiting the scope of their influence to decision-making within the program while curtailing the emphasis on community action. Kuntz introduces an issue that becomes a common thread throughout the text: the parents Head Start sought to involve from the beginning were mothers, with very little attention paid to involving fathers. Kuntz discusses how this tactic contributed to the perception of Head Start as a program for poor women and children. This perception had a positive impact on public opinion about the program, because, as several of the authors echo, it is difficult politically to challenge programs directed toward the innocent--in this case women and children. The negative aspects of this image of Head Start, however, were the gender stereotypes denigrating the power and opinions of women, and thus the value of any community action instigated by them. Polly Greenberg, active in Head Start from the 1960s, picks up this issue by referring to the initial desire to "eliminate poverty in America," the rallying cry in the War on Poverty. Greenberg discusses the various perspectives on parental involvement, ranging from efforts engaging parents in substantive community action to educational activities prodding parents to "improve" parenting skills.       The historical discussion of parental involvement and the political environment affecting it makes a smooth segue to the next section of the book, which considers parental involvement in Head Start as it exists today. Chapters three and four deal specifically with the day-by-day involvement of parents. Authors Linda Spatig, Laurel Parrott, Amy Dillon and Kate Conrad provide a detailed picture of parental participation in a Head Start Transition Demonstration Project. As the use of the term "busywork" in the chapter title implies, much of the participation they describe is superficial, providing little true empowerment for the involved parents. Examples are given of governing board actions, activities provided for parents, and communication between parents and school staff. The chapter questions if the structure of the experience actually transformed the involved individuals or if it served to reproduce the social structure in which they already existed, a structure replete with gender and class inequities.       Roslyn Arlin Mickelson and Mary Trotter Klenz reiterate this problem, specifically as it manifests itself in Council meetings and in communications between parents and Head Start staff. In addition to the hierarchies of class and gender, Mickelson and Trotter discuss the effects of racial bias in the provision of power to Head Start parents. These authors are careful to note, however, that such bias is a general societal problem, not a specific failing of the Head Start program.       Focusing on these current societal concerns, the next three chapters examine relationships between the Head Start experience and multicultural issues. In chapter five, Patricia A. Hamilton, Katherine Hayes and Henry M. Doan present the findings of their study on the multicultural dimensions of the Head Start program. They discuss the changing face of Head Start over the past thirty years as the demographics of the eligible population have changed. Recognizing that local programs have distinctive needs, Head Start policy provides for locally responsive variations. This chapter, however, explores the cultural biases that impede the development and provision of needed local services. The mismatch between the ethnic and language background of staff and that of clients creates a situation in which children and their parents may feel uncomfortable about participating or may even be unwilling to participate. Hamilton, Hayes, and Doan describe the efforts of staff to provide ethnically sensitive activities in the classroom, with attempts by staff to learn words and phrases from the children's home languages. They describe, however, how these token attempts can turn out to be detrimental, when the phrases from the child's first language are limited to command phrases or reprimands, giving a negative impression of the child's language or the staff member's perception of the child's home and cultural background. These researchers note the need for additional research on effective avenues for reaching and teaching children of the vastly diverse eligible population.       Directly related to this issue is the discussion in chapter six of a specific method of curriculum delivery and its impact on children and families from Southeast Asia. Author and researcher Eden Inoway-Ronnie discusses the High/Scope program, which emphasizes learning through play. A problem-solving approach, it involves use of discovery: the child chooses activities, and the adult guides and provides questions to direct the child through the learning experience. This loosely structured program has been considered as an effective, developmentally appropriate approach for the preschool child. It relies almost exclusively on intensive interaction with the individual child in school and also with the parent in the home. The population under investigation in Inoway-Ronnie's study, however, had strong objections to this educational approach. Although the group included students from a variety of backgrounds, the majority of the students represented the Hmong, an ethnic group with roots in mainland China. This group lived more recently in Laos, and many members of the group emigrated to the US after assisting our military forces during the Vietnam War. These families expected that Head Start would teach their children English, because this was an endeavor they were ill-equipped to perform themselves. And they perceived the activities in their children's classrooms as play, rather than as work or learning. Inoway-Ronnie also notes that the nature of the High/Scope program may have discouraged parents with limited English abilities from participating, further crippling the efforts of Head Start to promote parental involvement and community action. Inoway-Ronnie emphasizes the need for programs such as Head Start to recognize and validate parents' concerns. Whereas parental involvement has always been an important aim of Head Start, this research suggests that it may be even more important in multicultural settings, particularly when English is not the language of the home.       Elizabeth P. Quintero also reflects on this issue with specific reference to Hmong and Latino participants in family literacy programs. Quintero discusses the cultural norms that affect these families' involvement in and appreciation of programs such as Head Start. The focus of her chapter is on the need for such programs to provide culturally sensitive, child-centered approaches, in which teachers incorporate knowledge of the children=s cultures in order to tailor learning experiences to children's specific needs.       At this point in the book, the editors contribute a chapter that returns attention to the issue of empowerment of parents. Their discussion particularly emphasizes the effect of involvement in Head Start on the mothers themselves. Ames and Ellsworth remind readers that Head Start was always intended to be a two-generation program, with direct benefits anticipated both for children and for their parents. With this view of the program in mind, the authors consider the perspective of mothers: their loyalties to the program, their hopes of an improved life because of the program, and their disappointments when the program failed to meet their expectations. Blame for these unmet expectations is placed, to a great extent, on the institutionalization of the Head Start program, with the growing interest of the Head Start administrators on accountability.       Ames and Ellsworth's chapter provides an introduction to the next two chapters, written by individuals who participated in Head Start, first as parents whose children attended the program and later as staff members. Susan W. Geddes and Wendy L. Kirby provide in very different formats, distinct personal reflections on the effects Head Start had on their lives. Briefly they each describe their initial hopes for the program and the disappointments they experienced. While acknowledging the program's weaknesses, both authors express a sincere belief in the value of Head Start.       Moving away from considerations of the local and even personal impacts of Head Start, chapter eleven uses quantitative findings to address the theme of unmet expectations. Authors, Linda Spatig, Robert Bickel, Laurel Parrott, Amy Dillon and Kate Conrad examine the disparity between the developmental, constructivist approach often employed in Head Start programs and the conventional methods of gauging the success of such programs, namely standardized tests of achievement. The research asks some key questions that enable speculation about this disparity: Does the experience of Head Start promote the success of children? Or does it impede their progress? Do the pedagogical approaches used in Head Start enable or interfere with children's transition to the academic expectations of public schools? Based on findings that show virtually no impact of Head Start on students' achievement, the authors speculate that the developmental, constructivist approach may not indeed be the best use of time and resources for the low-income children who participate in the program. Such children have limited access to the "dominant cultural knowledge" that forms the basis of standardized tests. Additionally, the mismatch between teaching approaches used in Head Start and those used in the public schools may have long-term and negative effects on the school success of Head Start participants.       The issue of transition from Head Start to public school is also discussed by Stacey Neuharth-Pritchett and Panayota Y. Mantzicopoulos. Through a series of interviews, the researchers uncover differences between Head Start Transition teachers and regular classroom teachers. Differences implicate both educational philosophies and classroom management styles. Based on their findings, the researchers conclude that the efforts of Head Start especially with regard to children's transition to the regular classroom, are stymied by the institutional hierarchy of the public school system.       Whereas the various contributors to the book have reassured this reader that they do indeed believe in and support Head Start, without exception they have clearly expressed criticism of the program's shortcomings and disappointment with its failure to fulfill expectations. Perhaps their continued support for a program whose deficiencies they enumerate mirrors general public sentiment toward the program. Unlike other programs targeted to fight poverty, Head Start has enjoyed public endorsement since the 1960s. To address the apparent contradiction between the public's response to Head Start and its response to other anti-poverty programs, Ellsworth devotes a chapter to an overview of public opinion. "Inspiring Delusions: Reflections on Head Start's Enduring Popularity" begins by reminding the reader that, despite its wide acceptance and public acclaim, Head Start can demonstrate few enduring benefits. In fact, Ellsworth suggests that the appeal of a program to benefit the children of the nation's poor may sustain a dangerous delusion--the image that we are indeed doing something effective to assist the "underprivileged." This delusion may enable the public to dispense with further concerns about the poor. Moreover, Ellsworth argues that the program's image--large groups of minority children often being taught by white middle class teachers--serves to segregate Head Start participants from mainstream children. She refers to the popular "Deficit Theory," which is often used as a rationale for Head Start. If poor children are indeed "disadvantaged" educationally and socially, it is because their parents are somehow incompetent in child-rearing, and this deficit can be "fixed" through the provision of educational opportunities to both the children and their parents. Ellsworth's treatment of this rationale clearly expresses her disdain for it. In her view, its pitiful picture of the poor contributes to keeping them in their "place," as opposed to empowering them to rise above their present economic and corresponding social status. She commends those who have repeatedly avowed the merit of the Head Start program, citing their sincerity and enthusiasm. But she cautions against accepting and celebrating the program as it exists, overlooking its failings and using it as an excuse to ignore the increasing proportion of the nation's children living in poverty.       Whereas Ellsworth's chapter summarizes her personal reaction to Head Start and its public acclaim, she and Ames collaborate on a final chapter that provides a concluding overview of all of the contributions to the book. They reiterate the intention of the book: to "focus a critical eye on Head Start". (p. x) Despite this intention, the editors make it clear that they continue to be proponents of Head Start, supporting its underlying philosophy. Their criticisms of the program focus on the unrealistic expectations originally attributed to Head Start, namely the elimination of poverty through education. The editors close the final chapter by recalling a vivid mental picture presented by another contributing author, Kathy Kuntz. In this picture Head Start is a Band-Aid, a temporary way to cover a problems, in this case the problem of poverty and its effects on children. Whereas the Band-Aid does not cure the problem, it decreases its visibility. To remove the Band-Aid is to expose the problem again, perhaps reawakening attention to it and stimulating a renewed search for solutions. But removing the temporary remedy also exposes the "wound." Neither Kuntz nor the editors of the collection are willing to support such a drastic measure. Rather, they hope that critical reviews of Head Start, such as the one they present, will motivate researchers to discover ways to improve the services provided by Head Start and at the same time spark the political will required to bring about necessary changes.       The editors and contributing authors are not neutral toward Head Start, but their balanced critique of the program is admirable. The book provides the reader with adequate background about the program's inception, the political issues surrounding its growth, and the important policies governing its implementation. Moreover, the various criticisms of the program are not presented in such a way as to obscure the program's benefits. Combining a number of different voices into one collection, the editors are still able to present a coherent message. The collection leaves the reader with an understanding of the program and its failings, yet a belief in the program's potential--not to supply an unrealistic miracle cure as was once claimed but to offer a beneficial experience for participating children and their families. About the Reviewer Teresa R. Hardman Marshall University Teresa R. Hardman currently serves as an Assistant Professor of Leadership Studies at Marshall University, Huntington, WV. Her interests include leadership, women's studies, education and educational reform.