WWC review of this study

Promoting academic and social-emotional school readiness: The Head Start REDI program [Head Start Research-Based, Developmentally Informed program vs. business as usual (Creative Curriculum or HighScope)]

Bierman, K. L., Domitrovich, C. E., Nix, R. L., Gest, S. D., Welsh, J. A., Greenberg, M. T., Blair, C., Nelson, K. E., & Gill, S. (2008). Child Development, 79(6), 1802–1817. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ818718

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    356
     Students
    , grade
    PK

Reviewed: June 2022

At least one finding shows promising evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Language outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (3rd edition)

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
335 students

42.46

41.03

No

--
More Outcomes

Test of Language Development: Sentence Imitation Subtest

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
337 students

1.49

1.56

No

--

Test of Language Development: Grammatical Understanding Subtest

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
337 students

10.86

11.72

No

--
Reading & Literacy Related outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Test of Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL) Blending subtest

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
337 students

14.65

13.04

Yes

 
 
14
 
More Outcomes

Test of Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL) Elision subtest

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
335 students

10.68

9.61

Yes

 
 
11
 

Test of Preschool Early Literacy (TOPEL) Print Knowledge subtest

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
337 students

17.94

16.49

No

--
Self-regulation outcomes—Indeterminate effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Adapted Leiter – R Assessor Report

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
337 students

3.53

3.38

No

--
More Outcomes

Learning engagement: teacher (Bierman et al. 2008)

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
343 students

5.08

4.97

No

--

ADHD Rating Scale: Teacher

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
343 students

0.66

0.73

No

--
Social-Emotional Learning outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Challenging Situations Task: Competent

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
335 students

3.01

2.29

Yes

 
 
12
 
More Outcomes

Challenging Situations Task: Inept

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
335 students

3.17

2.56

No

--

Social Competence Scale: Observer

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
326 students

2.36

2.21

No

--

Assessment of Children’s Emotion Skills

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
334 students

7.74

7.12

No

--

Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation Revised/Social Behavior Scale Teacher Form (Bierman et al., 2008)

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
343 students

3.69

4.12

No

--

Emotion Recognition Questionnaire

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
331 students

1.58

1.52

No

--

Challenging Situations Task: Aggressive

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
337 students

2.54

2.06

No

--

Social Competence Scale: Teacher

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
343 students

4.15

3.98

No

--

Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation –Revised: Observer

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample;
326 students

0.30

0.37

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 54%
    Male: 46%

  • Rural, Suburban, Urban
    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Pennsylvania
  • Race
    Black
    25%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    17%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    93%

Setting

The intervention was administered in 44 classrooms across 25 Head Start centers in three counties in the state of Pennsylvania. One county was located in the southeastern part of the state and included an urban area surrounded by smaller communities. The other two counties were from the central part of the state, and included small towns and rural areas.

Study sample

A total of 17% of the sample students identified as Hispanic and 25% of the sample identified as African American. Approximately 54% of the sample were female. The authors explained that across the intervention and comparison groups student ethnicity was relatively similar, with 39% of students in the intervention group and 45% in the comparison condition being from a minority group. No other sample characteristics were reported.

Intervention Group

The intervention was the Head Start REDI program, which is designed as a supplement to existing Head Start programs using the High/Scope or Creative Curriculum. The intervention is intended to promote teachers’ use of evidence-based practices to support child development of social-emotional skills as well as language abilities. The program was integrated into regular classroom practices ranging from the regular classroom curriculum, circle time, and other classroom activities. The REDI program is focused on four domains that consist of (a) prosocial friendship skills, (b) emotional understanding and emotional expression skills, (c) self-control (e.g., the capacity to inhibit impulsive behavior and organize goal-directed activity), and (d) problem-solving skills, including interpersonal negotiation and conflict resolution skills. The REDI intervention consists of four main components. One component involves social-emotional skill enrichment, and these skills are conveyed to children through the 33 lessons of the PATHS curriculum delivered during class circle time. A second component involves language/emergency literacy skill enrichment which targets children’s vocabulary, syntax, phonological awareness, and print awareness. This component is conveyed through a shared reading program based on that developed by Wasik and Bond (2001) that involves presenting two books per week, with each book containing targeted vocabulary words. Phonological awareness and print knowledge are covered using Sound Games. The third component is training and professional development of teachers (see the ‘Support for Implementation’ section below). The fourth component involves take-home packets provided to parents. These packets include parenting tips and learning activities that parents can provide at home.

Comparison Group

Teachers in the comparison classrooms used business-as-usual practices. All comparison classrooms also were located in Head Start centers, but teachers of those classrooms only used the High/Scope or Creative Curriculum, without supplementing that curriculum using REDI materials.

Support for implementation

Teachers received kits with REDI program materials and manuals to support implementation. Intervention teachers also received a 3-day professional development session conducted before the beginning of the intervention. Teachers also received weekly coaching support from REDI trainers, who supported program implementation. The authors explained that coaches spent approximately 3 hours in each classroom per week providing support. Intervention teachers were also given a 1-day booster session in January.

Reviewed: March 2009

At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Language development
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Blending subtest of the TOPEL

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

14.71

13.04

Yes

 
 
15
More Outcomes

Elison subtest of TOPEL

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

11.19

9.61

Yes

 
 
14

Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

42.79

41.03

Yes

 
 
6

Print awareness subtest of TOPEL

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

18.84

16.49

Yes

 
 
6

Sentence Imitation subtest of the TOLD

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

1.57

1.56

Yes

-2
 
 

Gramatical Understanding subtest of the TOLD

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

11.95

11.72

Yes

-3
 
 
Social-emotional development
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Challenging Situations Task-competent responses

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

3.16

2.29

Yes

 
 
14
More Outcomes

Adapted Leiter-R Assessor (task orientation observer)

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

3.49

3.38

Yes

 
 
11

Social Competence Scale: Observer

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

2.36

2.21

Yes

 
 
10

Emotion Recognition Questionnaire

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

1.61

1.52

Yes

 
 
9

Social Competence Scale- Teacher Version

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

4.15

3.98

Yes

 
 
9

Assessment of Children's Emotion Skills

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

7.45

7.12

Yes

 
 
8

Engagement Inventory-teacher

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

5.08

4.97

Yes

 
 
7

Reading Engagement- Parent

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

0.05

-0.05

Yes

 
 
7

Social Competence Scale- Parent Version

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

3.73

3.66

Yes

 
 
4

ADHD Rating Scale: Parent

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

1.48

1.64

Yes

-4
 
 

Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation (TOCA): Parent

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

2.71

2.86

Yes

-5
 
 

ADHD Rating Scale: Teacher

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

0.66

0.73

Yes

-6
 
 

Challenging Situations Task-aggressive responses

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

1.53

2.06

Yes

-8
 
 

Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation (TOCA): Observer

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

0.30

0.37

Yes

-8
 
 

Challenging Situations Task-inept responses

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

1.94

2.56

Yes

-11
 
 

Teacher Observation of Child Adaptation (TOCA): Teacher

The Head Start REDI Program vs. Business as usual

Posttest

Overall;
student

3.69

4.12

Yes

-11
 
 


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • Female: 54%
    Male: 46%

  • Rural, Urban
    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Pennsylvania
  • Race
    Black
    25%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic    
    17%
    Not Hispanic or Latino    
    83%
 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top