CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,144Early Childhood Education and DevelopmentSchool Choice and PerformanceYouth Development and Social Support

Early Childhood Education: Young Adult Outcomes From the Abecedarian Project

Campbell, Frances A., Ramey, Craig T., Pungello, Elizabeth, Sparling, Joseph, Miller-Johnson, Shari·2002·Applied Developmental Science
DOI 10.1207/s1532480xads0601_05
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The high-risk infants who initially enrolled in the Abecedarian Project, a longitudinal prospective study of the benefits of early childhood educational intervention within a child care setting, were followed up as young adults (age 21 years). One hundred-eleven infants were in the original sample; 104 took part in the follow up. Treatment was provided in 2 phases: during preschool and in the primary grades. Participants received either both phases, 1, but not both, or neither. Assignment to groups was random. Those in the preschool treatment group earned significantly higher scores on intellectual and academic measures as young adults, attained significantly more years of total education, were more likely to attend a 4-year college, and showed a reduction in teenaged pregnancy compared with preschool controls. Preschool treatment was associated with educationally meaningful effect sizes on reading and math skills that persisted into adulthood. School-age treatment served to maintain preschool benefits for reading, but by itself, the effects were generally weaker than those of the preschool program. Statistically significant differences in the attainment of full economic independence were not found at this stage, but would not be expected among young adults still attending school. The incidence of self-reported violence and lawbreaking was not significantly reduced, although trends in the data favored the treated group. The reported incidence of marijuana use was significantly less among treated individuals. The positive findings with respect to academic skills and increased years of post-secondary education support policies favoring early childhood programs for poor children.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s1532480xads0601_05

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  2. Gray, S. W., Ramsey, B. K. & Klaus, R. A. (1982). From 3 to 20: The Early Training Project. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
  3. Karnes, M. B., Shwedel, A. M. & Williams, M. B. (1983). A comparison of five approaches for educating young children from low-income homes. In Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (Ed.), As the twig is bent: Lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 133-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  4. Ogbu, J. U. (1987). Variability in minority responses to schooling: Non-immigrants versus immigrants. In J. Spindler & L. Spindler (Eds.), Interpretative ethnography of education: At home and abroad (pp. 255-280). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  5. Ramey C. T., 1984, American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 515
  6. Ramey, C. T. & Campbell, F. A. (1987). The Carolina Abecedarian Project: An educational experiment concerning human malleability. In J. Gallagher & C. Ramey (Eds.), The malleability of children (pp. 115-126). Baltimore: Brookes.
  7. Ramey, C. T. & Campbell, F. A. (1991). Poverty, early childhood education, and academic competence: The Abecedarian experiment. In A. Huston (Ed.), Children reared in poverty (pp. 190-221). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Ramey, C. T., MacPhee, D. & Yeates, K. O. (1982). Preventing developmental retardation: A general systems model. In L. A. Bond & J. M. Joffe (Eds.), Facilitating infant and early childhood development (pp. 343-401). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
  9. Ramey C. T., 1977, American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 81, 318
  10. Smith, J. R., Brooks-Gunn, J. & Klebanov, P. K. (1997). Consequences of living in poverty for young children's cognitive and verbal ability and early school achievement. In G. J. Duncan & J. Brooks-Gunn (Eds.), Consequences of growing up poor (pp. 132-189). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  11. Sparling, J. & Lewis, I. (2000). Learningames: The Abecedarian curriculum. Tallahassee, FL: Early Learning Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Campbell, F. A., Ramey, C. T., Pungello, E., Sparling, J., & Miller-Johnson, S.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
ORCID
Sparling, Joseph
Venue
Applied Developmental Science
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2002-01-01
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
42-57
ISSN
  • 1088-8691 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-480X
DOI
10.1207/s1532480xads0601_05
OpenAlex
W1975021796
Cited by
1,144
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 47 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 62 · 2018: 51 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 54 · 2014: 71 · 2013: 96 · 2012: 60
FWCI
123.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied Developmental Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Youth Development and Social Support
Keywords
Abecedarian Project, early childhood education, high-risk infants, young adult outcomes, preschool intervention, academic performance, college attendance, adolescent pregnancy, educational attainment, financial independence, cannabis use, low-income children, early intervention policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review