Pardon Us, But What Was the Question Again?: A Response to the Critique of the Follow Through Evaluation

References

1. Bock, G., Stebbins, L. B., & Proper, E. C. Education as experimentation: A planned variation model, Volume 1V-B, Effects of Follow Through models. Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates, Inc., 1977. (Also issued by the U.S. Office of Education as National evaluation: Detailed effects, Volume II-B of The Follow Through Planned Variation Experiment series.)
2. Education as experimentation: A planned variation model, Volume IV-C, Appendices, Parts 1 and 2. Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates, Inc., 1977.
3. Feinberg, L. "Basic" teaching methods more effective, study says. Washington Post, 20 June 1977, pp. 1; 8.
4. House, E. R., Glass, G. V, McLean, L. D., & Walker, D. F. No simple answer: Critique of the Follow Through evaluation. Harvard Educational Review, 1978, 48, 128-160.No simple answer: Critique of the Follow Through evaluation. Harvard Educational Review 48:128–160.
5. Kilpatrick, J. J. Basics better in education, Cambridge group finds. Boston Evening Globe, ljuly 1977, p. 19.
6. Stebbins, L. B., St. Pierre, R. G., Proper, E. C, Anderson, R. B., & Cerva, T. R. Education as experimentation: A planned variation model, Volume IV-A, An evaluation of Follow Through. Cambridge, Mass.: Abt Associates, Inc., 1977. (Also issued by the U.S. Office of Education as National evaluation: Patterns of effects, Volume II-A of The Follow Through Planned Variation Experiment series.)
7. Westinghouse Learning Corporation & Ohio University. The impact of Head Start: An evaluation of the effects of Head Start on children's cognitive and affective development. Washington, D.C.: Office of Economic Opportunity, 1969. (Distributed by Department of Commerce, Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information, Springfield, Va.)