ESCALA DE EVALUACIÓN DE LA PSICOMOTRICIDAD EN PREESCOLAR

A number of recommendations arise from the present study for the conduct of future research on HIPPY, both in Australia and internationally, and for research in the field of early educational intervention broadly.

11.2.1 The usefulness of a matched comparison group

One of the major limitations of the present study is that it is not possible to confidently attribute the observed changes in children’s functioning to the HIPPY program alone, due to the absence of a matched control group. Ideally, an

appropriate non-HIPPY comparison group is needed to ascertain how much of the change observed in children’s functioning over time can be specifically attributed to HIPPY. Although this is not easy to achieve, it is strongly recommended for future research.

11.2.2 Complementary quantitative and qualitative methods

One key aspect of the current study that goes some way to offset the limitation of the absence of a comparison group was the extensive, longitudinal qualitative data from three waves of in-depth interviews with parents and staff. It was clear from these interviews that most parents believed, and could identify in some detail, how HIPPY had helped their children. The positive changes that parents noted in their children were corroborated by the quantitative measures of children’s functioning in the areas of concrete early school skills and socio-emotional

development, although less conclusively in other areas of cognitive functioning. This strongly indicates that a qualitative dimension to data collection, as used in the present study, is essential to ongoing research of HIPPY outcomes.

An additional qualitative component that was not able to be included in the present study was interviews with children about their experience of HIPPY. The present study employed parent reports only, which, although insightful, do not provide a proxy for the children’s perspective. This should be considered in future research, perhaps including drawings or some reference to the HIPPY materials to assist with children’s understanding of the questions. The present study suggested that children were engaged with HIPPY and would be able to complete such a task. 11.2.3 Increasing sample size

Due to the nature of the program, HIPPY research participants are likely to always be a relatively small group at any one site. This means that subgroup

comparisons, such as between the developmentally delayed group and the others in the present study, are unlikely to be statistically robust. Where possible, larger numbers of participants, perhaps by pooling data from different iterations of the program, of from different sites, should be used for statistical computations to better ascertain which children are able to benefit from HIPPY and in what ways.

It must be acknowledged, however, that pooling data in such ways would bring its own difficulties in terms of having to assume that the program is delivered in comparable contexts, iterations, or sites (Hawe, Shiell, Riley & Gold, 2004). The present research has illuminated very clearly how one delivery can be rather different to what may be the norm at any one site.

11.2.4 The challenge of longitudinal measures in early childhood

Because of children’s rapid development in many domains between the ages of three and seven, there are few measures of functioning that can span this period. In the present study, the only two tests which were able to be used at all three waves of the study, the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales and the Who am I?, both

showed significant improvements in scores across time.

Additionally, tests for which standard scores have been developed, rather than relying on raw scores, allow a more meaningful interpretation of results in the context of age-peers. The limitation of the Who am I? in the present study is that, at this stage of its development, standardised scores are not available. To examine general cognitive development in future research, it may be possible to use one of the comprehensive cognitive tests, such as the Wechsler scales (Wechsler, 1991). However, time limitations, expense, and the requirement that a qualified Psychologist carry out test administration and scoring may be prohibitive.

11.2.5 The desirability of longer-term follow-up

It is clearly worthwhile for future HIPPY researchers to consider longer-term follow-up. There is the possibility of delayed program effects that the three-year time-frame of the current study was not able to capture. Although obtaining ongoing funding, and both tracing and maintaining the involvement of, participants are always challenges in longitudinal research, following these children further into their school

years may provide more information on the impact of HIPPY on children’s academic trajectories.

11.2.6 The need for a comprehensive database

Perhaps the most immediate recommendation that arises is for agencies involved in the delivery of HIPPY to establish consistent records of the processes of implementation, such as recruitment. Such information is crucial to knowing exactly what the program involved in a particular context (Hawe, Shiell, Riley & Gold, 2004). This is important not only to assist evaluation of program integrity, but also to further illuminate outcome findings by focusing on how the complexity of relevant factors may interact to influence those outcomes.

Future evaluation research focused upon HIPPY would best be grounded in a detailed database, rigorously maintained by the service delivery agencies. Indeed, as future research may involve multi-site implementations of HIPPY, the

establishment of such a database across all HIPPY sites nationally would provide an invaluable resource for ongoing evaluation research on the effectiveness of HIPPY in Australia.