This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
HighScope article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 21 December 2005. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
-- Angr ( t· c) 18:42, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2022 and 17 May 2022. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Kevahcoles (
article contribs). Peer reviewers:
Sctbr,
Katelynnels.
Hi. Stumbled across this article, so I do not have the benefit of any previous discussions that may have occurred on this topic. I see two things that concern me here:
I don't really care about this topic and I don't have knowledge to judge neutrality in this field. But these red flags are objective and easy to recognize so I have tagged them as such. -- Ds13 ( talk) 01:43, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
This article reads like an ad. It should get a neutrality header. Chuck Baggett ( talk) 18:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
The Perry Preschool Project was a research program to determine the effectiveness of universal preschool. This appears to be a specific educational methodology. They are not the same thing.
128.252.20.193 ( talk) 15:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
There should definitely be a criticism section somewhere here. Chris Blattman suggests in a blog that this is not a very robust study ( http://chrisblattman.com/2015/10/12/society-is-paying-a-high-price-in-dollars-and-human-suffering-for-wrong-assumptions/).
Hasire ( talk) 15:41, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on HighScope. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:40, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
This article shows a very high score on Earwig's Copyvio Detector: 92.1%. That is unacceptable unless it is a false positive!
The two sources which the article is potentially plagiarising are:
If these sources have copied the text from us (and we are sure about that) then the article is OK. If we have copied from them, or from a source that they have also copied, then that is not OK.
I can't tell which is the case but it does not look good. In some cases the text in the links above is worse than ours, possibly indicating that we copied it and then cleaned it up a bit. However, there a section where the non-Wikipedia version has inexplicable hyphens in it. That could indicate that it was ineptly copied from us, or just as plausibly from somewhere else, and that our version is either the original version or a cleaned up copy of their copy. (Or maybe it was just badly written in the first place.)
What I do not see is any strong indicators that the text was copied from us. There is no attribution to us and our text is so badly referenced that you can't just say "Aha! They took our text and ripped all the reference tags out." But then the large quantity of unreferenced material here is a separate issue that might justify cutting a lot of it out anyway.
I'm going to tag the article but not gut it for now but if there really is any plagiarism of copyrighted sources here then we will have to remove the content. It's not just a good idea. It's the law! -- DanielRigal ( talk) 13:51, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
NPR has done some recent reporting on the Perry Preschool project which may be useful for this page
I don't have time to add info from these sources to the page right now, but I may come back and do some editing later. If I forget though maybe someone else will see this and fill in? Hope this helps. Devinplatt ( talk) 05:58, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
I would like to start working on improving this article. Here are some sources I have gathered. These are specifically dealing with the Perry Preschool study. "The Economic Goals of Schooling: Human Capital, Global Economy, and Preschool", American Education, Routledge, pp. 107–133, 2015-08-14, ISBN 978-1-315-72446-1, retrieved 2022-02-18 "Perry Preschool Project - Social Preschool Programs that Work". Social Programs that Work. Retrieved 2022-02-18. Muennig, Peter; Schweinhart, Lawrence; Montie, Jeanne; Neidell, Matthew (2009-08). "Effects of a Prekindergarten Educational Intervention on Adult Health: 37-Year Follow-Up Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial". American Journal of Public Health. 99 (8): 1431–1437. doi:10.2105/ajph.2008.148353. ISSN 0090-0036. Kevahcoles ( talk) 02:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)