community input discussions: measuring the progress of young children in massachusetts august 2009
TRANSCRIPT
Community Input Discussions: Measuring the Progress of Young Children in Massachusetts
August 2009
2
Statement of Intent
Massachusetts is in the early stages of developing a statewide system to measure developmental progress of its young children
EEC is engaging parents, providers, program administrators, teachers, higher education institutions, and policy makers to build a responsive approach
This initiative is separate from (and would not replace) developmental information that programs gather about children to use for curriculum planning and to individualize instruction
3
Questions for Stakeholder Input
What are your hopes for measuring the developmental progress of young children in state?
How do you hope information will be used?
What are the most important things to measure about school readiness?
What are some of the challenges you foresee in moving forward with this effort?
4
Measuring School Readiness Across the Country
Massachusetts is joining rapidly growing trend to understand school readiness
29 states currently collect statewide data on children’s progress
These efforts are often directly connected to state-funded preschool efforts
5
Why Are Statewide Data Needed?
To inform policy makers about the benefits of and impact of investments in early childhood education and care in Massachusetts
To better understand school readiness gaps(s) for subgroups of children
To inform statewide policy development
Data will not be used for high stakes “testing” of young children or providers
6
Statewide Measures of School Readiness vs. Child Assessments and Screenings
Currently, many providers are already using a developmental assessment or screening tool to inform practice and individualize instruction
Providers are currently using a variety of assessment measures UPK grantees are required to use one of four assessment
systems• Creative Curriculum Developmental Continuum• Ages & Stages• High Scope Child Observation Record (COR)• Work Sampling System
Statewide measurement of school readiness is not intended to be used to replace program-level assessment practices
7
Statewide Measures of School Readiness vs. Child Assessments and Screenings
Different purposes Statewide system: information about the success
of all children in Massachusetts Program-level assessments: information for
parents and caregivers about individual children
Different level of information about child Statewide system: measure a small number of
indicators of school readiness Program-level assessments: comprehensive look at
child progress across all developmental domains
8
Statewide Measures of School Readiness vs. Child Assessments and Screenings
Different usefulness to providers Statewide system: for broader policy purposes Program-level assessments: to help provider
support each child’s growth and development
Other differences Statewide system: children will be anonymous
when data are reported
9
Design Options for Statewide Measure: Key Issues to Consider
WHAT to measure about child development
WHO to measure
WHEN to measure
HOW will measures/information on children be collected
WHAT ELSE to measure about home environments, program characteristics, and community context
10
Design Options for Statewide Measure: Key Issues to Consider
WHAT: how broadly should we measure children’s development – which domains are most important?
WHO: all children and programs, or just a sample?
WHEN: longitudinal data in preschool only (ages 3 and 4) or linking with school data (K and/or grade 1)?
HOW: providers trained to administer measures, outside evaluators, and/or other informants?
11
Other State Approaches
All states look at development either at one point in time or over time, usually using different samples of children at each age
All states interested in measuring school readiness skills, although the skills that they measure vary
Types of measures used vary (standardized assessment vs. developmental observations, number of development areas measured)
Where system is ongoing, states involve providers in data collection
12
Other States: Approaches Using Providers as Data Collectors
MD: Ongoing assessment of all children at school entry by kindergarten teachers, using Work Sampling System
PA: Ongoing measures of all children three time per year during preschool and kindergarten by providers, using Work Sampling System
NC: Snapshot of school readiness information using variety of measures from a sample of principals, kindergarten teachers, parents, and children just entering kindergarten, coordinated by research firm
13
Key Issues Raised To Date (based on six stakeholder meetings)
Engage parent and provider support for initiative to ensure maximum participation Make sure purpose of initiative is clear
Ensure information collected about children does not reflect negatively on families
Consider how to support providers and minimize burden if they will be on the front lines of the measurement effort
Consider how to provide context for data on development of vulnerable subgroups of children
Consider linking child assessment data to program quality data to better understand linkages between quality and child outcomes
14
Key Decisions Moving Forward: WHAT to measure?
Narrow vs. broad measurement Tension between desire to measure “whole child”
and what is feasible to collect
Which skills/outcomes to measure Focus on outcomes that research tells us are
related to success in school such as:• Academic skills in reading, writing, and/or math• Social skills• Cognitive and behavioral self-regulation
15
Key Decisions Moving Forward: WHO to measure?
Could measure as broad a population as possible or target more narrowlyMight oversample particular subgroups of
interest
Effort will likely be limited to preschool children in licensed and license-exempt settingsProbably not feasible to access children who
are in informal and/or unlicensed care settings or who are not in out-of-home care at all
16
Key Decisions Moving Forward: HOW to measure?
Providers as assessors Advantages: cost, may help with getting parent permission,
providers learn about their children’s skills Disadvantages: concerns about bias if providers assess their
own children, need to train large number of providers, difficult for providers to find time to conduct quiet standardized assessment
Outside assessors Advantages: can be trained to reliability, no public concerns
about partiality, possibility of building on early childhood education infrastructure in state to develop group of assessors
Disadvantages: cost of conducting assessments, cost of training
Parents as assessors Advantages: builds parent buy-in, not expensive Disadvantages: public perception of bias, some concepts might
be hard to explain to parents, may be difficult to get parents to return this information
17
Key Decisions Moving Forward: Consider Integration/Overlap with Other Assessment Efforts
UPK grantees using one of four specified child assessment tools
Many other programs are using either one of these four tools or another measure
School district programs using Battelle in spring of 3-year-old year with children who will be evaluated for special needs
Other efforts?
18
Key Decision Points Moving Forward: WHEN to measure?
Options for data collection schedule before school entry Measure children once, at the end of preschool, to
describe school readiness of preschoolers Measure children twice, at the beginning and end of
preschool, to describe school readiness but also to see whether children who start out below average are closing the gap over time
Measure children three times, once during the 3-year-old year and fall and spring of the 4-year-old year. This design provides more information on progress over time
Looking at same group of children over time vs.
different groups of children each time Although following the same children would allow us to
look at individual growth over time, this is a very expensive undertaking
19
Questions for Stakeholder Input
What are your hopes for measuring the developmental progress of young children in state?
How do you hope information will be used?
What are the most important things to measure about school readiness?
What are some of the challenges you foresee in moving forward with this effort?