• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Kathy Sylva - EECERA 2013 Keynote
 

Kathy Sylva - EECERA 2013 Keynote

on

  • 1,216 views

Quality in Early Childhood Education – Can it be International?

Quality in Early Childhood Education – Can it be International?

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,216
Views on SlideShare
776
Embed Views
440

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0

1 Embed 440

http://www.eecera2014.org 440

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Kathy Sylva - EECERA 2013 Keynote Kathy Sylva - EECERA 2013 Keynote Presentation Transcript

    • Professor Kathy Sylva University of Oxford EECERAConference TallinnEstonia2013 Quality in Early Childhood Education – Can it be International?
    • The EPPE/EPPSE Team Principal Investigators: Kathy Sylva Department of Education, University of Oxford Edward Melhuish Birkbeck, University of London Pam Sammons Department of Education, University of Oxford Iram Siraj-Blatchford Institute of Education, University of London Brenda Taggart Institute of Education, University of London
    • Themes in today’s presentation  The effects of pre-school education on children’s intellectual and social/behavioural development at age 11, 14 years  (Controlling for for) effects of early learning at home  Outcomes – attainment or progress?
    •  Independent Variable: Early Childhood Education e.g. Perry Pre-school Programme  Dependent Variable: Children’s developmental outcomes Establishing cause in educational research: Experimental design
    • An experimental approach: The High/Scope Perry Study in US School Achievement Tests,plus Interviews with children Social Profiles:questionnaires Interviews with parents Behaviour Ratings:teachers Assignment to Special Education I.Q. Jobs Training Parenthood Welfare Crime Pre-schoolgroupControl(noschool) group 3 5 AGE 18 27 From Schweinhart & Weikart (1993)
    • An educational effectiveness approach: fixed effects in EPPE The EPPE Project uses an educational /school effectiveness design, which investigates ‘natural’ variation using multi-level modelling (pupil and school level) in order to establish effects of pre- school attendance or quality on children’s development over time.
    •  Five regions strategically selected in England (  141 pre-school centres randomly selected within regions to include: playgroups, nursery classes, private day nurseries, day care centres run by local authorities, nursery schools and integrated centres  2800 randomly selected children from 141 centres; 305 children from home  Linked study of 800 children in Northern Ireland; ‘strength of replication’ The EPPE Sample
    • EPPE has an ‘mixed methods’ design which includes:  Quantitative methods (led by Sammons)  Qualitative methods (led by Siraj-Blatchford) 50 cast studies of resilient chidren and families The EPPE Mixed Method Design
    • 25 nursery classes 590 children 34 playgroups 610 children 31 private day nurseries 520 children 20 nursery schools 520 children 7 integrated centres 190 children 24 local authority day care nurseries 430 children home 310 children Design of EPPE 3-11: 6 LA, 141 pre-schools, 3,000 children Reception Yr 2Pre-school Provision (3+ yrs) Key Stage 1 600 Schools Yr 6 Key Stage 2 1000 Schools
    • Neighbourhood The Developing Child Family Settings Cultural context Immediate environment Social and economic context Bronfenbrenner’s model of human development
    • Influences on child outcomes at ages 5, 7, 11, 14 Child Factors Family Factors Home- Learning- Environment Cognitive outcomes: English & maths Social/Behavioural: Self Regulation Likes to work things out for self Pro-social Considerate of others feelings Hyperactivity Restless, cannot stay still for long Anti-social Bullies other children Primary School Pre-School Secondary School
    • Sources of data  Child cog/ social/dispositional assessments  Child/Family background information, e.g. SES, birthweight  Interviews with all parents  Case studies of settings and of children who were ‘resilient’  Observation rating scales for quality (ECERS-R and E)
    • Early Years Home Learning Environment (HLE at ages 3-4 years) HLE index (Melhuish, 2001), measuring frequency of: 1. Reading with child 2. Painting and drawing 3. Library visits 4. Playing with letters/numbers 5. Teaching alphabet 6. Playing or teaching numbers/shapes 7. Playing with songs/nursery rhymes HLE to children’s British Ability Scales scores as well as measures of socio-economic status and educational qualifications of parents.
    • 0.21 0.22 0.40 0.57 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 14-19 20-24 25-32 33-45 Net Effect of Early Home-Learning Environment on Maths at Age 10 EffectSize HLEIndex (Pre-School) R
    • Multilevel analysis predicting oral language skills at age 5 (primary school entry)* Factors Effe ct Size No. of Siblings (3+ vs. none) -.17 English as an Additional Language (EAL vs. English as mother tongue) -.24 Mother’s Qualification Level (degree vs. no degree) .24 Family SES (semi-skilled manual vs. professional non-manual) -.23 HLE: Being read to (daily vs. rarely) .27 Effects of Early Years HLE on vocabulary at 5
    • Does pre-school attendance matter at 7 years?
    • READING at key stage 1, social class and pre-school experience WRITING at key stage 1, social class and pre-school experience The effect of social class and pre-school attendance on literacy at age 7 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8 Professional Skilled Un/semi skilled Social class by occupation Meanyear2readinglevel Pre-school Expected minimum No pre-school 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.6 Professional Skilled Un/semi skilled Social class by occupation Meanyear2writinglevel Pre-school Expected minimum No pre-school From Sylva et al. (2004)
    • Does pre-school quality matter at age 11?
    • ECERS-R  Based on observation  7 sub-scales:  Space and furnishings  Personal care routines  Language reasoning  Activities  Interaction  Programme structure  Parents and staff  Harms, Clifford & Cryer (1998) ECERS-E  Based on observation  4 sub-scales:  Literacy  Mathematics  Science and environment  Diversity  Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2010) Two Early Childhood Environment Quality Rating Scales
    • Example ECERS-E item: Food preparation (Science) Inadequate Minimal Good Excellent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1.1 No preparation of food/drink is undertaken in front of children 3.1 Food preparation is undertaken by staff in front of the children 5.1 Food preparation / cooking activities are provided regularly 7.1 A variety of cooking activities in which all children may take part are provided regularly 3.2 Some children can choose to participate in food preparation 5.2 Most of the children have the opportunity to participate in food preparation 7.2 The ingredients are attractive and the end result is edible and appreciated 3.3 Some food-related discussion takes place where appropriate 5.3 The staff lead discussion about the food involved and use appropriate language 7.3 The staff lead and encourage discussion on the process of food preparation and/or question children about it 5.4 Children are encouraged to use more than one sense (feel, smell, taste) to explore raw ingredients
    • 0 1 2 3 4 5 Literacy Mathematics Science and environment Diversity ECERS-Escore Level 2 Level 3 / 4 Level 5 ECERS-E subscales by manager qualifications
    • The effect of pre-school pedagogical quality (ECERS-E) on English and Mathematics in Year 6
    • There is no effect of the ECERS-R on English or Mathematics at age 11 The effect of global quality (ECERS-R) on academic attainment
    • The social behavioural outcomes (Goodman scale extended)  Hyperactivity e.g. Restless, overactive, cannot stay still for long’  Self regulation e.g. ‘Likes to work out things for self’  Pro-social behaviour e.g. ‘Considerate of other people’s feelings’  Antisocial behaviour e.g. ‘Bullies other children`
    • The effect of pre-school quality (ECERS-R and ECERS-E) on self-regulation at age 11
    • The effect of pre-school quality (ECERS-R and ECERS-E) on anti-social behaviour at age 11
    • The net effect of pre-school quality on academic progress in English between 7 and 11 (accelerated learning compared to peers)
    • Representation of mediated effects upon literacy and numeracy Early Years HLE 3+ Pre-school Effectiveness 3-5 years Literacy ages 7, 11, 14 Numeracy ages 7, 11, 14 Self-regulation at age 5
    • Quality fosters capacity for learning how to learn  Pre-school attendance alone led to better attainment in English and Mathematics but this did not translate into better progress.  Pre-school quality (medium, high) led to greater progress between Years 2 and 6 for English and Maths, children who attended high quality had accelerated learning compared to ‘home’ children.  High quality pre-school provides children with an initial boost to at school entry but also promotes progress (by fostering children’s capacity to learn?)
    • Play scenario: Katz Four children were playing together. Three were wearing trainers but shoes of one child lit up occasionally. Teacher: Wow! Look at your shoes! That is so cool. They light up when you step down. Child 1: Yes, they do this. [Jumps up and down several times] Teacher: How does that happen? How does it light up? Child 1: Because they are new. Teacher: Um. Mine are new too but they don’t light up. Child 2: No, because they light up when you step down on them. [Steps down hard several times] Quality learning: The Light-Up Shoes
    • Teacher: [Steps down hard several times] That’s funny. Mine don’t light up when I step down. Child 3: No, no, no, you have to have these holes [points to the holes] Teacher: [Pointing to the holes in her own shoe] But I have holes and mine still don’t light up, and Josh has holes in his trainers too and his do not light up either. I wonder why? Child 4: I think you need batteries. Kids, you need batteries. Child 1: Yeah, you need batteries to make them work. [Thinks for a while]. But I did not see batteries when I put my toes in. Child 4: I think they are under the toes. Child 2: I can’t feel the batteries under my toes. Teacher: I wonder how we can find out about this? The Light-Up Shoes (cont.)
    • Harms. T., Clifford, R. M., & Cryer, D. (1998). Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale Revised Edition (ECERS-R). New York: Teachers’ College Press. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2010). Early Childhood Matters: Evidence from the Effective Pre-school and Primary Education Project. Oxford: Routledge. Sylva, K., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2003, Second Edition 2010). Assessing quality in the early years. Trentham Books. EPPSE Project http://eppe.ioe.ac.uk/ Families, Early Learning and Literacy (FELL) research group http://www.education.ox.ac.uk/research/fell/