Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants

613

Published on

Presented by: Charles Bruner, CFPC and Catherine Scott-Little, UNCG -- Moderated by:Eboni Howard, AIR …

Presented by: Charles Bruner, CFPC and Catherine Scott-Little, UNCG -- Moderated by:Eboni Howard, AIR
September 16, 2011

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
613
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. a partnership between BUILD and First Five Years Fund
  • 2. Kindergarten Entry Assessments and Early Learning Challenge Grants Some Basics Presented by: Charles Bruner, CFPC and Catherine Scott-Little, UNCG Moderated by: Eboni Howard, AIR September 16, 2011
  • 3. Presentation Areas <ul><li>KEA Definition </li></ul><ul><li>Key Purposes and Requirements </li></ul><ul><li>What the Scoring Advantage Means </li></ul><ul><li>Criteria for Assigning Points </li></ul><ul><li>Types of Assessment Instruments </li></ul><ul><li>Observational Assessment Examples </li></ul><ul><li>Components of a KEA System </li></ul><ul><li>Required Dual Use </li></ul><ul><li>Developing a “High Quality” Plan </li></ul><ul><li>Developing a Budget (that doesn’t break the grant or state budget) </li></ul><ul><li>Final Thoughts </li></ul>
  • 4. KEA Definition <ul><li>Is administered during the first few months of kindergarten; </li></ul><ul><li>Covers all five Essential Domains of School Readiness; </li></ul><ul><li>Upholds recommendations of the NRC reports on early childhood; </li></ul><ul><li>Meets additional criteria for appropriate assessments; </li></ul><ul><li>Is not to be used to prevent children’s entry into kindergarten. </li></ul>
  • 5. Key Purposes and Requirements for Developing a KEA <ul><li>Purposes: </li></ul><ul><li>Inform instruction and services in the early elementary grades </li></ul><ul><li>Inform efforts to close the school readiness gap at kindergarten entry </li></ul><ul><li>Aligned with: </li></ul><ul><li>Early learning and development standards across five domains </li></ul><ul><li>Meet tests for : </li></ul><ul><li>Validity, reliability and appropriateness of use </li></ul><ul><li>Use with English language learners and children with disabilities </li></ul><ul><li>Part of: </li></ul><ul><li>Statewide longitudinal data system/state early childhood data system </li></ul><ul><li>To be administered : </li></ul><ul><li>As a common, statewide assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Beginning no later than the start of school year 2014-15 </li></ul><ul><li>Funded : </li></ul><ul><li>In significant part, with Federal or State resources other than those available under this grant </li></ul>
  • 6. What the Scoring Advantage for KEA Means <ul><li>KEA is one option under Criteria E (40 points total). </li></ul><ul><li>Selecting KEA is to state’s scoring advantage if it can score 70% in developing a high quality plan to implement one. </li></ul><ul><li>If KEA is selected, states also will want to reference it in other parts of their plan (A1, A2, C2, C3,and Priority 4a, in particular). </li></ul><ul><li>In general, GO FOR IT! </li></ul>
  • 7. KEA in the Context of Efforts to Improve Children’s Educational Success KEA Birth………………………….XXX………………………..Eight Look Back Use as part of early learning and development system improvement Step Forward Use as part of K-3 instruction and services development Review the referenced NRC reports for appropriate (and inappropriate) uses!
  • 8. Criteria for Assigning Points for KEA (E1) <ul><li>Whether each element of the selection criterion is implemented or planned </li></ul><ul><li>The quality of the implementation or plan </li></ul><ul><li>The extent to which the different types of Early Learning and Development Programs in the State are included and addressed </li></ul><ul><li>The extent to which the unique needs of the State’s special populations of Children with High Needs are considered and addressed </li></ul>
  • 9. Types of Assessment Instruments <ul><li>Direct assessments (assessments administered directly to child) </li></ul><ul><li>Observational assessments (assessments through ongoing observation of child) </li></ul><ul><li>Parental reports or assessments (particularly on special needs or health concerns, but can be broader) </li></ul><ul><li>Requirement that KEA cover five domains leans toward conducting an observational assessment (which may be complemented by direct assessment and parent reports). </li></ul>
  • 10. Commercial Observational Assessment Examples: Touching Five Domains WSS ** Maryland GOLD Assessment California PVDP # Items 30 39 37+2 Social &amp; Emotional Development Approaches to Learning Language and Literacy General Cognition Physical Health and Motor Development Cultural and Linguistic Appropriateness item ** Maryland adapted the WSS, using a portion of its items. There are many state variations in the use of WSS.
  • 11. Components of a KEA System <ul><li>Common KEA instrument(s) used statewide </li></ul><ul><li>Training/professional development to kindergarten teachers to administer and use </li></ul><ul><li>Application to inform practice in kindergarten </li></ul><ul><li>Safeguards in place to ensure appropriate use of the data </li></ul><ul><li>Software and electronic storage of information at the elementary school level </li></ul><ul><li>Electronic transfer of information into statewide data system </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporation of electronic information into statewide data system </li></ul><ul><li>Application at the state level to inform efforts to close kindergarten readiness gaps </li></ul>
  • 12. Required Dual Use and Implementation <ul><li>Possible “look back” uses </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To track state progress or changes in children’s general well being and readiness over time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To identify service gaps that need to be addressed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To identify area where there are additional needs for strategy development </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Possible “step forward” uses </li></ul><ul><ul><li>To inform instruction by letting teachers and administrators know classroom needs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To inform instruction by being part of ongoing individual student instruction (most beneficial if tied to other reports and parent teacher conferences) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>To inform K-3 standards and practice (Priority 4) </li></ul></ul>
  • 13. <ul><li>Requires careful consideration of the instruments selected (because most instruments are not designed for dual purposes) </li></ul><ul><li>Requires buy-in and ownership from multiple stakeholders </li></ul><ul><li>Requires teachers recognize why it is important </li></ul><ul><li>Must demonstrate alignment with other teaching activities for children </li></ul>Implications for Dual Uses
  • 14. <ul><li>Options in Selecting KEA Approach </li></ul><ul><li>Chose/adapt an existing commercial assessment and justify its ability to meet all conditions and negotiate on costs, ownership, and use </li></ul><ul><li>Develop own state assessment (new or adaptation/revision) </li></ul><ul><li>Work as part of a “cross-state consortium” to develop assessment or core elements of assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Some Considerations </li></ul><ul><li>Value in having tool that can be scored, analyzed, and evaluated on an ongoing basis at classroom and state level </li></ul><ul><li>Value in considering parent observations as complement to KEA assessment </li></ul>
  • 15. Developing a “High Quality” Plan <ul><li>State doesn’t need to have a KEA in place – will be scored on developing a “high quality plan” to build one. </li></ul><ul><li>State doesn’t have to start from scratch. </li></ul><ul><li>State has time to build ownership and to test prototypes and elements. </li></ul><ul><li>The process itself can lead to the understanding and support needed to ensure KEA is useful at the school and state level. </li></ul>
  • 16. High Quality Plan (1) – Key Goals <ul><li>To inform efforts to close the school readiness gap </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How data will be used to look at subpopulations and target areas </li></ul></ul><ul><li>To inform instruction and services in the early elementary school grades </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How kindergarten teachers will use the data to inform instruction for children in their classroom </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Potential for extending early development and learning approach into kindergarten and creating better alignment with early childhood programs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Potential for informing early elementary guidelines and practice to incorporate five domains (Priority 4a) </li></ul></ul>
  • 17. High Quality Plan (2) – Key Activities <ul><li>Planning process </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Resources that can inform plans for the KEA </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Analysis of alignment with early learning and development standards </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Legislation and/or regulations that may be needed and how to enact them </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Actual KEA System </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Instrumentation (and issues that must be considered) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>By whom and when the KEA will be administered </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Training that will be needed </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Administrative procedures and safeguards </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Preparing for Implementation </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Pilot testing the instrument, administrative procedures, and training </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Building data management systems </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Preparations for scaling the KEA up (including plans for implementation to be phased in). </li></ul></ul></ul>
  • 18. High Quality Plan (3) – Timeline, Parties Responsible, and Finances <ul><li>Realistic timeline, including key milestones, for implementing each key activity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Must implement the KEA in a public school kindergarten in 2014-15 school year </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Need to allow time for a planning process, instrument development/procurement, piloting, testing the data system, and planning scale-up activities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Want to show capacity to implement as expeditiously as possible </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Party or parties responsible for implementing each activity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Need to demonstrate that state has sufficient persons with expertise to carry out the activities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>May be important to demonstrate the planning process will involve stakeholders at different levels and with different roles </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Good to demonstrate commitment across the executive and legislative branches of government </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Appropriate financial resources to support successful implementation of the plan </li></ul>
  • 19. High Quality Plan (4) – Scoring Criteria <ul><li>Plans for how the State will address the needs of the different types of Early Learning and Development programs, if applicable. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>States could describe how the data from KEA will inform early learning and development instruction and identify where children are doing well and where children in the state demonstrate less competence or gaps in the services they have received </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How the State will meet the needs of Children with High Needs, as well as the unique needs of special populations of Children with High Needs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>States could describe how the unique needs and characteristics of Children with High Needs will be considered when planning and implementing the KEA, and how data from the KEA will be used to address services for Children with High Needs. </li></ul></ul>
  • 20. Developing a Budget for the KEA (that doesn’t break the grant or State budget) <ul><li>Instrument selection/development and costs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Many development costs represent in-kind costs from stakeholders in developing the High Quality Plan </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Training and professional development for KEA administration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>This is key to making the assessment effective but also should be part of training and professional development investments in kindergarten teachers (who will be the administrators) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>LEA cost in administering, scoring, using, and reporting to state </li></ul><ul><ul><li>These costs are not unique to KEA but apply to developing the statewide longitudinal database overall </li></ul></ul><ul><li>State cost in receiving, aggregating, and using the data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>These costs are not unique to KEA but apply to developing the statewide longitudinal database overall </li></ul></ul>
  • 21. Possible Funding Sources for the KEA <ul><li>Grant itself </li></ul><ul><li>In-kind commitment of planning efforts and activities </li></ul><ul><li>Funding from Sections 6111 and 6112 of ESEA </li></ul><ul><li>Funding from IES/longitudinal database development and use </li></ul><ul><li>Funding for information system development at LEAs </li></ul>
  • 22. Demystifying KEA – Co-Presenters’ 1963 Kindergarten Report Card <ul><li>First report card after two months of kindergarten year </li></ul><ul><li>Covered five domains </li></ul><ul><li>Scored as 1-2-3 (beginning, developing, mastering) </li></ul><ul><li>Incorporated observational and direct assessment items </li></ul><ul><li>Shared with parents at parent-teacher conference </li></ul><ul><li>Used for instructional purposes </li></ul><ul><li>Not a “high stakes” testing tool </li></ul>
  • 23. Additional Advice <ul><li>While the RTT-LC application separates the KEA (E1) from the comprehensive assessment system (C2) … </li></ul><ul><ul><li>It is important to think of the KEA as a part of the comprehensive assessment system that links the early development and learning system with the K-12 education system. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>This may be achieved through discussing KEA and its integration within A1 and A2, C2 and C4 and Priority 4a, as well as in E1. </li></ul></ul>
  • 24. Conclusion <ul><li>States have much to gain by planning for/implementing a KEA </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Substantial points in the RTT ELC </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Useful information on the status of children as they enter kindergarten </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved instruction in kindergarten </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Improved services and outcomes for High Needs Children </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Careful planning, significant resources, and careful implementation will be needed to realize the potential benefits of the KEA. </li></ul>
  • 25. About the Presenters Charles Bruner, Ph.D. Executive Director Child &amp; Family Policy Center Director Build Research and Evaluation 505 5 th Avenue, Suite 404 Des Moines, IA 50309 515-280-9027 [email_address] www.cfpciowa.org www.finebynine.org www.buildinitiative.org Catherine Scott-Little, Ph.D. Associate Professor Human Development and Family Studies School of Health and Human Sciences University of North Carolina at Greensboro PO Box 26170 Greensboro, NC 27402-6170 336 256-0132 [email_address]

×