SlideShare a Scribd company logo
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE
KINDERGARTEN OBSERVATION FORM
& THE ASR SCHOOL READINESS ASSESSMENT MODEL
Susan Brutschy, ASR President
Lisa Colvig-Niclai, MA
Kim Carpenter, PhD
Penny Huang, PhD
Christina Branom, PhD
Yoonyoung Kwak, PhD
Casey Coneway, MPP
Overview
 Overview of the KOF and assessment methodology
- Why assess kindergarten readiness?
- Where have we assessed readiness?
- How do we assess readiness? The Kindergarten Observation Form
 How do we tell the readiness story?
- How do we use these readiness data to spark action?
2
Purposes for readiness assessment
 Create a portrait of readiness for a population of children
- Which children are more ready…and less ready?
- Which child and family factors are linked to greater readiness?
 Set baseline as springboard for coordinated action…and track trends or
“sea changes” over time
 “Look backward” to evaluate interventions for program participants
 “Look forward” to provide formative data to guide K-3 interventions
 To build bridges between ECE and K-12 with common framework and
indicators for readiness…a platform for coordinated intervention
 We use these data at variety of levels or units of analyses: county-wide,
program or initiative, district, school, class, and recently, between teachers,
parents and individual children
3
Where has the KOF been used, and why?
4
5 longitudinal studies:
San Francisco, San Mateo,
Santa Clara, Marin, LA
Preschool
Assess at entry
• Formative
assessment
• Tailor instruction
• Engage parents
as partners
Assess at exit
• Profile of readiness
• Engage parents as
partners for
summer learning
support
• Collaborate with
kindergartens
Summer
Evaluate the readiness
‘boosters’
• Pre and post of summer
bridge programs
• Engage parents as
partners; help them be
school ready
Kindergarten
Assess at entry
• Create portrait of readiness
• Evaluate what works to boost
readiness
• Inform class instruction
• Engage parents as partners
• Use findings to inform readiness
investments, align systems
Third grade
Assess test scores
• Assess whether kinder
readiness predicts
third grade success
• Assess influence of
certain factors or
interventions
F5 Alameda County, 2008,09, 10, 11,13,14,15, 16 (Hayward PN)
F5 Contra Costa, 2016, 2017
F5 Del Norte, 2011,12,13,14,15,16, 17
F5 Sacramento, 2012,13,14,15,16, 17
F5 Marin/Marin Community Foundation, 2010, 11,12,13,14
F5 Napa (NVELI eval), 2013,14,15,16, 17
F5 San Francisco, 2007, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017 (KRI)
F5 Santa Clara County 2004, 05, 06, 08, 11,12,13 (Quality Matters
study), 2016 (Alum Rock universal Pre-K), 2017
F5 San Mateo, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008
F5 San Mateo- Preschool for All Evaluation 2005, 2008
F5 San Mateo Kickoff to Kindergarten Eval, 2008, 2009
F5 Santa Cruz, 2008
F5 Siskiyou, 2017
United Way, Lake County, Illinois, 2005, 2006
F5 San Mateo Kickoff to Kindergarten 2001, 02, 03, 04, 06, 07, 09, 13
Palo Alto USD Springboard to Kindergarten 2010, 11,12
Santa Clara County Migrant Ed, 2010
Duke University, 2014, 15,16
F5 Contra Costa
Literacy preschool
2010, 11, 12, 13, 14
F5 San Benito, 2012-14
Santa Clara County Head
Start, 2010, 11
San Jose Smart Start, 2010
Gilroy Unified, 2009, 2010
F5 Santa Cruz “Snapshot,”
2010, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
How do we measure school readiness?
 Holistic view of
readiness
 Teacher-generated,
researcher-refined
 Used with over
55,000
children
 Predicts 3rd grade
test scores
5
K
Academics
Recog. shapes
Recog. colors
Counts 20 objects
Recog. letters
Recognizes rhyming words
Engages with books
Writes own first name
Answers questions about literature
Self-
Regulation
Stays focused
Follows class rules
Follows directions
Plays cooperatively
Participates in circle time
Handles frustration well
Social
Expression
Expresses empathy
Tells about story or experience
Curious & eager to learn
Expresses needs & wants
Motor Skills Items
Use of pencil (fine motor)
General coordination
How do we measure school readiness?
 The Kindergarten Observation Form
- 10 minute teacher-administered assessment (average)
- 20 items = 14 observational, 6 interactive
- Common core aligned
- Four readiness dimensions or “Basic Building Blocks of Readiness”
• Self- Care & Motor Skills
• Self-Regulation
• Social Expression
• Kindergarten Academics
 Parent Information Form
- Self-administered parent survey
- Research-based predictors of readiness, such as:
• Early education experience of child
• Transition activities
• Family activities like reading-aloud, arts/crafts, exercise
• Protective factors
• Background and demographic information
 Secondary program/service data (program or school records)
6
A Glimpse of the Kindergarten Observation Form
7
How is the KOF implemented?
8
April ASR or a school district rep contacts each of the schools’ principals to
schedule teacher trainings for the Fall assessment
August ASR conducts 90 minute in-person teacher trainings (on school campuses)
Sept Teachers hand out Parent Packet: consent form, incentive book, and
Parent Information Form (PIF) survey
Teachers complete Kindergarten Observation Forms (KOF)
(paper, IPAD or computer!) for each student in their class.
October Teachers return the KOF, and PIFs materials to ASR by pre-paid Fed Ex
envelope
ASR sends each teacher their stipend (usually $150 to $250)
November ASR begins data entry and analysis
Teachers receive a data profile for their classroom
Jan-Mar ASR finalizes reports (comprehensive, school report, district dashboard)
The KOF is a valid measure of readiness
9
Content
validity
YES: Domains and items premised upon National
Education Goals Panel framework, Common Core
standards, and extensive, ongoing literature
reviews
Do experts view KOF
items as essential to
readiness?
Construct
validity
YES: Correlated with other validated assessments:
• Woodcock Johnson III,
• Brigance K-1 Screens,
• Expressive One Word Picture Vocabulary Test
(EOWPVT),
• Work Sampling System (WSS)
• Preschool/Kindergarten Behavior Scales (PKBS),
• Head Toes Knees Shoulder test (HTKS),
• Ages and Stages (ASQ)
Does the KOF measure
what we think it is
measuring?
Predictive
validity
YES: Five large longitudinal studies have shown that
KOF scores independently predict 3rd grade English and
Math scores, and 3rd grade DIBELS scores
Is the KOF a good
predictor of later
school performance?
Some Examples of How We
Tell the Readiness Story
Percent at each level of proficiency
11
Self-Care &
Motor Skills
Self-
Regulation
Social
Expression
Kindergarten
Academics
7%
6%
23%
6%
5%
7%
5%
6%
5%
7%
5%
6%
19%
12%
18%
11%
11%
19%
13%
18%
12%
13%
13%
14%
10%
11%
15%
17%
7%
10%
23%
9%
32%
34%
21%
24%
28%
36%
30%
33%
29%
26%
30%
31%
28%
27%
30%
32%
30%
30%
67%
87%
42%
49%
39%
59%
56%
37%
53%
43%
54%
58%
50%
51%
58%
58%
53%
47%
62%
56%
Recognizes primary shapes
Recognizes basic colors
Recognizes letters of the alphabet
Counts up to 20 objects
Recognizes rhyming words
Writes own first name
Understands structure, basic features of books
Answers questions about details in literature
Demonstrates curiosity, eagerness for learning
Tells about a story or experience
Expresses empathy or caring for others
Appropriately expresses needs and wants
Handles frustration well
Participates successfully in large group activities
Works and plays cooperatively with peers
Follows two-step directions
Follows class rules and routines
Stays focused in individual/small group activities
Has general coordination
Uses a pencil with proper grip
Not Yet Beginning In Progress Proficient
Source: Applied Survey Research, Kindergarten Observation Form (2015), First 5 Alameda, N=1,495-1,514
Readiness levels by KOF Building Block
12
3.29
3.52
3.20
3.32 3.25
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
Overall Readiness Self-Care & Motor
Skills
Self-Regulation Social Expression Kindergarten
Academics
Average readiness scores across all students
Proficient
In Progress
Beginning
Not Yet
Readiness levels across student groups
13
2.85
3.19
2.80 2.82 2.81
3.32
3.58
3.23 3.33 3.27
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
Overall Self-Care & Motor
Skills
Self-Regulation Social Expression Kindergarten
Academics
Cesar Chavez, 2012 SCC-Low income, 2008 SCC, 2008
Comparing readiness levels:
Cesar Chavez Elementary Students, County-wide, and County-wide Low Income
Proficient
In Progress
Beginning
Not Yet
Percentage of students ready for school
Not Ready
(0 areas),
20%
Partially Ready (1-
2 areas), 36%
Fully Ready
(all areas),
44%
14
Source: KOF, First 5 Alameda, 2015. N=1,460. Note: Data were weighted to approximate district and EL representation.
Fully Ready: Mean score of 3.25 or higher in all three domains: Self-Regulation, Social Expression and K. Academics.
Partially Ready: Mean score of 3.25 or higher in one or two domains.
Not Ready: Mean score below 3.25 in all three domains.
Percent Ready for Kindergarten, Alameda County, 2015
Readiness portraits across regions
15
Prevalence of students in each “readiness portrait,” 2009
City and County of San Francisco
Readiness levels across regions
16
94607
94606
94601
94621
94603
94579
94578
94556
94546
94541
Ave Readiness Score
Dark Red: 1-2.49
Light Red: 2.5-2.99
Light Green: 3-3.49
Dark Green: 3.5-4
Alameda County,
2017
What factors predict readiness?
17
School
Readiness
Quality ECE
(Pre-school, TK,
family care)
Gender
Age
Family
SES
English
Learner
Special
Needs
Health & Well-
Being
Single
Parent
Screen
Time
Race/
Ethnicity
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form (2015), Parent Information Form (2015), First 5 Alameda.
Note: All variables in the chart are statistically significant (p<.05). The overall regression model was significant (p<.001),
explaining 33% of the variance in kindergarten readiness (R2 = .33).
Percent fully ready, by key predictor (adjusted)
27%
52%
27%
50%
42%
51%
38%
48%
35%
51%
Overall
Sample:
44% Ready
Health & Well-
Being
Quality ECE
(Pre-school, TK,
family care)
Age
Special
Needs
English
Learner
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form (2015), Parent Information Form (2015), First 5
Alameda. Note: N=1,201. **All differences are statistically significant (p<.01).
Family Engagement matters!
 The children of more highly engaged families had significantly higher
readiness scores, controlling for child and family demographics
3.00
3.09
2.86
2.97
3.16 3.15 3.07
3.17
Overall* Self-Regulation Social Expression* K Academics*
Less engaged
More engaged
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Parent Information Form 2016. Note: N=275-294. Analyses adjusted for gender, special
needs, English Learner, age, family SES, race/ethnicity, child well-being. *Difference statistically significant, p<.05.
20
One community’s “recipe” for school readiness
Cumulative effect of predictors
37% 38%
45%
38% 39%
26%
23%
18%
32% 34%
43%
52%
70%
77%
45%
31% 21% 19%
10%
4%
0%
0-5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Percent of Children Ready for Kindergarten, by Number of Predictors
Partially Ready Fully Ready Not Ready
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Parent Information Form, First 5 Alameda, 2015. Note:
N=1,461. ***Statistically significant, p<.001.
Readiness is linked to certain interventions
22
57%
34%
F5 Preschool No preschool
Children in preschools supported by
First 5 Sacramento are almost
twice as likely to be fully ready for
kindergarten than children with no
preschool (adjusted)
English Learner students who participate in
Napa Valley Early Learning Services are
almost three times as likely to be fully
ready for kindergarten as EL students
who did not have such services
33%
13%
ELLs who
participated in NVELI
ELLs who did not
participate in NVELI
Source: Applied Survey Research, KOF,
Napa Valley Early Learning Initiative,
2015.
NVELI n=76, Non-NVELI n=45
Source: Applied Survey Research, KOF, PIF, First 5
Sacramento, 2015.
N= 610 ***Significant at p<.001.
Readiness is linked to certain interventions
23
2.65
2.81
2.51 2.48
2.86
3.07
3.29
3.05
2.92
3.09
Overall
Readiness***
Self-Care &
Motor Skills***
Self
Regulation***
Social
Expression**
Kindergarten
Academics*
No quality
factors
Two or
three
quality
factors
Source: Applied Survey Research, F5 Santa Clara Quality Matters study, 2013. Kindergarten Observation Form, 2013. N=106 (45 with no quality indicators,
61 with 2 or 3 quality indicators). ANCOVA- means adjusted for well-being variable. ***p<0.001; **p<0.01;*p<0.05.
Quality Indicators: PD >24 hours/year, Average years of teaching experience >10, Parent activity almost every day.
Readiness Levels of Santa Clara County Low Income Students,
by Former Preschools’ Number of Quality Factors, 2013
Longer-term impact of school readiness
24
25%
50%
68%
Not ready Partially ready Ready
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Ns = 3rd grade: 882. SFUSD
Percentage of students proficient in third grade ELA and Math, by kindergarten readiness level
Factors that predict third grade achievement
25
-0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60
Child age
Preschool
API of kindergarten school
Use of community resources
Risk factors
English learner at kindergarten
Child is a girl
Kindergarten well-being
Was read to at home as a kindergartner
Special ed/IEP in kindergarten
Kindergarten Academics
Predictive Weight (Unstandardized)
CSTMath
CSTELA
Negative effect Positive effect
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Parent Information Form; First 5 administrative data, SFUSD administrative data. N=576
CSTELA; 577 CST Math Notes: The overall regression model explains 34% of the variance in 3rd grade CSTELA and 33% of the
variance in 3rd grade CST Math scores.
Academics and Self Reg both matter for later success
25% 29%
55%
70%
Low on both K
Academics and Self-
Regulation
Low K Academics, High
Self-Regulation
High K Academics,
Low Self-Regulation
High on both K
Academics and Self-
Regulation
26
Source: Kindergarten Observation Form and individual school district data, 2010, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties.
Note: Sample sizes = 367, 211, 235, 515, respectively. Students were divided into high and low levels of Kindergarten Academics and Self-Regulation based on
whether they were above or below the mean score on each.
Percent of Students Scoring at “Proficient” or “Advanced” on Third Grade ELA Tests, by
Kindergarten Readiness Patterns
Examples of how readiness data sparks action
 Readiness guides for parents in several First 5 counties (Santa Clara, San
Francisco, Sacramento)
 Calls to Action and Policy Briefs: Alameda, Siskiyou county
 Stronger Pre-K and Kinder articulation, alignment and collaboration (Marin
County, Santa Cruz “Snapshots”)
 Deeper views of who’s “not ready” in our programs, so we can better serve
children like them in the future (Napa, Sacramento,Alameda)
 Direct feedback about the ECE practices that work (Santa Clara Quality
Matters)
 Continued funding for interventions that show consistent, repeated linkage
with stronger readiness scores (San Francisco, Sacramento, Napa)
 Baseline and trend data for community initiatives (Hayward Promise
Neighborhoods, Mission Promise Neighborhood, My Brother’s Keeper San
Jose, Grade Level Reading Campaign San Jose)
27
Summary
 The KOF and the companion tools offer a 360 degree view of readiness
 Readiness data reveals important differences in proficiencies…patterns of
skills…patterns of children…patterns of influences --- enabling partners
to better target their next efforts
 Readiness data predicts 3rd grade outcomes…but early absenteeism
erases the benefits of readiness by third grade
 Readiness is a movable needle, if groups can create the right recipe
28

More Related Content

What's hot

Education in pakistan
Education in pakistanEducation in pakistan
Education in pakistan
Hijab Zahra
 
5 Components of Literacy
5 Components of Literacy5 Components of Literacy
5 Components of Literacy
ChristinaBetts
 
8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx
8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx
8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx
WeeSee1
 
Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning
Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning
Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning
IbrashPasha
 
Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)
Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)
Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)
Saad ID ReEs
 
Qualities of a good test (1)
Qualities of a good test (1)Qualities of a good test (1)
Qualities of a good test (1)kimoya
 
Organisational Structure of Secondary Education in Pakistan
Organisational Structure of Secondary Education in PakistanOrganisational Structure of Secondary Education in Pakistan
Organisational Structure of Secondary Education in Pakistan
R.A Duhdra
 
Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626
Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626
Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626
Ek ra
 
Review of five year Plans of Education in Pakistan
Review of five year Plans of Education in PakistanReview of five year Plans of Education in Pakistan
Review of five year Plans of Education in Pakistan
Jang Group of Companies
 
Comparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UK
Comparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UKComparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UK
Comparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UK
seharalam
 
Approaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyur
Approaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyurApproaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyur
Approaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyurTariq Ghayyur
 
National education policy 2009
National education policy 2009National education policy 2009
National education policy 2009
International advisers
 
Test, measurement, assessment & evaluation
Test, measurement, assessment & evaluationTest, measurement, assessment & evaluation
Test, measurement, assessment & evaluation
Sadia Shahzad Ali
 
Pakistan Education Plan
Pakistan Education PlanPakistan Education Plan
Pakistan Education PlanMinhaaj Rehman
 
Classroom management and organization
Classroom management and organizationClassroom management and organization
Classroom management and organization
Raj Kumar
 
Curriculum development in Islamic perspective
Curriculum development in Islamic perspectiveCurriculum development in Islamic perspective
Curriculum development in Islamic perspective
Dr. Hina Kaynat
 
Teacher Made Test vs Standardized Test
Teacher Made Test vs Standardized TestTeacher Made Test vs Standardized Test
Teacher Made Test vs Standardized Test
Dr. Amjad Ali Arain
 

What's hot (20)

Education in pakistan
Education in pakistanEducation in pakistan
Education in pakistan
 
5 Components of Literacy
5 Components of Literacy5 Components of Literacy
5 Components of Literacy
 
8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx
8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx
8602 Unit 2 Assesment.pptx
 
Education, Ideologies And Identities
Education, Ideologies And Identities Education, Ideologies And Identities
Education, Ideologies And Identities
 
Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning
Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning
Introduction to the Process of Educational Planning
 
Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)
Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)
Educational Assessment and Evoluation (8602)
 
Qualities of a good test (1)
Qualities of a good test (1)Qualities of a good test (1)
Qualities of a good test (1)
 
Classroom assessment
Classroom assessmentClassroom assessment
Classroom assessment
 
Organisational Structure of Secondary Education in Pakistan
Organisational Structure of Secondary Education in PakistanOrganisational Structure of Secondary Education in Pakistan
Organisational Structure of Secondary Education in Pakistan
 
Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626
Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626
Teacher Competencies & Role of Educational Technology-Unit 07- 8626
 
Review of five year Plans of Education in Pakistan
Review of five year Plans of Education in PakistanReview of five year Plans of Education in Pakistan
Review of five year Plans of Education in Pakistan
 
Comparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UK
Comparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UKComparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UK
Comparative perspective on teacher education Pakistan and UK
 
Approaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyur
Approaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyurApproaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyur
Approaches to the study of comparative education by tariq ghayyur
 
National education policy 2009
National education policy 2009National education policy 2009
National education policy 2009
 
Test, measurement, assessment & evaluation
Test, measurement, assessment & evaluationTest, measurement, assessment & evaluation
Test, measurement, assessment & evaluation
 
Pakistan Education Plan
Pakistan Education PlanPakistan Education Plan
Pakistan Education Plan
 
UNIT 1.pptx
UNIT 1.pptxUNIT 1.pptx
UNIT 1.pptx
 
Classroom management and organization
Classroom management and organizationClassroom management and organization
Classroom management and organization
 
Curriculum development in Islamic perspective
Curriculum development in Islamic perspectiveCurriculum development in Islamic perspective
Curriculum development in Islamic perspective
 
Teacher Made Test vs Standardized Test
Teacher Made Test vs Standardized TestTeacher Made Test vs Standardized Test
Teacher Made Test vs Standardized Test
 

Similar to An Introduction to the Kindergarten Observation Form

Wsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision Making
Wsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision MakingWsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision Making
Wsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision MakingWSU Cougars
 
Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]
Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]
Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]biancaj5
 
spec-item1-Slides.pptx
spec-item1-Slides.pptxspec-item1-Slides.pptx
spec-item1-Slides.pptx
AldrinApon2
 
Wsu Ppt Building District Data Capacity
Wsu Ppt Building District Data CapacityWsu Ppt Building District Data Capacity
Wsu Ppt Building District Data CapacityGlenn E. Malone, EdD
 
Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009
Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009
Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009
tlysiak
 
Common core-e guide
Common core-e guideCommon core-e guide
Common core-e guide
Claymont Intermediate
 
Student Assessment
Student AssessmentStudent Assessment
Student Assessmentcgamble
 
Pierce county WAVA - CCSS - Gohen
Pierce county WAVA - CCSS - GohenPierce county WAVA - CCSS - Gohen
Pierce county WAVA - CCSS - Gohen
pcwava
 
Parent presentation 2011 12 export
Parent presentation 2011 12 exportParent presentation 2011 12 export
Parent presentation 2011 12 exportJonathan Martin
 
Improvements in performance version 2
Improvements in performance version 2Improvements in performance version 2
Improvements in performance version 2Peter Billington
 
Wsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of Support
Wsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of SupportWsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of Support
Wsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of SupportWSU Cougars
 
Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008
Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008
Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008WSU Cougars
 
Heath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 final
Heath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 finalHeath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 final
Heath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 finalJustin Reeve
 
March 2019 Directors Meeting
March 2019 Directors MeetingMarch 2019 Directors Meeting
The Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for All
The Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for AllThe Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for All
The Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for All
appliedsurveyresearch
 
DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15
DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15
DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15Peter Hofman
 
Non-Cognitive Testing
Non-Cognitive TestingNon-Cognitive Testing
Non-Cognitive Testing
jwilliams77
 
Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance- An Efficien...
Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance-  An Efficien...Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance-  An Efficien...
Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance- An Efficien...Bethany Silver
 
Transitional Counseling
Transitional CounselingTransitional Counseling
Transitional CounselingStephen Torode
 

Similar to An Introduction to the Kindergarten Observation Form (20)

Wsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision Making
Wsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision MakingWsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision Making
Wsu Greg Lobdell September 2008 Data And Decision Making
 
Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]
Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]
Staff Powerpoint 09 10[1]
 
spec-item1-Slides.pptx
spec-item1-Slides.pptxspec-item1-Slides.pptx
spec-item1-Slides.pptx
 
Wsu Ppt Building District Data Capacity
Wsu Ppt Building District Data CapacityWsu Ppt Building District Data Capacity
Wsu Ppt Building District Data Capacity
 
Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009
Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009
Euclid City Schools DLT Presentation Feb 9 2009
 
Common core-e guide
Common core-e guideCommon core-e guide
Common core-e guide
 
Student Assessment
Student AssessmentStudent Assessment
Student Assessment
 
Pierce county WAVA - CCSS - Gohen
Pierce county WAVA - CCSS - GohenPierce county WAVA - CCSS - Gohen
Pierce county WAVA - CCSS - Gohen
 
Parent presentation 2011 12 export
Parent presentation 2011 12 exportParent presentation 2011 12 export
Parent presentation 2011 12 export
 
Career Planning Ma Session
Career Planning Ma SessionCareer Planning Ma Session
Career Planning Ma Session
 
Improvements in performance version 2
Improvements in performance version 2Improvements in performance version 2
Improvements in performance version 2
 
Wsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of Support
Wsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of SupportWsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of Support
Wsu District Capacity Of Well Crafted District Wide System Of Support
 
Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008
Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008
Copy Of Characteristics Of Highly Effective Schools Sept 2008
 
Heath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 final
Heath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 finalHeath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 final
Heath phillips ut ascd summit dec 15 2011 final
 
March 2019 Directors Meeting
March 2019 Directors MeetingMarch 2019 Directors Meeting
March 2019 Directors Meeting
 
The Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for All
The Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for AllThe Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for All
The Difference You Make: Using Data to Highlight Equity for All
 
DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15
DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15
DRAFT - Assessment-Accountability Option - 1-22-15
 
Non-Cognitive Testing
Non-Cognitive TestingNon-Cognitive Testing
Non-Cognitive Testing
 
Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance- An Efficien...
Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance-  An Efficien...Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance-  An Efficien...
Using Common Assessment Data to Predict High Stakes Performance- An Efficien...
 
Transitional Counseling
Transitional CounselingTransitional Counseling
Transitional Counseling
 

Recently uploaded

standardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghh
standardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghhstandardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghh
standardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghh
ArpitMalhotra16
 
一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单
nscud
 
Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...
Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...
Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...
John Andrews
 
一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单
vcaxypu
 
Opendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptx
Opendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptxOpendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptx
Opendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptx
Opendatabay
 
Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...
Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...
Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...
Subhajit Sahu
 
The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...
The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...
The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...
jerlynmaetalle
 
原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样
原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样
原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样
u86oixdj
 
一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单
ewymefz
 
一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单
ewymefz
 
哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样
哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样
哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样
axoqas
 
一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单
vcaxypu
 
一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理
mbawufebxi
 
Ch03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdf
Ch03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdfCh03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdf
Ch03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdf
haila53
 
Adjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTES
Adjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTESAdjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTES
Adjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTES
Subhajit Sahu
 
Sample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdf
Sample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdfSample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdf
Sample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdf
Linda486226
 
一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单
ewymefz
 
Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)
Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)
Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)
TravisMalana
 
一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理
v3tuleee
 
一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单
ukgaet
 

Recently uploaded (20)

standardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghh
standardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghhstandardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghh
standardisation of garbhpala offhgfffghh
 
一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(CBU毕业证)卡普顿大学毕业证成绩单
 
Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...
Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...
Chatty Kathy - UNC Bootcamp Final Project Presentation - Final Version - 5.23...
 
一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(RUG毕业证)格罗宁根大学毕业证成绩单
 
Opendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptx
Opendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptxOpendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptx
Opendatabay - Open Data Marketplace.pptx
 
Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...
Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...
Algorithmic optimizations for Dynamic Levelwise PageRank (from STICD) : SHORT...
 
The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...
The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...
The affect of service quality and online reviews on customer loyalty in the E...
 
原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样
原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样
原版制作(Deakin毕业证书)迪肯大学毕业证学位证一模一样
 
一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(BU毕业证)波士顿大学毕业证成绩单
 
一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UofM毕业证)明尼苏达大学毕业证成绩单
 
哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样
哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样
哪里卖(usq毕业证书)南昆士兰大学毕业证研究生文凭证书托福证书原版一模一样
 
一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(ArtEZ毕业证)ArtEZ艺术学院毕业证成绩单
 
一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Bradford毕业证书)布拉德福德大学毕业证如何办理
 
Ch03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdf
Ch03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdfCh03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdf
Ch03-Managing the Object-Oriented Information Systems Project a.pdf
 
Adjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTES
Adjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTESAdjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTES
Adjusting primitives for graph : SHORT REPORT / NOTES
 
Sample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdf
Sample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdfSample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdf
Sample_Global Non-invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT) Market, 2019-2030.pdf
 
一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UMich毕业证)密歇根大学|安娜堡分校毕业证成绩单
 
Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)
Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)
Malana- Gimlet Market Analysis (Portfolio 2)
 
一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(UofS毕业证书)萨省大学毕业证如何办理
 
一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单
一比一原版(UVic毕业证)维多利亚大学毕业证成绩单
 

An Introduction to the Kindergarten Observation Form

  • 1. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE KINDERGARTEN OBSERVATION FORM & THE ASR SCHOOL READINESS ASSESSMENT MODEL Susan Brutschy, ASR President Lisa Colvig-Niclai, MA Kim Carpenter, PhD Penny Huang, PhD Christina Branom, PhD Yoonyoung Kwak, PhD Casey Coneway, MPP
  • 2. Overview  Overview of the KOF and assessment methodology - Why assess kindergarten readiness? - Where have we assessed readiness? - How do we assess readiness? The Kindergarten Observation Form  How do we tell the readiness story? - How do we use these readiness data to spark action? 2
  • 3. Purposes for readiness assessment  Create a portrait of readiness for a population of children - Which children are more ready…and less ready? - Which child and family factors are linked to greater readiness?  Set baseline as springboard for coordinated action…and track trends or “sea changes” over time  “Look backward” to evaluate interventions for program participants  “Look forward” to provide formative data to guide K-3 interventions  To build bridges between ECE and K-12 with common framework and indicators for readiness…a platform for coordinated intervention  We use these data at variety of levels or units of analyses: county-wide, program or initiative, district, school, class, and recently, between teachers, parents and individual children 3
  • 4. Where has the KOF been used, and why? 4 5 longitudinal studies: San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Marin, LA Preschool Assess at entry • Formative assessment • Tailor instruction • Engage parents as partners Assess at exit • Profile of readiness • Engage parents as partners for summer learning support • Collaborate with kindergartens Summer Evaluate the readiness ‘boosters’ • Pre and post of summer bridge programs • Engage parents as partners; help them be school ready Kindergarten Assess at entry • Create portrait of readiness • Evaluate what works to boost readiness • Inform class instruction • Engage parents as partners • Use findings to inform readiness investments, align systems Third grade Assess test scores • Assess whether kinder readiness predicts third grade success • Assess influence of certain factors or interventions F5 Alameda County, 2008,09, 10, 11,13,14,15, 16 (Hayward PN) F5 Contra Costa, 2016, 2017 F5 Del Norte, 2011,12,13,14,15,16, 17 F5 Sacramento, 2012,13,14,15,16, 17 F5 Marin/Marin Community Foundation, 2010, 11,12,13,14 F5 Napa (NVELI eval), 2013,14,15,16, 17 F5 San Francisco, 2007, 2009, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017 (KRI) F5 Santa Clara County 2004, 05, 06, 08, 11,12,13 (Quality Matters study), 2016 (Alum Rock universal Pre-K), 2017 F5 San Mateo, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2008 F5 San Mateo- Preschool for All Evaluation 2005, 2008 F5 San Mateo Kickoff to Kindergarten Eval, 2008, 2009 F5 Santa Cruz, 2008 F5 Siskiyou, 2017 United Way, Lake County, Illinois, 2005, 2006 F5 San Mateo Kickoff to Kindergarten 2001, 02, 03, 04, 06, 07, 09, 13 Palo Alto USD Springboard to Kindergarten 2010, 11,12 Santa Clara County Migrant Ed, 2010 Duke University, 2014, 15,16 F5 Contra Costa Literacy preschool 2010, 11, 12, 13, 14 F5 San Benito, 2012-14 Santa Clara County Head Start, 2010, 11 San Jose Smart Start, 2010 Gilroy Unified, 2009, 2010 F5 Santa Cruz “Snapshot,” 2010, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15
  • 5. How do we measure school readiness?  Holistic view of readiness  Teacher-generated, researcher-refined  Used with over 55,000 children  Predicts 3rd grade test scores 5 K Academics Recog. shapes Recog. colors Counts 20 objects Recog. letters Recognizes rhyming words Engages with books Writes own first name Answers questions about literature Self- Regulation Stays focused Follows class rules Follows directions Plays cooperatively Participates in circle time Handles frustration well Social Expression Expresses empathy Tells about story or experience Curious & eager to learn Expresses needs & wants Motor Skills Items Use of pencil (fine motor) General coordination
  • 6. How do we measure school readiness?  The Kindergarten Observation Form - 10 minute teacher-administered assessment (average) - 20 items = 14 observational, 6 interactive - Common core aligned - Four readiness dimensions or “Basic Building Blocks of Readiness” • Self- Care & Motor Skills • Self-Regulation • Social Expression • Kindergarten Academics  Parent Information Form - Self-administered parent survey - Research-based predictors of readiness, such as: • Early education experience of child • Transition activities • Family activities like reading-aloud, arts/crafts, exercise • Protective factors • Background and demographic information  Secondary program/service data (program or school records) 6
  • 7. A Glimpse of the Kindergarten Observation Form 7
  • 8. How is the KOF implemented? 8 April ASR or a school district rep contacts each of the schools’ principals to schedule teacher trainings for the Fall assessment August ASR conducts 90 minute in-person teacher trainings (on school campuses) Sept Teachers hand out Parent Packet: consent form, incentive book, and Parent Information Form (PIF) survey Teachers complete Kindergarten Observation Forms (KOF) (paper, IPAD or computer!) for each student in their class. October Teachers return the KOF, and PIFs materials to ASR by pre-paid Fed Ex envelope ASR sends each teacher their stipend (usually $150 to $250) November ASR begins data entry and analysis Teachers receive a data profile for their classroom Jan-Mar ASR finalizes reports (comprehensive, school report, district dashboard)
  • 9. The KOF is a valid measure of readiness 9 Content validity YES: Domains and items premised upon National Education Goals Panel framework, Common Core standards, and extensive, ongoing literature reviews Do experts view KOF items as essential to readiness? Construct validity YES: Correlated with other validated assessments: • Woodcock Johnson III, • Brigance K-1 Screens, • Expressive One Word Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT), • Work Sampling System (WSS) • Preschool/Kindergarten Behavior Scales (PKBS), • Head Toes Knees Shoulder test (HTKS), • Ages and Stages (ASQ) Does the KOF measure what we think it is measuring? Predictive validity YES: Five large longitudinal studies have shown that KOF scores independently predict 3rd grade English and Math scores, and 3rd grade DIBELS scores Is the KOF a good predictor of later school performance?
  • 10. Some Examples of How We Tell the Readiness Story
  • 11. Percent at each level of proficiency 11 Self-Care & Motor Skills Self- Regulation Social Expression Kindergarten Academics 7% 6% 23% 6% 5% 7% 5% 6% 5% 7% 5% 6% 19% 12% 18% 11% 11% 19% 13% 18% 12% 13% 13% 14% 10% 11% 15% 17% 7% 10% 23% 9% 32% 34% 21% 24% 28% 36% 30% 33% 29% 26% 30% 31% 28% 27% 30% 32% 30% 30% 67% 87% 42% 49% 39% 59% 56% 37% 53% 43% 54% 58% 50% 51% 58% 58% 53% 47% 62% 56% Recognizes primary shapes Recognizes basic colors Recognizes letters of the alphabet Counts up to 20 objects Recognizes rhyming words Writes own first name Understands structure, basic features of books Answers questions about details in literature Demonstrates curiosity, eagerness for learning Tells about a story or experience Expresses empathy or caring for others Appropriately expresses needs and wants Handles frustration well Participates successfully in large group activities Works and plays cooperatively with peers Follows two-step directions Follows class rules and routines Stays focused in individual/small group activities Has general coordination Uses a pencil with proper grip Not Yet Beginning In Progress Proficient Source: Applied Survey Research, Kindergarten Observation Form (2015), First 5 Alameda, N=1,495-1,514
  • 12. Readiness levels by KOF Building Block 12 3.29 3.52 3.20 3.32 3.25 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 Overall Readiness Self-Care & Motor Skills Self-Regulation Social Expression Kindergarten Academics Average readiness scores across all students Proficient In Progress Beginning Not Yet
  • 13. Readiness levels across student groups 13 2.85 3.19 2.80 2.82 2.81 3.32 3.58 3.23 3.33 3.27 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 Overall Self-Care & Motor Skills Self-Regulation Social Expression Kindergarten Academics Cesar Chavez, 2012 SCC-Low income, 2008 SCC, 2008 Comparing readiness levels: Cesar Chavez Elementary Students, County-wide, and County-wide Low Income Proficient In Progress Beginning Not Yet
  • 14. Percentage of students ready for school Not Ready (0 areas), 20% Partially Ready (1- 2 areas), 36% Fully Ready (all areas), 44% 14 Source: KOF, First 5 Alameda, 2015. N=1,460. Note: Data were weighted to approximate district and EL representation. Fully Ready: Mean score of 3.25 or higher in all three domains: Self-Regulation, Social Expression and K. Academics. Partially Ready: Mean score of 3.25 or higher in one or two domains. Not Ready: Mean score below 3.25 in all three domains. Percent Ready for Kindergarten, Alameda County, 2015
  • 15. Readiness portraits across regions 15 Prevalence of students in each “readiness portrait,” 2009 City and County of San Francisco
  • 16. Readiness levels across regions 16 94607 94606 94601 94621 94603 94579 94578 94556 94546 94541 Ave Readiness Score Dark Red: 1-2.49 Light Red: 2.5-2.99 Light Green: 3-3.49 Dark Green: 3.5-4 Alameda County, 2017
  • 17. What factors predict readiness? 17 School Readiness Quality ECE (Pre-school, TK, family care) Gender Age Family SES English Learner Special Needs Health & Well- Being Single Parent Screen Time Race/ Ethnicity Source: Kindergarten Observation Form (2015), Parent Information Form (2015), First 5 Alameda. Note: All variables in the chart are statistically significant (p<.05). The overall regression model was significant (p<.001), explaining 33% of the variance in kindergarten readiness (R2 = .33).
  • 18. Percent fully ready, by key predictor (adjusted) 27% 52% 27% 50% 42% 51% 38% 48% 35% 51% Overall Sample: 44% Ready Health & Well- Being Quality ECE (Pre-school, TK, family care) Age Special Needs English Learner Source: Kindergarten Observation Form (2015), Parent Information Form (2015), First 5 Alameda. Note: N=1,201. **All differences are statistically significant (p<.01).
  • 19. Family Engagement matters!  The children of more highly engaged families had significantly higher readiness scores, controlling for child and family demographics 3.00 3.09 2.86 2.97 3.16 3.15 3.07 3.17 Overall* Self-Regulation Social Expression* K Academics* Less engaged More engaged Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Parent Information Form 2016. Note: N=275-294. Analyses adjusted for gender, special needs, English Learner, age, family SES, race/ethnicity, child well-being. *Difference statistically significant, p<.05.
  • 20. 20 One community’s “recipe” for school readiness
  • 21. Cumulative effect of predictors 37% 38% 45% 38% 39% 26% 23% 18% 32% 34% 43% 52% 70% 77% 45% 31% 21% 19% 10% 4% 0% 0-5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Percent of Children Ready for Kindergarten, by Number of Predictors Partially Ready Fully Ready Not Ready Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Parent Information Form, First 5 Alameda, 2015. Note: N=1,461. ***Statistically significant, p<.001.
  • 22. Readiness is linked to certain interventions 22 57% 34% F5 Preschool No preschool Children in preschools supported by First 5 Sacramento are almost twice as likely to be fully ready for kindergarten than children with no preschool (adjusted) English Learner students who participate in Napa Valley Early Learning Services are almost three times as likely to be fully ready for kindergarten as EL students who did not have such services 33% 13% ELLs who participated in NVELI ELLs who did not participate in NVELI Source: Applied Survey Research, KOF, Napa Valley Early Learning Initiative, 2015. NVELI n=76, Non-NVELI n=45 Source: Applied Survey Research, KOF, PIF, First 5 Sacramento, 2015. N= 610 ***Significant at p<.001.
  • 23. Readiness is linked to certain interventions 23 2.65 2.81 2.51 2.48 2.86 3.07 3.29 3.05 2.92 3.09 Overall Readiness*** Self-Care & Motor Skills*** Self Regulation*** Social Expression** Kindergarten Academics* No quality factors Two or three quality factors Source: Applied Survey Research, F5 Santa Clara Quality Matters study, 2013. Kindergarten Observation Form, 2013. N=106 (45 with no quality indicators, 61 with 2 or 3 quality indicators). ANCOVA- means adjusted for well-being variable. ***p<0.001; **p<0.01;*p<0.05. Quality Indicators: PD >24 hours/year, Average years of teaching experience >10, Parent activity almost every day. Readiness Levels of Santa Clara County Low Income Students, by Former Preschools’ Number of Quality Factors, 2013
  • 24. Longer-term impact of school readiness 24 25% 50% 68% Not ready Partially ready Ready Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Ns = 3rd grade: 882. SFUSD Percentage of students proficient in third grade ELA and Math, by kindergarten readiness level
  • 25. Factors that predict third grade achievement 25 -0.60 -0.40 -0.20 0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 Child age Preschool API of kindergarten school Use of community resources Risk factors English learner at kindergarten Child is a girl Kindergarten well-being Was read to at home as a kindergartner Special ed/IEP in kindergarten Kindergarten Academics Predictive Weight (Unstandardized) CSTMath CSTELA Negative effect Positive effect Source: Kindergarten Observation Form, Parent Information Form; First 5 administrative data, SFUSD administrative data. N=576 CSTELA; 577 CST Math Notes: The overall regression model explains 34% of the variance in 3rd grade CSTELA and 33% of the variance in 3rd grade CST Math scores.
  • 26. Academics and Self Reg both matter for later success 25% 29% 55% 70% Low on both K Academics and Self- Regulation Low K Academics, High Self-Regulation High K Academics, Low Self-Regulation High on both K Academics and Self- Regulation 26 Source: Kindergarten Observation Form and individual school district data, 2010, Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. Note: Sample sizes = 367, 211, 235, 515, respectively. Students were divided into high and low levels of Kindergarten Academics and Self-Regulation based on whether they were above or below the mean score on each. Percent of Students Scoring at “Proficient” or “Advanced” on Third Grade ELA Tests, by Kindergarten Readiness Patterns
  • 27. Examples of how readiness data sparks action  Readiness guides for parents in several First 5 counties (Santa Clara, San Francisco, Sacramento)  Calls to Action and Policy Briefs: Alameda, Siskiyou county  Stronger Pre-K and Kinder articulation, alignment and collaboration (Marin County, Santa Cruz “Snapshots”)  Deeper views of who’s “not ready” in our programs, so we can better serve children like them in the future (Napa, Sacramento,Alameda)  Direct feedback about the ECE practices that work (Santa Clara Quality Matters)  Continued funding for interventions that show consistent, repeated linkage with stronger readiness scores (San Francisco, Sacramento, Napa)  Baseline and trend data for community initiatives (Hayward Promise Neighborhoods, Mission Promise Neighborhood, My Brother’s Keeper San Jose, Grade Level Reading Campaign San Jose) 27
  • 28. Summary  The KOF and the companion tools offer a 360 degree view of readiness  Readiness data reveals important differences in proficiencies…patterns of skills…patterns of children…patterns of influences --- enabling partners to better target their next efforts  Readiness data predicts 3rd grade outcomes…but early absenteeism erases the benefits of readiness by third grade  Readiness is a movable needle, if groups can create the right recipe 28