slide 1 slide 1

slide 2 slide 2

slide 3 slide 3

Risk to Ready begins with the Early Development Instrument

Developed in Canada in 1998 and expanding across US since 2009 through the TECCS network

Population-based (results for neighborhoods and schools but not individual children)

Teacher-administered (no child involvement or use of class time)

Kindergarten level (first comprehensive and comparable assessment under grade 3)

Multi-domain (not just “academics”)Evaluations show high reliability, moderate

validity, good predictive validity

slide 4 slide 4

EDI Content• Bullet pointsDomain Sub-domains

Physical health and well-being Physical readiness for school dayPhysical independenceGross and fine motor skills

Social competence Overall competence with peersRespect and responsibilityApproaches to learningReadiness to explore new things

Emotional maturity Pro-social and helping behaviorAnxious and fearful behaviorAggressive behaviorHyperactive and inattentive behavior

Language and cognitive development Basic literacy skillsInterest in literacy/numeracyAdvanced literary skillsBasic numeracy skills

Communication skills and general knowledge

(no sub-domains)

slide 5 slide 5

Which children?This presentation includes data for the first 2 years of 3• 150 teachers in 40 schools• Approx. 3,000 students (60% of project area

kindergarteners)

• 87% free or reduced price meals (counts TPS only)

• 60% attended pre-kindergarten in the same district

• 18% (552) attended CAP early childhood programs

• 27% English language learners• 7% with Individualized Education Plans

slide 6 slide 6

How EDI Results are ReportedDomain results

◦ “Very ready”: scoring at or above the 75th percentile from the 2010 U.S. sample of nearly 18,000 children

◦ “At risk”: scoring at or below the 10th percentile from the 2010 national sample

◦ “Somewhat ready”: scoring between 10th and 75th percentile

Overall results◦ “Very ready”: scoring very ready on 4 or 5 of

the 5 domains◦ “At risk”: scoring developmentally vulnerable on

2 or more domains

slide 7 slide 7

Tulsa and National Results

National (52,211 children)

Tulsa (3,117 children)

0% 50% 100%

15%

20%

15%

14%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

Note: Participation is voluntary and national results do not necessarily represent all children nationally.

slide 8 slide 8

Domain Results

Communication

Language

Emotional

Social

Physical

0% 20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

9%

12%

18%

15%

20%

34%

30%

25%

24%

25%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 9 slide 9

Risk by DomainTulsa vs. National

Phys

ical

Social

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Comm

unicat

ion

0%5%

10%15%20%25%

Tulsa (3,117 children)National (52,211 children)

Number of Domains

Note: Participation is voluntary and national results do not necessarily represent all children nationally.

slide 10 slide 10

By Family Income(TPS Only, Based on Meal Status)

Paid (260 children)

Reduced (142 children)

Free (1,580 children)

0% 20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

8%

21%

23%

21%

15%

10%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 11 slide 11

By Race (TPS Free Meals Only)

Multiracial (116 children)

African American(515 children)

Hispanic (515 children)

White (354 children)

0% 50% 100%

28%

28%

13%

28%

8%

7%

14%

9%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 12 slide 12

By Gender

Male (1,623 children)

Female (1,492 children)

0% 20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

27%

13%

10%

18%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 13 slide 13

By Special Education

Child has IEP (233 children)

Child does not have IEP (2,859 children)

0% 50% 100%

53%

17%

0%

15%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 14 slide 14

Teacher Believes Child has Special Need

Yes (546 children)

No (2,570 children)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%

60%

12%

0%

17%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 15 slide 15

Parent Attended Conference

Yes (2,574 children)

No(539 children)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%

18%

32%

16%

6%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 16 slide 16

By Prekindergarten

No Pre-K (1,273 children)

Pre-K (1,844 children)

0% 20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

24%

17%

13%

15%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

Pre-K includes CAP and public schools.

slide 17 slide 17

ECE Cumulative ImpactsTPS Free Lunch Only

No known ECE (595 children)

1 year pre-k only(756 children)**

2 years ECE (206 children)*

0% 50% 100%

28%

20%

17%

8%

11%

10%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

*Includes 2 years CAP and 1 year CAP + 1 year public pre-k.**Includes CAP and public pre-k.CAP minimum 90 days per year.

slide 18 slide 18

By CAP ParticipationTPS Free Lunch Only

No CAP (1,2277 children)

CAP as 1, 2, 3, or 4 (353 children)

CAP as 3 (229 children)

CAP as 4 (185 children)

0% 50% 100%

23%

20%

18%

15%

10%

9%

10%

10%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

Participated CAP >=90 days. CAP as 3 and any CAP includes Rosa Parks

slide 19 slide 19

CAP Risk by DomainTPS Free Lunch Only

Phys

ical

Social

Emot

iona

l

Lang

uage

Comm

unicat

ion

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

CAP as 4CAP as 3CAP as 1,2,3,or 4No CAP

Number of Domains

Participated CAP >=90 days. CAP as 3 or any CAP includes Rosa Parks

slide 20 slide 20

Correlation with OCCT• We examined the correlation between

EDI scores and 3rd grade OCCT scores in the same year at the school level (not the student level)

• OCCT scores are more correlated with the EDI Very Ready measure than the At Risk measure

Correlation Coefficients

3rd grade % Proficient or Advanced

% At Risk on EDI

% Very Ready on EDI

Math -0.35 0.45

Reading -0.24 0.42

slide 21 slide 21

Correlations by Domain

% At Risk by Domain3rd grade % Proficient or Advanced

Physical health and wellbeing

Social competence

Emotional maturity

Language and

cognitive developmen

t

Communication skills and

general knowledge

Math -0.32 -0.20 -0.38 -0.29 -0.09

Reading -0.21 -0.11 -0.27 -0.23 -0.02% Very Ready by Domain

3rd grade % Proficient or Advanced

Physical health and wellbeing

Social competence

Emotional maturity

Language and

cognitive developmen

t

Communication skills and

general knowledge

Math 0.45 0.25 0.02 0.34 0.34

Reading 0.40 0.19 0.00 0.30 0.35

slide 22 slide 22

Next Steps

2012-13—Data coming soon◦Finished Tulsa partners◦2 districts in Kay County◦2 districts in SE Oklahoma

2013-14—Transitions◦Finished in Tulsa◦New partners enrolling in SE◦Potential expansion in Kay County

22

slide 23 slide 23

For more informationPaul Shinn, Public Policy Analyst, CAP

◦pshinn@captc.org◦(918)855-3638

Cindy Decker, Senior Research Associate for Data & Accountability, CAP◦cdecker@captc.org◦(918) 382-3294

www.risktoready.orgTransforming Early Childhood

Community Systems◦http://www.teccs.net/

23

slide 24 slide 24