View
251
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Series Session #3: Research & Measures to Support Quality Early Childhood Initiatives in Ohio (March 27, 2014)
Citation preview
EXAMINING OHIO’S APPROACH TO MEASURING STUDENT SUCCESS
SERIES SESSION #3: RESEARCH & MEASURES TO SUPPORT QUALITY EARLY
CHILDHOOD INITIATIVES IN OHIO
March 27, 2014
Making Research Work for Educat ion
2
WELCOME
THE OHIO EDUCATION RESEARCH CENTER
A collaborative of Ohio-based research universities & institutions
Focused on a statewide research agenda
Addressing critical issues of education practice and policy
4
The mission of the Ohio Education Research Center (OERC) is to develop and implement a statewide, preschool-through-workforce research agenda to address critical issues of education practice and policy. Our intent is to identify and share successful practices; respond to the needs of Ohio’s educators and policymakers; and signal emerging trends. We intend to communicate findings broadly through multiple platforms and networks, producing materials, products and tools to improve educational practice, policy, and outcomes.
OERC’S MISSION
5
State Landscape: Ohio’s Early Learning System
OERC Early Childhood Research
Feedback Activity
OERC Learning Network — Brief Demonstration
Next Steps/Closing
TODAY’S AGENDA
STATE LANDSCAPE: OHIO’S EARLY LEARNING
SYSTEM
Stephanie Siddens, Ph.D., Director, Offi ce of Early Learning and School Readiness, Ohio
Department of EducationAlicia Leatherman, Deputy Director, Division
of Child Care, Offi ce of Family Assistance, Ohio Department of Job and Family Services
7
QUESTIONS?
OERC EARLY CHILDHOOD
RESEARCH
Ear ly Chi ldhood Research & Measures Symposium 3 /27/2014
9
Tina Kassebaum, Ph.D., Strategic Research Group (SRG)
Lauren Porter, Program Manager, Ohio Education Research Center at The Ohio State University
Rob Fischer, Ph.D., Research Associate Professor, Jack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social Sciences of Case Western Reserve University
Jennifer Zimmerman, Evaluation Consultant, Resilient Children Project
Jerry M. Jordan, Ph.D., Research Associate, University of Cincinnati’s Evaluation Service Center
OERC EARLY CHILDHOOD RESEARCH PRESENTERS
OERC Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
March 27, 2014
2013 WORKFORCE STUDY:
OHIO EARLY LEARNING & DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS
Purpose: To provide an overview of the current characteristics of the childhood workforce in Ohio.
Policy Implication: Over 20 years of research has consistently found a link between the level of education and compensation of the early childhood workforce, and the program quality and outcomes for children.
Key components of study:
Demographics of the childhood workforce
Staff education, credentials, and wage
Benefits offered to staff, turnover, and reasons for staying/leaving
11
PURPOSE OF STUDY
History (Similar Studies)2001 mail survey - 314 ODJFS programs2005 mail survey - 989 ODJFS & ODE programs
2013: Sample of 3,600 randomly selected early learning and development programs 2,388 ODJFS-licensed programs1,212 ODE-licensed programs
12
STUDY BACKGROUND
Surveys: Program Director SurveyTeacher Survey
Data Collection:Web-based surveys Invitation letters mailed to Program Directors
Two mailings 2 weeks apartTelephone and (if possible) email follow-up invitations
RESEARCH DESIGN
4
Response Rate:30% for directors and 23% for selected teachers
40% for ODJFS and 20% for ODE
10% held NAEYC Accreditation
Two Reports GeneratedGeneral Analysis (comparisons to 2005 study)A Profession Divided (comparisons by program type)
RESPONSE RATES & REPORTS
5
Six program sponsorship types Total Programs = 1060
PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS: SPONSORSHIP TYPES
10.1%
7.5%
32.1%
20.8%
20.5%
9.0% ODE School-Affiliated
ODE Other
ODJFS For-Profit
ODJFS Nonprofit
ODJFS Faith-Affiliated
Head Start
6
Majority still female and Caucasian Slight increase in gender and ethnic diversity in
2013
In both 2005 and 2013, ODE staff tended to be older than ODJFS staff
WORKFORCE DEMOGRAPHIC DIVERSITY
2005 2013
ODJFS ODE ODJFS ODE
Caucasian
Director 91% 95% 82% 91%
Teacher 87% 92% 76% 91%
Female
Director 98% 94% 97% 91%
Teacher 97% 96% 97% 92%
7
DEGREES HELD BY PROGRAM STAFF
ODJFS 2005
ODJFS 2013
ODE 2005
ODE 2013
57%43%
20% 17%
43%57%
80% 83%
TeacherLess than AAAA or Higher
ODJFS 2005
ODJFS 2013
ODE 2005
ODE 2013
88% 85%
46% 38%
12% 15%
54% 62%
Director
Less than Graduate DegreeGraduate Degree
8
A higher percentage of directors and teachers of ODE-licensed programs have credentials compared to those of ODJFS-licensed programs
CREDENTIALS HELD BY PROGRAM STAFF
Teachers Directors
Credential
Program with
Highest Percentage
%Program with
Highest Percentage
%
Child Development Associate
Head Start 26.2 ODJFS For-Profit 23.2
Pre-K Associate License Head Start 28.6 Head Start 23.2
EC Teacher License ODE Other 47.0ODE (both) & Head Start
25.2 - 26.3
Other Teaching LicenseODE School-Affiliated
54.4ODE School-Affiliated
72.0
9
Continued disparity between wages of ODE-licensed programs and ODJFS-licensed programs Current wages for ODE-licensed staff average over $9 more per
hour The average highest wage reported for ODJFS-licensed teaching
staff ($12.58) is lower than the average starting wage reported for ODE-licensed staff ($13.57)
In general, more education is associated with higher hourly pay Directors and staff with graduate degrees in ECE or CD claim
higher salaries than the same degree in another field
However, program sponsorship clearly matters as ODE-licensed staff tend to earn higher wages than ODJFS-licensed staff for the same degree
WAGES
10
AVERAGE CURRENT WAGES REPORTED BY STAFF
ODJFS ODE
$13.56
$23.48
$16.08
$25.42
Directors
2005
2013
ODJFS ODE
$9.59
$16.32
$11.36
$20.79
Teaching Staff
2005
2013
11
ODE School-Affiliated
ODJFS Faith-Affiliated
ODJFS For-Profit
ODJFS Nonprofit ODE Other Head Start
CredentialChild Development Associate $18.58 $15.52 $14.42 $12.99 $12.29 $17.00
Pre-K Associate License $29.00 $14.39 $15.26 $16.24 $23.45 $17.33
EC Teacher License $38.52 $14.57 $16.97 $16.04 $21.78 $15.36
Other Teaching License $31.88 $14.79 $16.48 $18.43 $25.64 $15.94
Highest Degree Earned
AA ECE or CD $16.35 $14.74 $14.82 $15.76 $12.89 $17.73
BA/BS ECE or CD $21.99 $15.49 $16.94 $18.22 $19.12 $15.98
Graduate Degree in ECE or CD $36.12 $16.90 $19.00 $21.08 $24.78 $18.18
Graduate Degree in Another Field $31.32 $15.10 $12.46 $19.42 $27.30 $15.07
DIRECTORS: AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
12
TEACHERS: AVERAGE HOURLY WAGE
ODE School-
Affiliated
ODJFS Faith-
Affiliated
ODJFS For-Profit
ODJFS Nonprofit
ODE Other
Head Start
CredentialChild Development Associate $15.54 $11.15 $11.14 $11.92 - $13.14
Pre-K Associate License $21.00 $11.74 $10.43 $16.65 $20.97 $15.53
EC Teacher License $24.62 $13.07 $11.61 $11.77 $25.10 $13.43
Other Teaching License $23.24 $12.87 $11.92 $12.32 $25.80 $13.21
Highest Degree Earned
AA ECE or CD $15.94 $12.44 $10.64 $12.29 $14.23 $14.28
BA/BS ECE or CD $16.92 $12.29 $12.32 $12.10 $19.66 $14.44
Graduate Degree in ECE or CD $26.84 $14.22 $12.00 $13.90 $31.75 $15.03
Graduate Degree in Another Field $25.47 $10.86 $10.70 $10.99 $20.79 -13
BENEFITS BY PROGRAM TYPE
ODE School-Affiliated
ODJFS Faith-Affiliated
ODJFS For-Profit
ODJFS Nonprofit
ODE Other
Head Start
62%
19%
33%
38%
71%
92%
49%
10%
20%
28%
53%
77%
81%
20%
24%
51%
71%
93%
Retirement Benefits
Dental Benefits
Health Benefits
14
Generally, from 2005 to 2013 the percentage of programs offering benefits other than health and dental coverage has increased (e.g., reduced fee or free child care, paid maternity leave, paid education expenses and training)
OTHER EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
15
Increase from 2005 to 2013 in percentage of staff employed at their program for more than 5 years
Greater longevity for directors and teaching staff in ODE-licensed programs compared to ODJFS-licensed programs
Turnover rates among teaching staff are higher for ODJFS-licensed programs than ODE-licensed programs, and almost identical to those of 2005
Turnover rates for directors of ODE-licensed and ODJFS-licensed programs continue to be similar, decreasing from 2005 to 2013
LONGEVITY & TURNOVER
16
TURNOVER RATES
Director Teachers Assistant Teachers
11%
21%
29%
10% 10%12%
2005
Director Teachers Assistant Teachers
6%
22%
30%
6%11% 13%2013
ODJFS
ODE
17
ODE School-Affiliate
d
ODJFS Faith-
Affiliated
ODJFS For-Profit
ODJFS Nonprofi
t
ODE Other
Head Start
Total
DirectorsBetter pay 26% 56% 61% 48% 52% 76% 53%Better benefits 3% 18% 23% 21% 12% 0% 16%
More help/support/ resources 3% 6% 15% 15% 8% 19% 11%
Work more/fewer hours 7% 9% 10% 10% 4% 0% 8%
More staff/retain good, qualified staff 3% 4% 13% 10% 8% 5% 8%
TeachersBetter pay 24% 70% 69% 78% 55% 73% 68%Better benefits 12% 28% 18% 26% 10% 9% 20%
Full-time employment or better hours 29% 12% 5% 9% 5% 9% 9%
Stable enrollment/job security 12% 6% 0% 3% 15% 23% 6%
MOST FREQUENTLY MENTIONED INCENTIVES FOR STAYING IN ECE/CD FIELD
18
Results highlight the continued disparity between ODE-licensed and ODJFS-licensed programs
Compared to staff of ODJFS-licensed programs, ODE-licensed program staff tend to: Receive higher wages and be offered more benefits Be older, more gender diverse, and less ethnically diverse Attain more credentials and higher levels of education Turnover less frequently and be employed longer
Despite increases in diversity, wages, and non-medical benefi ts, the gap in education and wages between ODE-licensed and ODJFS-licensed programs persists
Teachers and directors holding the same degrees and credentials are paid more than two times the rate in a school-affi liated setting than in for-profi t centers l icensed by ODJFS.
FINDINGS SUMMARY
19
THANK YOU
[email protected] | oerc.osu.edu
COMPREHENSIVE PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM EVALUATION
Lauren Porter, Ohio Education Research Center
Debbie Zorn, University of CincinnatiImelda Castañeda-Emenaker, University of
Cincinnati
31
There are 860,000 children ages 5 and under.
Currently over 11,000 licensed early learning programs.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Existing Landscape as of February 2013:
32
Ohio Department of Education Ohio Department of Job and Family Services Ohio Department of Health Ohio Department of Mental Health Ohio Department of Developmental
Disabilities
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Agencies Serving Children Birth–5
33
RttT ELC Grant – 2011.
Designed to improve state funded network of programs.
One ELC initiative: develop extensive early learning professional development system.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Early Learning Challenge (ELC) Grant
34
Mission: CPDS designed to provide appropriate professional development to early learning and development professionals working with children aged birth-5 years, enhancing their competencies and skills.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Comprehensive Professional Development System (CPDS)
35
Monitored Evaluated Aligned to standards from multiple sectors Based on research Supply data for analysis, reporting, and evaluation Support RttT-ELC Outcomes Coordinated, using common elements when possible Aligned to Ohio Core Knowledge and Competencies
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
CPDS Guiding Principles
36
Establishment of a seamless Comprehensive Professional Development System.
Activities include interviews of policy stakeholders & practitioner stakeholders and survey of the Regional PD Network.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Evaluation Question 1
37
Appraise the development and usefulness of the 16 new PD modules.
Activities include a needs assessment conducted by OCCRRA, expert review of modules, and PD participant feedback.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Evaluation Question 2
38
Appraise the actual delivery of PD content.
Activities include retrospective interviews with PD participants and Regional PD network members and observation of PD modules.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Evaluation Question 3
39
OCCRRA Project Team and the OERC team have met regularly to gather materials related to the evaluation and train on evaluation instruments.
Integral to the CPDS evaluation are the interviews from a variety of different practitioners: OCCRRA Project Team Regional PD Coordinators PD participants
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Researcher-Practitioner Collaboration
40
Currently in preparation stages of research. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is being
sought through The Ohio State University. While this application is pending, research
activities (interviews, surveys, data analysis) may not be conducted.
Delay has presented an opportunity to develop materials for later stages of the research project.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Boon and Bane of IRB
41
Upon IRB approval, next steps are: initial data access, interviews, and an in-depth examination of one module from development to implementation and impacts.
Potential policy impacts: PD options that better serve early learning and development professionals in all settings and a more aligned approach to early learning professional development across state agencies.
3/27/2014Early Childhood Research & Measures Symposium
Moving Forward
THANK YOU
Robert L. Fischer, Ph.D., Claudia J. Coulton, Ph.D., and
Seok- Joo Kim, Ph.D.
Center on Urban Poverty & Community DevelopmentJack, Joseph and Morton Mandel School of Applied Social
SciencesCase Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
March 27, 2014 – Columbus, OH
INVESTIGATING THE PATHWAY TO PROFICIENCY
FROM BIRTH THROUGH 3RD GRADE: INTEGRATED DATA SYSTEM (IDS)
APPROACH
BACKGROUND
Study significance:
• Importance of early childhood exposureso Early exposure to stressful circumstances,
environmental hazards, and less than optimal early learning environments negatively and persistently affect early development.
• Usefulness of longitudinal data• State adopted “3rd Grade Reading Guarantee” to ensure that students pass reading proficiency test before advancing beyond 3rd grade
• Districts can be more aware of risk factors for students being held back as the policy is implemented
BACKGROUND
Study aims:
Aim 1. Assess the practicality of linking early childhood and K-3 student records and potential usefulness of the resulting information to local schools (A)&(B)
Aim 2. Determine how individual, family, and environmental risk factors in early childhood interact with participation in early childhood education programs to influence kindergarten readiness (A)
Aim 3. Estimate the effects of early childhood risk factors and experiences on student progress over grades 1 to 3 (B)
Aim 4. Identify child-level indices, including kindergarten readiness and reading-growth trajectories, that in their combination accurately predict reading proficiency in third grade (A)&(B)
Note: (A) In process and (B) After April, 2014
COHORT DESIGN
Cohort 1
Cohort 2
Cohort 3
Cohort 4
B 3rdK
B 3rdK
B 3rdK
B 3rdK
2001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013Year
Retrospective Prospective
SAMPLING
Criteria
Enrolled in Cleveland Metropolitan School District (CMSD) Kindergarten in the school years of 2008-2011
First time enrollment of Kindergarten
Have a valid KRA-L score
With Ohio Birth-Certificate & Addresses
16,840
15,581
11,999
9,777
Selection criteria N
• Unduplicated cases (students)
• Will be updated from EMIS data
• Will be updated from Medicaid data
• Missing imputation
KRA-L &3rd grade reading*
Neighborhood
• Concentrated disadvantage
• Immigrant concentration*
• Crime *
School• School
characteristics *
Service• Home visiting
• Head Start
• Preschool • Universal Pre-
K
CONCEPTUAL MODEL
Child• Demographic• Low birth
weight• Age at
kindergarten• Disability
Family• TANF/SNAP/
Medicaid• Mother’s edu.• Teen mother• Maltreatment• Foster care
* Currently not available; will be included
Educational Outcomes• KRA-L score• 3rd grade reading proficiency• Attendance
Child Context• Demographic• Low birth weight• Age at kindergarten• Disability
Family Context• TANF/SNAP/ Medicaid• Mother’s education • Teen mother• Child maltreatment• Foster care
Service Context• Home visiting
• Head Start
• Preschool • Universal Pre-K
Mobility • School / Residential
INTEGRATED DATA SYSTEM
CHILD system
Educational Outcomes• KRA-L score• 3rd grade reading proficiency• Attendance
School Context• School characteristics
Mobility • School
OLDA
Neighborhood context• Concentrated disadvantage• Immigrant concentration• Crime
NEO CANDO
Data Integrationby State Student ID
Data IntegrationBy Census tract
Data IntegrationBy ECIID
CHILD SYSTEM
Introduction
Key data system for this study Data helps inform our understanding of the
early childhood systemIndividuals and families interact with multiple
systems and services, so integrated data offers a more complete view of reality [“Big Data”]
Understanding of how systems work and how to better meet existing needs can be informed by integrated data
Service models emphasize long term and collective impact, so data needed across services and over time
ID6
ID5ID4
ID3
ID2ID1
• Abuse/neglect reports*
• Foster care*
• Home visiting*• Special needs child
care*• Early childhood
mental health• Universal pre-k*
• Attendance*• KRA-L*• Proficiency test*• Graduation test• Disability*
• Medicaid*• Food Stamp*• TANF*• Child care
voucher*
• Infant mortality• Elevated Blood Lead
• Teen births*• Low weight
birth*
CHILD SYSTEM
ConceptChildMedicalData
Birth
Cert.
PublicAssist
PublicSchool
Child
Welfare
Services
CommonID
Childhood Integrated
Longitudinal Data
(CHILD) System
*: Data for this project
CHILD SYSTEM
Structure
Geocode & Standardize
Updated IDS Register-includes ID#s, names, addresses, DOB, etc.
IDS Register-includes ID#s, names, addresses, DOB, etc. Outcomes
E.g. Kindergarten Readiness Scores among children in UPK program
ProfilesE.g. Birth characteristics & service used for children entering kindergarten
GeographicE.g. % LBW births receiving ongoing home visits by neighborhood
Time TrendsE.g. Total Children Served by birth cohort
Data files-Births, Home Visiting, DCFS, UPK,
KRA-L, Medicaid, etc.
Longitudinal Master Files for Each Data Source
REPORTS
Match New Records to IDS Register
NEIGHBORHOOD MEASURE
Principal Component Analysis
PovertyFemale-headedfamilies
African-America
n
Un-employ-
ment
Welfarerecipien
t
.9 .8 .8 .5 .7
N of ne ighborhoods=501 census tracts of Cuyahoga County; Amer ican Community Survey 2009
Concentrated
Disadvantage
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSISKRA-L
(N=9777) % Mean(SD) p1)
Child Context Male 50.8 15.2(6.9) 0.000 Female 49.2 16.7(6.8) Low birth weight (No) 88.0 16.1(6.9) 0.001 Low birth weight (Yes) 12.0 15.2(7.0) Race
White17.2 16.5
(7.1)0.000
2)
Others 4.6 16.7(7.0) Hispanic 9.9 13.7(6.8) African-American 68.3 16.1(6.8) Age at Kindergarten (Months) 64.7 (4.2)3) 0.144) 0.000 Without disability at kindergarten 96.9 16.1(6.8) 0.000 Disability at kindergarten 3.1 11.5(6.3)Family Context Born to teenage mother (No) 76.1 16.1(6.9) 0.000 Born to teenage mother (Yes) 23.9 15.5(6.6) Born to mother without HS degree 44.2 15.0(6.6) 0.000 Born to mother with HS degree 55.8 16.8(7.0) Months of <150% of poverty line from birth to kindergarten3)
43.2 (23.2)3) -.0.144) 0.000
Substantiated/indicated child abuse before Kindergarten (No)
86.2 16.1(6.9)0.000
Substantiated/indicated child abuse before Kindergarten (Yes)
13.8 14.9(6.6)
Foster care placement before age 5 (No) 94.2 16.3(6.8) 0.025 Foster care placement before age 5 (Yes) 5.8 15.3(6.6)KRA-L score 16.0(6.9)Note: 1) p form t-test, 2) p form One-way ANOVA, 3) Mean (SD), 4) Pearson-r and p
DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSISKRA-L
(N=9777) % Mean(SD) p1)
Service Context Early intervention ever (No) 88.9 16.2 (6.8) 0.000 Early intervention ever (Yes) 11.1 13.8 (6.7) Number of ongoing home visiting over 12 times (No) 77.6 16.2 (6.9) 0.000 Number of ongoing home visiting over 12 times (Yes) 22.5 15.1 (6.7) Welcome home visiting ever (No) 68.9 15.8 (6.8) 0.000 Welcome home visiting ever (Yes) 31.1 16.4 (6.9) Headstart over 6 months (No) 90.6 15.8 (6.7) 0.000 Headstart over 6 months (Yes) 9.4 17.7 (6.7) CMSD Preschool over 120 days (No) 81.3 15.3 (6.7) 0.000 CMSD Preschool over 120 days (Yes) 18.7 18.7 (7.1) Universal Pre-K ever over 6 months (No) 97.7 15.9 (6.9) 0.000 Universal Pre-K ever over 6 months (Yes) 2.3 18.8 (6.6)Neighborhood context Concentrated disadvantages in 2009 by Census tract (M=0, SD=1) 0.8 (0.9)2) -.0.043) 0.000KRA-L score 16.0(6.9)Note: 1) p form t-test, 2) Mean (SD), 3) Pearson-r and p
OLS REGRESSIONKRA-L score (Dependent variable) B SE t p BIntercept -1.261 1.011 -1.25 .213 Child Context Gender (Female=1) 1.381 0.128 10.78 0.000 0.100 Low birth weight (Yes=1) -0.644 .0202 -3.19 .001 -0.030 Race: Reference (White and others, Yes=1) Hispanic (Yes=1) -2.515 .0245 -10.25 0.000 -0.109 African-American (Yes=1) 0.114 0.183 0.62 0.533 0.008 Age at Kindergarten (in months) 0.267 0.015 17.38 0.000 0.163 Disability at Kindergarten (Yes=1) -6.354 0.387 -16.41 0.000 -0.161Family Context Born to teenage mother (Yes=1) -0.194 0.185 -1.05 0.295 -0.012 Born to mother without HS degree (Yes=1) -1.136 0.141 8.04 0.000 -0.082 Months of <150% of poverty line from birth to kindergarten (months) -0.037 0.003 -11.89 0.000 -0.124 Substantiated/indicated child abuse before Kindergarten (Yes=1) -0.698 0.205 -3.40 0.001 -0.035 Foster care placement before Kindergarten (Yes=1) 0.714 0.306 2.34 0.020 0.024Service Context: Before kindergarten Early intervention ever (Yes=1) -1.935 0.221 -8.77 0.000 -0.088 Ongoing home visiting over 12 times (Yes=1) -0.365 0.160 -2.28 0.023 -0.022 Welcome home visiting ever (Yes=1) 0.917 0.163 5.62 0.000 0.062 Head Start over 6 months (Yes=1) 1.673 0.222 7.55 0.000 0.071 CMSD Preschool over 120 days (Yes=1) 4.003 0.171 23.35 0.000 0.227 Universal Pre-K ever over 6 months (Yes=1) 1.919 0.376 5.10 0.000 0.047Neighborhood Context Concentrated disadvantages in 2009 by Census tract -0.239 0.085 -2.80 0.005 -0.031Model Fit: F(18, 9752)=105.04, p<.001, R2=16.24% | N=9777
KRA-L Band and poverty rate in Cleveland Metropolitan School
District, OH
Source: 1. Cleveland Metropolitan School District (CMSD) data
2. American Community Survey 2009 (www.census.gov)
Note: Kindergartners in the school years of 2008-2011 (N=9777)
IMPLICATIONSCollaboration with Cleveland Metropolitan School District (CMSD) and Early childhood agencies
oData SharingoUses
-Building profiles-Community collaborative planning-Risk factor reduction
Helpful to inform educational planning; especially schools with large numbers of disadvantaged students
Understand challenges for kindergarten readiness and 3rd grade guarantee
FUTURE PLAN
Data work
Check duplicated cases again*
Prepare for variables between K-3 rd grade*
Update missing data from Education Management Information System (EMIS; Expected: April, 2014)**
Adding more level-2 dataoNeighborhood variables from NEO CANDO*
o School characteristics from EMIS***
Dealing with missing dataoMissing imputation**
Note: *Completed, **Expected after April, 2014, ***Planned
FUTURE PLAN
Analysis
Extended modeloOutcome variable: 3rd grade reading proficiency
Use multi-level analyseso School-levelo Census tract-level
Geo-analysis / mobility analysiso Spatial auto-correlationo School or residential mobility
61
Thank you!
Contact Information: Robert L. Fischer, Ph.D. (fi [email protected])Resources
Center on Urban Poverty & Community Development: http://povertycenter.case.edu/
Ohio Education Research Center: http://oerc.osu.edu/ NEO CANDO: http://neocando.case.edu/
RESILIENT CHILDREN PROJECT (RCP)
Funded in February 2011 by the Cincinnati/ Northern Kentucky Social Innovation Fund
Expands the scope of two existing Early Childhood Mental Health Consultation (ECMHC) projects
Provides comprehensive services to support young children’s social and emotional development
Increases the capacity of early care and education administrators and caregivers
Resilient Children Project
To what extent, if any, does the programmatic delivery of ECMHC increase the kindergarten readiness of the preschool children who receive the ECMHC?
To what extent, if any, do the adult professionals participating in the programmatic delivery of ECMHC increase their level of self effi cacy in the delivery of ECMCH?
RCP Research Questions
Year 1: Intervention Group: Early childhood
programs already participating in ECMHC Comparison Group: Early childhood
programs on a “wait list” for ECMHC services
Year 2: All sites receive ECMHC services Permits examination of effects of
implementation of ECMHC services in new sites
Comparison of new and long-term sites
RCP Evaluation Design
Linking preschool assessment data to demographics and kindergarten entry data
Measuring teacher stress and self effi cacy
New measurement strategies for teacher knowledge and skill
Clarification of key program components and their impact
Exploration of program climate
The Evolution of an Evaluation
Child, teacher, and staff turnover/mobility
Differences in program models
“Dosage” complications
Changes at the state
Linkage to kindergarten assessment data sets
Life Happens….
Linking program outcomes
Revising process monitoring tools
Enhancing early childhood data systems
Continued exploration of program climate
Where do families play into the equation?
What’s Next
Thank You
70
QUESTIONS FOR PANELISTS?
71
FEEDBACK ACTIVITY
72
Erin Joyce, Director, Battelle for Kids, and
co-chair, OERC Outreach Committee
OERC LEARNING NETWORK
73
June 18, 2014 — Half-Day Learning Session
Columbus Convention Center
Mid-September — Full-Day Learning Session
Columbus
OERC NEXT STEPS
THANK YOU!
[email protected] | oerc.osu.edu