1 / 30

Child Outcomes State of the State

Child Outcomes State of the State. Council for Exceptional Children/Division of Early Childhood Conference October 2010 Kim Carlson, Asst. Director/619 Coordinator Ohio Department of Education Office of Early Learning and School Readiness.

meriel
Download Presentation

Child Outcomes State of the State

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Child OutcomesState of the State Council for Exceptional Children/Division of Early Childhood Conference October 2010 Kim Carlson, Asst. Director/619 Coordinator Ohio Department of Education Office of Early Learning and School Readiness

  2. 6th Largest State for children with disabilities (ages 3-21) 12/09 child count: 23,246 612 School Districts 88 Counties Education Service Centers County Boards of DD 16 State Support Teams-regionalized TA/PD Ohio: Demographics

  3. Ohio Assessment Policies State statute requires programs to document child progress using research-based indicators prescribed by the Department and report results annually.

  4. Accountability & Continuous Improvement Ohio Early Learning Program Guidelines: Systematically assess conditions, practices, policies and program performance • Conduct annual self-assessment with identified stakeholders and community partners to evaluate accomplishment of program goals • Data reported to ODE • Child progress data • Program licensure report • Family input and feedback • Complaint records • Fiscal reports • Transition services

  5. Initial year of the COSF: 2007 Trained local teams of teachers and administrators Locals report scores to state Fall & spring of every year State does conversion of COSF scores to progress categories Implementing alternate form spring 2011 Source summary OR Evidence statements Early Childhood Outcomes Summary Form

  6. Early Childhood Outcomes Summary Form • Multiple Sources Required • Two Sources are consistent statewide for funded programs • Get It! Got It! Go! & • Ages/Stages Questionnaire: Social-Emotional (completed with parent)

  7. Preschool special education supervisors Annual series of communication Fall Data/Reporting Requirements February Supervisor Discussions Spring Institutes Two Institutes Stage 1: Data Quality and Accuracy Stage 2: Data Analysis and Public Reporting For families: outcomes brochure/cards Measurement System Knowledge & Skills

  8. Data collection protocols Data checks in the state data system Funding impact Measurement System Knowledge & Skills

  9. Data Collection: Efficient, Effective, Accurate

  10. New Web page Webinar series (in development with ECO Center) Teacher reference sheet Approved PD through regional state support teams Alternate COSF form- 2 options Measurement System Knowledge & Skills

  11. Teacher Reference: PROCESS Implementation

  12. ECO Implementation Survey • Purpose: Identify challenging practices for local districts and personnel • Survey May 2010 • Lessons Learned: • Multiple sources of information • Duplication of source summaries • Comparable to same-aged peers • Use of Decision Tree • Fidelity of Process • Data Issues

  13. Use of the Decision Tree How Will I Know?

  14. ECO Implementation Survey • Lessons Learned • Core team input • Preschool special education teacher • General education teacher • Parent • Related services personnel • Involving parent

  15. Reasons for Completion without all Members Contributing How Will I Know?

  16. Involving Parents How Will I Know?

  17. WHOLE Whole child Whole class Whole system How is this in evidence?

  18. Accountability FrameworkEarly Childhood Child and Family Outcome Measures Literacy: GGG and KRA_L Early Childhood Outcomes Summary Parent Survey Health & Developmental Screenings Aligned with P-12 Content Standards ProgramCapacity Measures Curriculum-Embedded Performance Measures ELLCO: Early Language & Literacy Classroom Observation ELLRT: Early Language & Literacy Reflection Tool Self-Assessment Tools Tools for Alignment to the Early Learning Content Standards IEP Outcomes

  19. State InfrastructureRegionally Based/Local Needs • Professional Development • Preschool Literacy Core Curriculum (CORE) • SIRI: Pre K/K State Institutes for Reading Instruction • Teacher Leaders • Ohio Early Learning Content Standards • Integrated Curriculum • The IEP and the Early Childhood Curriculum • Teacher Leaders • Assessment Training • Observation and Mentoring • ELLCO Observations and TA • English Language Learners • Regional Leadership Meetings

  20. PD Connection • IVDL/Higher Education Faculty • At no cost unless college credit desired • Institute of Education Science Grant- APPLE: Ohio • Evaluate statewide professional development in Ohio • 80 Teacher Leaders each year • Group A will participate in the Preschool Literacy Core • Group B will participate in Preschool Literacy Core with Teacher Leader support • Group C will participate in two of the Ohio Early Learning Content Standards modules (Math, Science, Social Studies)

  21. Ohio Resource Center for Mathematics, Science ad Reading • Resources for early childhood • Early Childhood Bookshelf • Standards-aligned and Peer Reviewed Lessons • Early Childhood Building Blocks- Best Practice Articles http://www.ohiorc.org/

  22. What do we know? • Children served in Public Preschool and PSE classrooms experienced statistically significant growth from fall to spring • Public Preschool participants had significantly higher KRA-L scores than all other K students. • PSE participants who are nondisabled in K have higher KRA-L scores than all other K students who are nondisabled.

  23. Early Language and Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO) Study Results Instrument Methodology Stratified random sample of PSE classrooms 2009: 115 observations in PSE 2010: 299 observations conducted • Classrooms rated on 14 individual ELLCO elements • 5 point evidence scale (5 = exemplary or strong evidence) • 2 subscales: • General Classroom Environment • Language, Literacy and Curriculum

  24. ELLCO Study Questions • What is the quality of literacy practices in ODE-funded early education programs? • How do the scores of programs and classrooms compare with recognized standards of effective literacy practice (defined as a 4 or 5 on the ELLCO rating scales)? • To what extent are teachers (best practices) and programs (capacity) making progress toward reaching or exceeding recognized standards of literacy practice that promote literacy success? • Based on the ELLCO results, what are statewide or local professional development needs?

  25. ELLCO Mean Ratings for PSE Classrooms, Spring 2010, N=299

  26. ELLCO Mean Ratings for PSE Classrooms, Spring 2009 STANDARD EFFECTIVE PRACTICE N=115 *N=116

  27. ELLCO Results 2010 • Highest-rated ELLCO elements: • Classroom Management Strategies (Mean=4.29) • Classroom Climate (Mean=4.24) • Organization of the Classroom (Mean=3.99) • Lowest-rated ELLCO elements: • Presence and Use of Technology (Mean=3.18) • Recognizing Diversity in the Classroom (Mean=2.84)

  28. Summary of ELLCO Results 2010 • 41% PSE classrooms demonstrated effective literacy practices • Higher levels of teacher educational attainment were associated with higher ELLCO ratings for all three scores • Average early childhood education teaching experience was approximately 12 years • Teachers with 13 or more years of teaching experience scored significantly higher on the Language, Literacy, and Curriculum Subtotal & Classroom Observation Total than teachers with 6-12 years of teaching experience • Higher ELLCO ratings are associated with classrooms that have a smaller percentage of students with disabilities

More Related