1. July 30, 2013

2. 2 © iStockphoto.com/fishwork S ESSION O VERVIEW

3. 3  Review how evaluation research can impact professional development (PD) investments and to effectively design, prioritize, and sequence PD strategies.  Explore options for using workforce data to conduct performance management and continuous quality improvement activities.  Learn about Wisconsin’s process to document the role its credentials play in its State PD system, and how the data will inform curriculum revisions and process improvements.  Discuss entry-level professionals and credit-based career pathways. Session Objectives

4. Agenda  Workforce Data Systems Overview  Using The Registry Data for Evaluation: Wisconsin’s Story  Overview of Methodology and Results  Use of Findings: Wisconsin’s Story Continued  Process Steps  Q&A Discussion  Wrap-Up and Evaluations 4

5. 5 Sarah LeMoine, PDW Center W ORKFORCE D ATA S YSTEMS O VERVIEW

6. Workforce Statistics  National data gaps about composition and characteristics.  In 2009, of the 1.8 million early child care and education (ECCE) workers nationwide:  72% lack an associate degree or higher;  93% of ECCE workers with a bachelor’s degree do not have it in early childhood education (ECE); and  61% of full-time workers earned less than $22,000 per year. 6 Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2012) Early child care and education: HHS and education are taking steps to improve workforce data and enhance worker quality (GAO-12-248). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved June 21, 2012, from http://gao.gov/assets/590/588577.pdf

7. Data Collection Efforts  The Census Bureau’s American Community Survey  Study of Early Childhood Care and Education Workforce, 2010-2012  State registries  State longitudinal data systems  Higher education institutions student information  Early Childhood (EC) data required  For Federal program reporting purposes  In response to legislative and public inquires 7

8. Data Collection and System Guidance Efforts  Common Education Data Standards  Data Quality Campaign  INQUIRE Data Elements for Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS) and Quality Initiatives  Comprehensive data matrix, a data dictionary, and examples of linking data with key policy questions  [Former] OCC’s Functional Requirements Organizing Group  Guide for developing child care subsidy data collection systems  Early Childhood Data Collaborative  10 Fundamentals of coordinated State ECE data systems  The National Registry Alliance  Best Practices and Core Data Elements 8

9. Workforce Data Systems Guiding Principles Key principles to consider in the development, revision, and implementation:  Start with a comprehensive inventory of existing data systems related to the State’s/Territory’s EC and school-age (SA) services.  Reflect the best thinking, research, and standards of practice about what workforce data systems should contain and how data shall be collected.  Follow industry recognized best practices for data collection and verification.  Address the entire workforce across sectors, employment settings, roles, and ages served. 9

10. Workforce Data Systems Guiding Principles, Cont’d  Keep the end in mind: Data for what? For whom?…  Recognize who is and isn’t being counted.  Ensure policy and goals drive system functionality.  Take into account the specialized informational needs of the end users.  Be flexible and user friendly in order to avoid useless data haystacks. 10

11. 11 Wisconsin’s Story Jere Wallden, The Registry U SING R EGISTRY D ATA FOR E VALUATION

12. History and Overview  Background on WI’s The Registry Credentials 12

13. What’s a Credential?  The Wisconsin definition 13

14. Curriculum is owned by The Registry, available to all institutions of higher education in Wisconsin, and updated annually at a faculty retreat.  Is credit based (12-18 credits).  Is a sequence of specific courses.  Includes a Capstone Course.  Requires a project or portfolio presented to a Registry Commission. 14

15. Progression  1998 – Administrator  2000 – Infant Toddler  2006 – Preschool  2009 – Inclusion  2011 – Leadership Timeline Graduates  1159 awarded  874 awarded  160 awarded  66 awarded  16 awarded 15

16. Why the Study?  Do the credentials meet the anticipated goals? 16

17. Contributing Factors  State Resources used:  Administrator – 1159 awarded / 782 T.E.A.C.H.  Infant Toddler – 874 awarded / 586 T.E.A.C.H.  NEW Credentials seeking approval:  Afterschool and Youth Development Program Development 17

18. O VERVIEW OF M ETHODOLOGY AND R ESULTS Rebecca Starr, PDW Center 18

19. The Credential Surveys  Infant/Toddler and Administrator Credential recipients answered questions about:  Their employment and education experiences,  Their experiences with credential coursework, and  Their perceptions of how the credential has influenced their career and practices. 19

20. The Employer Infant/Toddler Credential Survey  Employers of Infant/Toddler Credential recipients answered questions about:  Their perceptions of the credentialed teachers and  How the credential affects their hiring procedures. 20

21. Results: Employment Before and After Infant/Toddler Credential Position BeforeAfter Assistant Teacher12%6% Teacher48%52% Administrator9%13% Center Director of 50 or fewer6% Center Director of 51 or more2%8% Certified Family Provider6% Licensed Family Provider40%42% Other0%13% 21

22. Results: Employment Before and After Administrator Credential Role BeforeAfter Assistant Teacher10%2% Teacher41%28% Administrator31%44% Center Director of 50 or fewer21%20% Center Director of 51 or more42%49% Certified Family Provider2%1% Licensed Family Provider12%11% 22

23. Results: Education Before and After Infant/Toddler Credential EducationBeforeAfter High School53%29% Associate Degree16%33% Bachelor’s Degree16%21% Master’s Degree2%4% 23

24. Results: Education Before and After Administrator Credential EducationBeforeAfter High School 35%23% Associate Degree 28%30% Bachelor’s Degree 29%30% Master’s Degree 3%10% 24

25. Summary of Infant/Toddler Credential Survey Results  Some recipients attained higher-level employment and achieved higher education after completing the credential.  Most recipients believed that the credential affected their careers in positive ways.  Respondents believed they learned from the credential and that they regularly apply this knowledge to their current work. 25

26. Summary of Administrator Credential Survey Results  Some recipients attained higher-level employment and achieved higher education after completing the credential.  Some recipients believed that the credential affected their careers in positive ways.  Respondents believed they learned from the credential and that they regularly apply that knowledge to their current work. 26

27. Employer Perceptions of the Infant/Toddler Credential  36% reported that the portfolios had a positive effect on hiring decisions.  27% of employers thought the Infant/Toddler Credential had a greater impact on quality than other types of education.  43% reported that staff with the credential positively impacted the classroom. 27

28. Analysis of The Registry Data  The Registry data included two groups:  Practitioners who had earned either the Administrator or Infant/Toddler Credential (1998-2012), and  Practitioners who had not earned any of The Registry Credentials.  The Registry data included:  Demographic information, and  Education and employment information.

29. Education for Those with and without a Credential Credential High School Some College One Year Diploma AABAMA Yes (n = 1970) 1%51%3%23%19%3% No (n = 8489) 29%24%2%14%26%4% 29

30. Employment for Those with and without a Credential Credential Yes (n = 1471) No (n = 7107) Family Child Care21%9% Agency Staff2%1% Childhood Professional2%1% Assistant Teacher2%10% School-Age Teacher<1%7% Teacher28%60% Administrator9%2% Center Director (<50)10%4% Center Director (>50)26%5% 30

31. Summary of The Registry Analyses  There was little change in education levels or employment from the time practitioners earned a credential to the present (ranged from 0-15 years).  For a small group of practitioners, the credentials may serve as stepping-stones to higher education and employment levels.  Earning a credential relates to education and employment. 31

32. 32 Wisconsin’s Story Continued Laura Saterfield, Bureau of Quality Improvement, Division of Early Care and Administration, Wisconsin Department of Children and Families U SE OF F INDINGS

33. Use of Findings  How has WI used the evaluation process and findings to inform performance management and/or State PD investments?  What questions did the evaluation answer for you? What new questions did it raise? 33

34. 34 Kathryn Tout, PDW Center P ROCESS S TEPS

35. Engage Stakeholders 35

36. Articulate Questions  Articulate questions for evaluation and for performance management. 36

37. Identify and Align Data  Identify and align relevant data elements to the questions 37

38. Supplement Registry Data  Develop data collection tools to supplement registry data, including surveys and focus groups (if relevant). 38

39. Plan for Analysis  Decide on appropriate analysis of the data. 39

40. Present Findings  Present and report on the findings. 40

41. Using the Findings  Specify feedback loops for using the findings. 41

42. 42 © iStockphoto.com/lostinbids Q&A D ISCUSSION

43. W RAP -U P AND E VALUATIONS 43

44. ZERO TO THREE 1255 23 rd St. NW, Suite 350 ● Washington, DC 20037 202-857-2623 ● PDWCenter@zerotothree.org THANK YOU! 44