Presentation on theme: "Strategic Thinking in ECE in New Zealand: Seminar, Wellington, 27 rd July 2011 Giving ALL Children a Chance to Achieve: evidence from research Effective."— Presentation transcript:
Strategic Thinking in ECE in New Zealand: Seminar, Wellington, 27 rd July 2011 Giving ALL Children a Chance to Achieve: evidence from research Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education Project (EPPSE 3-16) A Longitudinal Study Funded by the UK Department for Education 1997-2014 Professor Iram Siraj-Blatchford Institute of Education, University of London
Intro to the EPPE/EPPSE study Evidence from EPPE/REPEY, EPPNI and MEEIFP Exploring quality The short, medium and long term impact of pre-school This presentation
The overall research design of EPPSE 3-14 Project as an example of ‘educational effectiveness’ research using valued added methods. EPPSE combines both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The EPPE/EPPSE Design
To compare the progress of children from a wide range of social and cultural backgrounds who have differing pre-school experiences. To separate out the effects of pre-school experience from the effects of primary school. To establish whether some pre-school centres are more effective than others in promoting children’s development. To discover the characteristics of pre-school education in those centres found to be most effective. To investigate the differences in the progress of groups of children, e.g. children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Aims of research on educational effectiveness
25 nursery classes 590 children 34 playgroups 610 children 31 private day nurseries 520 children 20 nursery schools 520 children 7 integrated centres 190 children 24 local authority day care nurseries 430 children home 310 children Design of EPPSE : 6 Local Authorities, 141 pre-schools, 3,000 children Pre-school Provision (3+ yrs) KS 1 862 sch KS2 1,128 sch KS3 739 sch KS4 700+ sch
● Child assessment (social/behaviour & cognitive) at 3, 4+, 6, 7, 10,11 & 14 years (first 16 outcomes in 2009) ● Family background at 3, 6 and 11 & 14 ● Interviews/questionnaires with staff ● ‘Quality’ rating scales in pre-school ● Case studies of effective pre-school settings ● Pedagogical observations in primary school ● School and classroom climate questionnaires ● Children’s views of school at age 7, 10 & 14 ● Teachers’ views on school processes and practice in Yr 5 & Yr 9 Sources of data, so far
Different influences on child outcomes Child Factors Family Factors Home- Learning- Environment Cognitive outcomes: English & maths Social/Behavioural: Self Regulation Likes to work things out for self Pro-social Considerate of others feelings Hyperactivity Restless, cannot stay still for long Anti-social Has been in trouble with the law Primary School Pre-School
Drawing on evidence from projects: EPPE/REPEY 3-7 (England) EPPNI 3-5 (Northern Ireland) MEEIFP 3-6 (Wales) Some Key Issues Quality of provision formal v informal (care and education) Transitions – especially Summer born children Ratios Training Literacy and interactions Appropriate curriculum and assessments
Early Years and outcomes If children come from disadvantaged backgrounds and are ‘at risk’ of social problems, then high quality pre-school/early years will make an important contribution to improving their social development. Children with no pre-school experience (the ‘home’ group) had poorer intellectual attainment, sociability and concentration when they started school, even after taking account of home background. More terms in pre-school (after the age of 2 years) is related to better cognitive and social progress (dose effect). Children who attend pre-school settings part-time develop as well as those children attending full-time
Effectiveness. Integrated settings and nursery schools tend to do better on cognitive outcomes even after taking account of children’s backgrounds. Integrated settings (which have fully integrated education with care) nursery schools and nursery classes are better at fostering children’s social development Settings with higher quality provision decreased children’s anti-social/ worried behaviour.
Quality Settings in the state educational sector have children who make (comparatively) more progress than those in the private/voluntary sector. In the EPPE sample, nursery schools and centres that integrated education and care tended to be rated highest on quality, (e.g. ECERS and Caregiver Interaction Scale). Good quality and better cognitive outcomes for children are associated with higher quality as defined by the ECERS R and E In the most effective settings, staff had 1.Better knowledge of the curriculum and child development 2.Engaged more in ‘sustained shared thinking’ with children 3.Supported children in talking through and resolving conflict 4. Adults had warm, responsive relationships with children. 5. Set clear educational goals. 6. Have recognised early years qualifications. 7. Trained teachers are amongst the staff. 8. Parents are supported in involvement in children’s learning.
Complex value-added model: the effect of pre-school’s quality on children’s cognitive progress Pre- reading Early number concepts LanguageNon-verbal reasoning Spatial awarenes s ECERS-E Average totalpositive*positive Literacypositive*positive Mathspositive Science/Environmentpositive# Diversitypositive#positive ECERS-R Average total Space and furnishings Personal care Language and reasoningpositive# Activities Interactionpositive Programme structure Parents and staffpositive# * When change of centre is not in model # verging on statistical significance
Complex value-added model: the effect of pre-school’s quality on children’s social-behavioural development Independence and concentration Cooperation and Conformity Peer SociabilityAnti-social/ Worried ECERS-E Average totalpositive# Literacypositive# Maths Science/ environment positive# Diversitypositive#
Home learning before 3 years reading to children; teaching children songs and nursery rhymes; playing with letters and numbers; painting and drawing; taking children to libraries; (for social outcomes) creating regular opportunities for play with friends. What parents and carers do is most important and makes a real difference to development. Activities for parents which help children’s development include:
Training: Relationship between Quality and Manager Qualification: EPPE evidence
Best Practice in the Foundation Phase (achieved by 10% of the pilots, all maintained) 4th December, 2006 The best settings in terms of implementing the FP appear to have the following common characteristics: More detailed, focused planning. Lead practitioners with good leadership and management skills and the ability to allocate effective roles for other adults whilst planning together for children’s learning Guided and supported play activities with higher levels of adult-child interaction that support children’s thinking. Clear and dynamic vision and leadership from setting heads who have a good grasp of effective early years practice and are able to communicate this effectively to FP staff.
Best Practice in the Foundation Phase 4th December, 2006 The best settings did not slavishly adhere to the FP guidance but took it seriously and built the FP into existing good practice. A move away from over-formal practice in the basics towards a more experiential, child centred and adult guided, play based practice. The leadership of the setting has a culture of investing in staff development. Some well trained and qualified staff who have a good understanding of child development and pedagogy and who actively support other staff in working with children.
Sustained shared thinking: An episode in which two or more individuals “work together” in an intellectual way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate activities, extend a narrative etc. Both parties must contribute to the thinking and it must develop and extend. Open-ended questions Playful learning Effective Pedagogy
Percentage of high cognitive challenge activities within each initiation category in each setting type percentage
Proportion of adult cognitive pedagogical interactions in settings varying in effectiveness
Time spent by children in different social groupings across settings of varying effectiveness
From: Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2009) ‘Early Childhood Education’ in Maynard, T. and Thomas, N. (Eds.) An Introduction to Early Childhood Studies, (2nd Edition) London: Sage Publications (in press) Table 1: OECD Curriculum Outlines Teacher’s initiating activities Teacher’s extending activities Differentiation and Formative Assessment Relationships and conflict between children Sustained Shared Thinking EEL   “Introducing new activities” “Enriching interventions” “Observe children” “Work out sustaining relations” “Engagement” High Scope“Sharing Control” “Participation as partners” “Plan - Do - Review” “Adopt a problem solving approach” “Authentic dialogue” Reggio Emilia “Development of short and long- term projects” “Sustaining the cognitive and social dynamics” “Teachers first listen don’t talk” “Warm reciprocal relationships” “Reciprocity of interactions” EPPE/ REPEY Correlations found with effective practice
Reducing Inequality Investing in good quality EYFS provision is an effective means of achieving targets concerning social exclusion and breaking cycles of disadvantage, but more is only better if the quality is right.
Playful learning for children is based on the following ideas: Building on and extending the child’s interests The child is usually active physically, socially and intellectually The learning is exploratory without necessarily fixed outcomes in mind Playful learning motivates children to try more challenging learning Children use, apply and extend their knowledge, skills and understanding through active exploration In social contexts children develop their capacities for cooperation and collaboration and can often explore complex ideas
Supporting playful learning involves the use of a suite of strategies including: Creating well resourced environments with rich materials Being involved and interacting with children as they play and explore Maintaining a purposeful focus on the child’s learning and development Modelling expressive language and consciously extending children’s vocabulary Constructively engaging with children to scaffold and extend learning Using sustained shared thinking strategies to build on child-initiated activity to extend knowledge, skills and understanding
The short, medium and long term impact of pre-school
Short Term impact- Aged 5 (entry to school) Reading
Short term impact – Aged 5 (entry to school) Social-behavioural
Scores on the total ECERS-R were positively related to children’s progress in Cooperation/conformity Scores on the ‘social interaction’ sub-scale were related to the development of independence and peer sociability Total scores on the ECERS-E were significantly related to progress in children’s - Pre-reading(Phonological awareness, letter recognition) - Non-verbal reasoning - Number skills Sub-scale scores were related to- - independence and concentration Main findings from the ECERS- R & E
Caregiver Interaction Scale (Arnett) Positive relationships is a subscale made up of 10 items indicating warmth and enthusiasm interaction with children by the caregiver. Punitiveness is a subscale made up of 8 items indicating harsh or over-controlling behaviour in interaction with children by the caregiver. Permissiveness is a subscale made up of 4 items indicating avoidance of discipline and control of children by the caregiver. Detachment is a subscale made up of 4 items indicating lack of involvement in interaction with children by the caregiver.
Pre- reading Early number concepts Independence & Concentration Co-operation & Conformity Peer Sociability Positive relationships +++++ Punitiveness --- Permissive ---- Detachment ---- Impact of quality as measured by the Caregivers Interaction Scale on cognitive and social behaviour outcomes
READING at key stage 1, social class and pre-school experience WRITING at key stage 1, social class and pre-school experience Medium Term Impact – Aged 7 (end of KS 1 ) - Reading and Writing
MATHEMATICS at key stage 1, social class and pre-school experience The contribution of social class and pre-school to mathematics attainment (age 7)
The impact of Pre-school Quality (ECERS-E: Educational aspects) on English and Maths Pre-school quality is associated with Key Stage 2 performance in both English and Mathematics. Also medium or high quality pre-school is associated with significantly enhanced attainment compared to no pre-school or low quality pre-school, and the effects are comparable in size to the effects of gender and FSM.
The Combined Impact of Pre-School Quality and Primary School Effectiveness (Value add) - Mathematics Reference Group: No Pre-School and Very low / low Primary School Effectiveness
Long Term impact – Aged 10 Pre-school Quality and Self Regulation Self regulation is highest in children who have attended medium or high quality pre-schools
The impact of Pre-school Quality (ECER-R: Social/Care aspects) on Hyperactivity and Pro-social Behaviour Children who attend high quality pre-school display higher pro-social behaviour and lower levels of hyperactive behaviour Home children show significantly reduced levels of positive social behaviour relative to children who attended pre-school regardless of quality, however, they also show reduced levels of Hyperactivity HyperactivityPro-social
The impact of Pre-school Quality (ECERS-R: Social/Care aspects & ECERS-E: Educational aspect) on Self-regulation and Pro-social behaviour Children who attended medium and high quality pre-schools had higher levels of ‘Self-regulation’ in Year 6 than others. ‘Home’ children were rated by teachers as having less ‘‘Pro-social’’ behaviour relative to children who had attended pre-school, although the difference is most marked for those who attended high quality.
For further Information about EPPSE project visit for free downloads the www.ioe.ac.uk/projects/eppe or Tel 00 44 (0)20 7612 6219 Brenda Taggart Research Co-ordinator (firstname.lastname@example.org) or the DfE website at: http://www.dfe.gov.uk/research/ www.ioe.ac.uk/projects/eppe http://www.dfe.gov.uk/research/ Principal Investigators: Professor Kathy Sylva, University of Oxford Professor Edward Melhuish, Birkbeck, University of London Professor Pam Sammons, University of Nottingham Professor Iram Siraj-Blatchford, Institute of Education, University of London Brenda Taggart, Institute of Education, University of London Analyses Team at the Institute of Education, University of London: Dr. Stephen Hunt, Dr. Helena Jeličić, Kati Toth, Diana Dragichi, Rebecca Smees and Wesley Welcomme, Dr Aziza Mayo, Donna-Lynn Shepherd