Carol Berg College of Staten Island

PROBLEM Universal Pre-Kindergarten (UPK) classrooms receiving minimal scores on the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale – Revised (ECERS-R) in the subscale measuring the quality of activities and interactions that support the development of language and reasoning skills have indicated a need for program improvement in this area.

The Importance of Language and Reasoning Skills of Pre-Kindergarten Students “Early learning in these areas predicts young children’s later reading ability” Lyon and Torgeson (2002). “Decades of research have shown the importance that learning vocabulary plays in children’s ability to learn to read and ultimately, in their success in school” Hart & Risley and Snow (2003).

Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R) a tool that measures the quality of early childhood programs serving children ages 2 ½ to 5 examines both the processes and structures within a program that impact student learning “Numerous research projects in the United States and abroad had used the ECERS to assess global quality and had discovered significant relationships between ECERS scores and child outcome measures” Harms, Clifford & Cryer (2005).

When using the ECERS-R the interactions of head and assistant teachers are measured by the same standard and weighed equally, as they are both directly involved with the students for a substantial portion of the day.

Questions to Consider Do both head and assistant teachers have opportunities throughout the day to support the development of language and reasoning skills? How are they interacting with the children? Do they spend most of their time managing behaviors and routines or providing instruction? Do they collaborate with each other regarding the instruction and assessment of students? Do they receive similar professional development to support their practice?

Needs Assessment Survey 7 assistant teachers 5 head teachers 2 directors 10 instructional coordinators (support 474 teachers and 555 assistants) _________________________________________________________ 24 total respondents 100% of the surveys were completed and returned.

Needs Assessment Survey Results – All Respondents Scale for Responses (Frequently) (Sometimes) (Never ) MedianModeMean During Center Time Head Teachers Spend Their Time… Managing Behaviors333 Assisting Students with Routines Observing and Assessing Students Interacting with Students as They Play in the Various Centers Preparing the Classroom for the Next Activity Working in a Center on a Planned Small Group Activity During Center Time Assistant Teachers Spend Their Time… Managing Behaviors Assisting Students with Routines Observing and Assessing Students Interacting with Students as They Play in the Various Centers Preparing the Classroom for the Next Activity Working in a Center on a Planned Small Group Activity Most Head Teachers and Assistant Teachers Collaborate… To Plan Instruction To Assess Student Progress and Performance Most Head Teachers Receive Instructional Support in the Form of… School-Wide Professional Development and Inquiry Work Professional Development from the DOE Coaching/Mentoring from School Staff On-Site Coaching from the DOE Intervisitations Most Assistant Teachers Receive Instructional Support in the Form of… School-Wide Professional Development and Inquiry Work Professional Development from the DOE Coaching/Mentoring from School Staff On-Site Coaching from the DOE Intervisitations & &

Survey Results The greatest disparities between the way head teachers and assistant teachers spend their time during centers were: “assisting students with routines (bathroom, hand-washing, clean-up)” and “preparing the classroom for the next activity.” Assistants engaged in these tasks more frequently Head teachers engaged in these tasks close to never There were also considerable differences between the professional development provided to head teachers as compared to assistant teachers as indicated by the mean. Head teachers were noted as receiving more instructional support than assistant teachers, with the greatest inequity in professional development from the DOE (frequently for head teachers and never for assistant teachers for both median and mode).

Instructional Coordinator Survey Teacher Survey

Trends in the Data Assistant teachers spend more time attending to routines & classroom preparation Head teachers interact with students more frequently as they engage in center-based learning Head teachers spend more time observing and assessing the students than the assistant teachers Collaboration of the teachers range from never to frequently Assistant teachers receive considerably less instructional support and professional development than the head teachers, especially from the instructional coordinators

PLANNING THE INTERVENTION

SITE OF INTERVENTION UPK in a community-based organization in District 20, Brooklyn Two UPK classrooms each with a 2 ½ hour AM and PM session Head teacher and the assistant teacher in both rooms, director/owner of the site Fully enrolled with 62 students born in ECERS-R overall score of 4.20 (3 indicating minimal quality and 5 indicating good quality). Subscale of Language and Reasoning earned a 4.25, scored 3.00 in item #17 – using language to develop reasoning skills and a 4.00 in item #18 – informal use of language. Site was selected due to its expressed interest in developing the language and reasoning skills of its students and for the willingness of all staff to participate.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS UPK Program Office of Early Childhood 1. Director 2. Head Teacher-Classroom #1 3. Assistant Teacher-Classroom #1 4. Head Teacher-Classroom #2 5. Assistant Teacher-Classroom #2 6. Program Manager 7. Program Administrator 8. Instructional Coordinator #1 9. Instructional Coordinator #2

COMMITTEE MEETINGS  UPK Staff – monthly on site team meetings, phone/ communication as needed  Office of Early Childhood Administrators – monthly individual meetings, phone/ consulting as needed  Instructional Coordinators – weekly

What Does the Research Tell Us? “Curriculum without intensive, ongoing professional development may not achieve the intended success of the program or intervention. Professional development of teachers may be the critical factor in effectively translating practices into positive outcomes” Wasik (2010). “Positive effects for both peer and expert coaching is grounded in the clinical supervision model” Joyce and Showers (1996). “Current recommended guidelines for high quality professional development indicate that it should be sustained over time, grounded in practice, linked to curriculum and student outcomes, collaborative and interactive” The National Staff Development Council (2000).

Clinical Cycle of Supervision planning conference observation feedback conference

Source: Adapted from T. Harms, R.M. Clifford and D. Cryer, Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale-Revised Edition. Copyright © 2005 by Teachers College Press. Teacher Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre-Kindergarten Classrooms Site/Class:_________________ Teacher(s)Observed:_________________________________ Beginning Time: _________Ending Time:_________ Observer: ___________________________ Teacher LanguageTallyTotalExamples 1. Talk about logical relationships while children play with materials that stimulate reasoning (Ex. sorting or sequencing materials) 2. Encourage children to explain their reasoning when solving problems (Ex. why they sorted objects into different groups) 3. Add information or new vocabulary to expand on ideas presented by the children (not in the form of a question) 4. Ask questions to encourage students to give longer and more complex answers (Ex. “what”, “where”, “why” or “how”) 5. Introduce concepts in response to children’s interests or needs to solve problems (Ex. how to balance a tall block building)

What Will the Professional Development Look Like Coaching Modeling Staff Professional Development (possible topics): Using the Pre-K Environment to Support Vocabulary Development Theories of Language Development Intentional Teaching: Creating Opportunities to Support Language & Reasoning Working with Materials that Stimulate Reasoning

TIME LINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF INTERVENTION Phase I (December 2011) 1.Clinical cycle of supervision of all UPK teachers using the observational tool: Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre-Kindergarten Classrooms by the Instructional Coordinator 2.Individual coaching of teachers by the instructional coordinator 3.Team meeting: sharing the results of the needs assessment survey, determine a focus for professional development.

Phase II (January 2012) 1.Professional development facilitated by the instructional coordinator 2.Peer observations of all teachers (within and/or between classrooms) using the observational tool: Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre-Kindergarten Classrooms 3.Team meeting: Supporting the development of language and reasoning throughout the day, reflection, determine next steps

Phase III (February/March 2012) 1.Implement next steps: possible professional development, additional coaching 2.Director observes all of the teachers using the tool: Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre-Kindergarten Classrooms, supported by the instructional coordinator 3.Team meeting: reflection

Phase IV (April 2012) 1.Instructional coordinator observations of all teachers using the tool: Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre-Kindergarten Classrooms 2.Team meeting: looking at student work with a focus on the development of language and reasoning, reflection 3.Modified ECERS-R review targeting subscale for language and reasoning by an instructional coordinator trained to reliability

Phase V (May 2012) 1.Team meeting: review of data, reflection of the intervention All team meetings will be scheduled during lunch or end of the day, to be determined by the participants All professional development will be scheduled at the end of the day

Baseline Data ECERS-R score form 2010 in the subscale of Language and Reasoning, item #17 – using language to develop reasoning skills and item #18 – informal use of language. Needs assessment survey results Initial observation using the Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre-Kindergarten Classrooms observation tool

ASSESSMENT FormativeSummative Observations using the Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre- Kindergarten Classrooms observation tool Teacher and director reflections Student work ECERS-R review targeting subscale Language and Reasoning, item #17 – using language to develop reasoning skills and item #18 – informal use of language Final observation using the Teacher-Language During Center-Based Learning in Pre- Kindergarten Classrooms observation tool Teacher and director reflections

Barriers Solutions Teacher coverage for the peer observations Instructional coordinator’s lack of time to provide consistent on-site support Director volunteered to cover the classrooms herself Communicate with the site by phone and between visits Peer and director observations will build capacity to observe, reflect and collaborate, independent of the instructional coordinator

CONCERNS Warash, Markstrom, Lucci (2005) discuss the lack of significant improvement in language and reasoning when using the ECERS-R as a tool for improvement: This is an area that is difficult to improve without significant training and experience. It takes time for teachers to learn how to respond to children in order to promote language skills, cognitive development, and social skills. Such skills take an intensive amount of knowledge and experience with young children, and require teachers to be reflective of their own interactions. A teacher must be aware of the child’s cognitive understanding and thinking processes in order to respond to his or her questions or discoveries. Intentional teaching is a difficult skill to acquire in a short period of time (p.248).

References Harms, T., Clifford, R. M., Cryer, D. (2005). Early Childhood Environment Scale: Revised Edition. New York: Teachers College Press. Hsieh, W., Hemmeter, M. L., McCollum, J. A., Ostrosky, M. M. (2009). Using coaching to increase preschool teachers ’ use of emergent literacy teaching strategies. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24, Warash, B. G., Markstrom, C. A., Lucci, B. (2005). The Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised as a Tool to Improve Child Care Centers. Education (Chula Vista, Calif.),1 }}+26, no2, Winter, Wasik, B. A. (2010). What teachers can do to promote preschoolers ’ vocabulary development: Strategies from an effective language and literacy professional development coaching model. The Reading Teacher, 63(8),