advertisement

ChildOutcomes EHS2006

50 %
50 %
advertisement
Information about ChildOutcomes EHS2006
Education

Published on January 6, 2009

Author: aSGuest9356

Source: authorstream.com

advertisement

Slide 1: 1 Putting Child Outcomes Information to Work in EHS— Learnings from Spokane County HS/EHS 9th Annual Early Head Start Conference Portland State University July 19 2006 Terri Schibel, Spokane HS/EHS/ECEAP Myah Houghten, Washington State University Lisa Breitenfeldt, Washington State University Spokane County HS/EHS/ECEAP : 2 Spokane County HS/EHS/ECEAP Community Colleges of Spokane grantee HS/EHS in 11 sites scattered through Spokane 160 full-time staff 1360 Children Served 2005-2006 669 Head Start 210 Early Head Start 481 State Funded (sub-contracted) Spokane County HS/EHS/ECEAP : 3 Spokane County HS/EHS/ECEAP Variety of Program Options Part day/part year (traditional school calendar) Full day/part year Full day/full year (like community childcare) Home-based services with 74 EHS children and families Community college campus childcare/lab school Spokane County HS/EHS-University Child Outcomes Partnership Grant : 4 Spokane County HS/EHS-University Child Outcomes Partnership Grant Spokane County Head Start articulated a set of questions and invited Washington State University Spokane, Child and Family Research Unit to help answer the questions ACF/Head Start funding 2002-2006 One of five national projects University of Cincinnati Brown University University of Kentucky John Hopkins University WSU Spokane Spokane County HS/EHS-University Child Outcomes Partnership Grant : 5 Spokane County HS/EHS-University Child Outcomes Partnership Grant Build a model of organizational change that demonstrates how local HS programs can use assessment to improve the overall benefits to children Goal 1- Improve the quality of individual practice Goal 2- Improve the quality of the organization’s use of information in responding to all children Guiding Principals and Methods Commit to quality instruments = quality information Quality reporting - information value and ease of use Key value- Teachers, parents, education specialists, and senior management as partners Spokane County HS/EHS-University Child Outcomes Partnership Grant : 6 Spokane County HS/EHS-University Child Outcomes Partnership Grant Spokane HS/EHS adoption of an outcomes-driven model of program development Develop greater capacity to benefit children and families (direct service) Guide the evolution of the program with individual child outcomes information (program planning) Slide 7: 7 Spokane Outcomes Partnership Logic Model State of the Field : 8 State of the Field Assessment and curriculum should be linked Limited I/T assessment tools and program choices I/T Creative Curriculum, Ounce, DECA, Ages and Stages/ASQ When choosing a useful assessment: Link curriculum to program models and values Assessment costs—tangible and intangible Psychometrics—reliability and validity, aged-norms Child development and developmental domains Demographic challenges of families served Growing accountability requirements Program Values and Tool Selection Process : 9 Program Values and Tool Selection Process Birth-to-Five Program Tools must be reliable, valid, and meaningful Emphasize staff development Build community of scientists from parents to staff to senior management and governing board Cycle of Assessment at Child and Program Levels Slide 10: 10 Observe Record Reflect Plan Implement * The Cycle of Assessment Slide 11: 11 The Cycle of Assessment Observation and anecdotal records Program requirements Observe Slide 12: 12 Slide 13: 13 Slide 14: 14 The Cycle of Assessment Record Infant/Toddler Creative Curriculum, progress record -- age adjusted T scores Ounce Scale Denver II Developmental Screener Observation Notes Parent conferences IFSP documentation Slide 15: 15 Slide 16: 16 The Cycle of Assessment Child Goals Individual Reports Classroom Reports Tracking Reports Reflect Slide 17: 17 Categorize Synthesize/ Summarize Plan Compile Slide 18: 18 Categorize Plan Compile Synthesize/ Summarize Slide 19: 19 Report Slide 20: 20 Report Provides a static picture of a dynamic process Let others into the dynamic of a classroom Accountability Information for Planning But WHY? Slide 21: 21 Information Interpretation : 22 Information Interpretation Using standardized and age-adjusted scores -with limitations What other sources of information are available about this child? Screener scores, family situation, language, time in program, special services/disability, etc. Typical is good! Slide 23: 23 Slide 24: 24 Slide 25: 25 The Cycle of Assessment I/T Curriculum Plan Form Individualizing Goals and Objectives Plan Slide 26: 26 Slide 27: 27 The Cycle of Assessment Implement Examples of Organizing Questions at Different Levels in the Program : 28 Examples of Organizing Questions at Different Levels in the Program Slide 29: 29 Observe Record Plan Implement Reflect and Report Aggregate Data for Program Impact Information and Planning The Cycle of Program Assessment Slide 30: 30 The Cycle of Program Assessment Observe Aggregated Individual Child Assessments Slide 31: 31 The Cycle of Program Assessment Data development for sustainable MIS system Data entry done by office assistants Record Slide 32: 32 The Cycle of Program Assessment Statistical Analysis Site and Program-level reports Reflect and Report Slide 33: 33 Slide 34: 34 The Cycle of Program Assessment Review and make decisions with outcomes information I/T Program Plans Made Assessment instruments & use expectations I/T Progress Record 2x year Link child goals to assessment scores MIS data management and reporting Training Plan Slide 35: 35 The Cycle of Program Assessment Training Transitions Talking with Parents Data management Outcomes Framework Monitoring/self assessment Implement Slide 36: 36 Reporting to stay on course Conclusions : 37 Conclusions Confirmation of reliable and valid assessment tools Development of a management information system to support data entry, analysis, and use Use of information to assure response to the individualization of services and intentional program development Training impact and emphasis Organizational questions at each level No simple answers—only better questions Slide 38: 38 Spokane-University Child Outcomes Partnershiphttp://www.spokane.wsu.edu/headstart/Terri Schibel tschibel@iel.spokane.eduMyah Houghten houghten@wsu.eduLisa Breitenfeldt lbreit@wsu.edu

Add a comment

Related presentations