 |
Questions? |
|
Privacy |
|
Site Index |
|
Contact Us |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
Home | Services | Working with ACF | Policy/Planning | About ACF | ACF News | Search |
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
February 17, 2005 | October 27, 2004 | August 4, 2004
Head
Start Bureau February Updates
National Satellite Broadcast and Web Cast
Including a Report on Fall 2004 National Reporting System Results
Thursday, February 17, 2005 1:30-3:30 PM EST
The text from each segment of the February 17, 2005 Head Start Bureau Updates National Satellite Broadcast and Web Cast is available for viewing on-line. You may click on the segment number in order to view the text from that segment.
Windy M. Hill
Associate Commissioner
Head Start Bureau
Thank you, Ann.
It is my pleasure to welcome you to today’s broadcast. I’ll open today with a few updates related to the National Reporting System and follow that with some updates regarding other Head Start business and events.
You will notice in the broadcast today that one of the key staff is missing. Just a few weeks ago Dr. Tom Schultz resigned from the Head Start Bureau to accept a position at the Pew Charitable Trust working in the area of early childhood accountability. Dr. Michele Plutro, whom many of you know, will be taking on many of the roles that were Tom’s.
In this broadcast you will see that the rest of the team – both staff and contractors – remains in place and strong.
There are two other updates related to the NRS. First, a Report to Congress on this Head Start Assessment, approved by Assistant Secretary Dr. Wade Horn, is continuing to make its way through the ACF clearance process. I remain optimistic that this Report will reach the Congress this month.
Additionally, the General Accounting Office, GAO has conducted a study of the NRS development and implementation, including review of the assessment by members of the National Academy of Sciences. The GAO will be issuing its Report to Congress later this spring.
Now I’ll focus on some other areas of interest to the Head Start community.
You may have seen the press release in recent weeks announcing the 10-members of the Secretary’s Advisory Panel on Head Start Accountability and Educational Performance Measures. This group will be chaired by Dr. Susan Landry. Dr. Landry is a Michael Matthew Knight Professor and Chief of the Division of Developmental Pediatrics at the University of Texas Medical School in Houston, Texas.
The Committee will meet periodically over the next 16 to 24 months to review the existing sources of data in order to consider the status of Head Start Accountability and to make subsequent recommendations to the new Secretary of Health and Human Services, Michael Leavitt, on both the status and future considerations regarding various aspects of program accountability.
This includes data related to monitoring, the National Reporting System, the Impact Study, and FACES. You should look forward to hearing more about the work of this Committee in the next few months.
2005 represents the 40th Anniversary of the Head Start Program. You may be planning local events to celebrate and honor this historic occasion. The Head Start Bureau is currently engaged in planning a couple of events as well. You will hear more about these in the next several weeks.
Many of you in the viewing area today may also have been present two weeks ago for the first-ever Hispanic Institute that was held in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Over 2300 participants benefited from that experience and the various speakers and presentations that were part of the event, including 396 representatives from Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs, and the states of Texas, Illinois, New York and California having the largest number of participants. We were happy to offer this opportunity to all grantees that serve Spanish-speaking children and families, and we are hearing a great deal of positive feedback about this event.
There will be a number of support efforts that will build on the experiences and the momentum created by this institute, and we look forward to hearing how the lessons learned there are translating into improved practices in Head Start programs.
Whether or not you participated in the Institute, I hope you will give some attention to the current issue of the Head Start Bulletin which was first disseminated at the Institute. This issue is focused on English Language Learners. It is packed with useful information.
The final subject I want to mention to day is Reauthorization. As you know, the reauthorization process was not completed last year. It has since resumed. You may want to follow the progress and think about the various proposals that are presented by the Congress.
We know that a number of ideas are already being discussed by various members of Congress and within committees.
The subjects under discussion include:
The final update I need to share with you involves a recently mandated cap on salaries in Head Start programs. I’m going to give a very brief introduction to this new regulation. You will soon receive additional written explanation and guidance regarding compliance.
The HHS appropriations bill that was passed in December 2004 contains a provision, Section 205, which requires that “none of the funds appropriated in this title for Head Start shall be used to pay the compensation of an individual, either as direct costs or any proration as an indirect cost, at a rate in excess of Executive Level II.” As of January, 2005, the rate of compensation for an Executive Level II employee of the federal government is $162,100 per year.
This requirement became effective on December 8, 2004, the day the President signed this bill into law. Regional Offices will be reviewing the proposals of any fiscal year 2005 refunding awards already made subsequent to this date and will, as appropriate, contact grantees for clarification.
Every Head Start program is responsible for assuring its compliance with this provision. This provision applies to the salary and fringe benefits of any staff employed by a Head Start grantee or delegate agency who is paid, in whole or in part, with Head Start funds.
Grantees may pay staff compensation rates which exceed $162,100, but no Head Start funds can be used for any portion of that compensation which is in excess of this statutorily mandated cap. Grantees are cautioned that failure to comply with this requirement could lead to a finding of disallowable costs.
That concludes my remarks for today’s broadcast. You can now look forward to hearing about the current status of the NRS efforts as well as a special preview of new mentor coach materials.
Next we’ll hear from Michele Plutro, Educational Affairs Specialist. Michele will provide updates on the first year NRS reports, and an update on the NRS Technical Work Group.
Michele...
Segment 1b: Update on NRS Year I Reports and Technical Work Group
Michele Plutro
Special Assistant to the Associate Commissioner
Head Start Bureau
Thank you, Windy.
It is my pleasure to also be with you for today’s NRS broadcast. My remarks today are very brief, which may surprise many of you who know me!
I have been a part of the development of the National Reporting System team since the idea was first released by President Bush in 2002. Sometimes it is still hard to believe how far we have come and to believe that in a couple of months we will already be celebrating two years into this NRS process.
Each time I review data, talk with programs about their experiences or talk with other federal or state employees about this process, the more I believe we are doing one more thing right on behalf of children.
We may not yet be doing everything as well as we can. We may not implementing every single procedure as well as possible, but it is truly important that we be able to report to the Congress and to the tax-paying public that children are indeed better prepared for school after their Head Start experiences, and that the preparation includes sustained attention to cognitive skills as well as health status, nutrition, social and emotional development, and parent education. Historically, we know that we have done a better job in reporting on those outcomes than we have on reporting children’s cumulative, curricular experiences.
As Ann Linehan said, you will receive many updates throughout today’s broadcast, so my messages are indeed few since the presentations today are quite rich.
I have two messages to share. First, I want to repeat the caution that we have been stating since the inception of the NRS – a message that has been clearly stated in each of the reports that you have received to date and a message that has been repeated by many throughout these NRS broadcasts.
That is, the NRS is still under development. The infrastructure, though in existence, still needs some strengthening. Therefore, the reports you receive, while very informative, should not be "overused”, prematurely used, or inappropriately used for local decision-making related to certain types of critical programmatic changes.
I encourage you to reexamine the narrative sections of your reports and to review some of the relevant questions and answers as they are archived on the NRS website.
My second message is an update on the partnerships necessary to continue the NRS development and implementation. As evidenced in today’s broadcast – we are continuing to work with the primary organizations you are familiar with: Xtria, Westat and Mathematica.
In addition, the Technical Workgroup – the TWG as we say – is continuing, even with the formation of the Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Head Start Accountability. The membership of the TWG has remained 100% intact since it was formed in the earliest days of discussion regarding the NRS.
That group, the TWG, has a full agenda for this coming year, beginning with their next meeting this spring. I think you will be interested in the subjects they are currently discussing and debating and look forward to the recommendations after their meeting. These items include, after OMB approval, a 2005 field test of a possible measure or measures in the social emotional domain and the examination of various approaches or options to annual sampling of four-year-old children for participation in the NRS.
Now we will be joined by Dr. Nick Zill, a project director at Westat, Dr. Ruth Hubbell-McKey, of Xtria, and Dr. Diane Paulsell from Mathematica. They will discuss the NRS Fall 2004 child assessment results, the CBRS, including summer migrant programs in 2004, and the lessons learned from year one and the baseline.
To you Nick…
Segment 1c: Head Start NRS Fall 2004 Child Assessment Results
Nick Zill
Project Director
Westat
Thank you Michele. It’s good to be with you again.
SLIDE 1
FALL ASSESSMENT RESULTS
I will be giving an overview of the results of the Fall 2004 National Reporting System Child Assessment.
SLIDE 2
BASELINE DATA COLLECTION
I am very happy to report that the fall 2004 data collection for the National Reporting System has been completed. Thanks to the continued efforts of Head Start program staff throughout the United States, baseline assessments were successfully carried out with nearly all the kindergarten-eligible children in Head Start this year.
Baseline program reports are being posted on the CBRS website right after this broadcast. You should receive your printed baseline report in the next two or three weeks.
SLIDE 3
NUMBER OF CHILDREN TESTED
Once again, Head Start staff around the country have done an outstanding job of completing the NRS child assessments in a timely and conscientious fashion. We have received, scanned and scored completed baseline answer forms for 427,473 children. Assessment data have been received from over 1,800 Head Start programs. When we break that down by language of assessment, the totals for the fall are that some 404,000 assessments, or 95 percent, were completed in English. Approximately 98,000, or 23 percent, were completed in Spanish. And some 75,000 children, or 18 percent, were assessed in both English and Spanish.
SLIDE 4
HIGH QUALITY DATA
It appears that Head Start local trainers and assessors have done an excellent job overall in terms of the quality and consistency of assessments. The internal-consistency reliability of the fall data show good reliability at the individual child level.
These good reliabilities at the individual level mean that reliabilities are excellent when child data are aggregated to the program level.
SLIDE 5
COMPARISON WITH FALL 2003
The fall assessment results are not only reliable; their findings were generally consistent with the results from the fall 2003 baseline data collection. This suggests that Head Start programs are serving children with similar early literacy and early numeracy skills as in previous years.
SLIDE 6
WHAT ASSESSMENTS SHOW
So what do the fall NRS assessments show? On average, in the fall most children scored near the middle of the range on the vocabulary and early math subtests but low on Letter Recognition in both the English and Spanish assessments. These findings are similar to the results of the Fall 2003 assessments.
SLIDE 7
MEAN PERCENT OF ITEMS CORRECT
If we look at the percent of items that children got correct, on average, we see that children got 80% of the items correct on the English language screener.
Those who passed the screener went on to the other English assessment components. On the vocabulary component, the average percent correct was 55%.
The average score on the letter recognition component was somewhat lower, with children recognizing 25 percent of the letters, or about 6 out of the 26 letters of the English alphabet.
On the early math component, the average percent correct was 50%, which was in the middle of the score range.
SLIDE 8
MEAN PERCENT OF ITEMS CORRECT FOR U.S. MAINLAND PROGRAMS
The national average scores for the Spanish assessment are presented by Head Start program location. Analyses of the first year data have shown that the spring Spanish assessment scores were significantly higher for children in programs in Puerto Rico, where the primary language of instruction is Spanish, than for children in programs on the U.S. mainland, where the primary language of instruction is typically English.
Therefore, the Spanish assessment results are presented for U.S. mainland Head Start programs and separately for those programs in Puerto Rico.
The average baseline results on the Spanish assessment, based on mainland programs, were similar, though generally somewhat lower than the results on the English assessment. Children who took the Spanish assessment got 63 percent of the items correct on the Spanish language screener.
On Spanish vocabulary, they got 54 percent of the items correct. On Spanish letter recognition, they named 10 percent of the letters of the Spanish alphabet correctly, or 3 out of 30 letters. On Spanish early math, they got 40 percent correct.
SLIDE 9
MEAN PERCENT OF ITEMS CORRECT FOR PUERTO RICO PROGRAMS
Turning to Puerto Rico, we see that the children there got 75 percent of the items correct on the Spanish language screener.
And in Spanish vocabulary, children in Puerto Rico got 62 percent of the items correct. On Spanish letter recognition, they named 7 percent of the letters of the Spanish alphabet, or about 2 out of 30 letters. On Spanish early math, they got 43 percent correct.
SLIDE 10
ENGLISH LANGUAGE SCREENER FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
Let us look now at how well children from non-English-speaking families did on the English screener.
25 percent of all English Language Learner children understood spoken directions fairly well or well. That is, they got 16 or more items correct out of the 20 on the English screener.
On the other hand, 36 percent of all English Language Learners had insufficient knowledge of English to receive the remainder of the English assessment. Whether or not they passed the English screener, children from Spanish-speaking families received the Spanish assessment. Those who came from other language backgrounds and did not pass the screener did not receive further assessment.
SLIDE 11
VOCABULARY
On the English vocabulary component, the typical Head Start child started the program with a vocabulary size consistent with skill level 3, or a vocabulary size equivalent to that of an average child 40 to 47 months old (just under 4-years old). Given that most of the children taking the NRS were 4 or 5 years old, this meant that the vocabulary development of the typical Head Start child was somewhat behind that of the average non-poor child of the same age.
However, there was considerable variation around this average level of development. Even early in the program year, 17 percent of the Head Start children had vocabularies equivalent to that of an average child in the U.S. of the same age or older. On the other hand, 50 percent of the children were a year or more behind in their vocabulary development.
SLIDE 12
LETTER RECOGNITION
As I mentioned earlier, the average number of letters known by Head Start children early in the year was between 6 and 7. But this average was boosted by the minority of children who know considerably more letters. In fact, the typical child – one in the middle of the distribution – entered Head Start identifying only one or two letters by name, and that was consistent with skill level 2.
The minority of children who knew more letters included 9 percent who knew all or nearly all of their letters. Three-quarters of the children, however, identified fewer than the congressionally-mandated 10 letters early in the Head Start program year.
SLIDE 13
EARLY MATH SKILLS
Turning to early math skills, the typical Head Start child counted up to 10 or 11 objects early in the program year, consistent with skill level 3.
14 percent of the children had the more advanced skill of being able to count 15 or more objects.
There was similar diversity among children assessed in Spanish.
SLIDE 14
SPANISH LANGUAGE SCREENER
Baseline skill level results for the Spanish assessment subtests are presented for the U.S. mainland programs.
The typical kindergarten-eligible children assessed in Spanish entered the Head Start program understanding directions moderately well, consistent with skill level 4.
23 percent understood directions well or fairly well in Spanish.
10 percent had insufficient knowledge of the language to receive the remainder of the Spanish assessment.
SLIDE 15
SPANISH VOCABULARY
On Spanish vocabulary, the typical Spanish-speaking Head Start child started the program with a vocabulary size equivalent to that of an average child 40 to 47 months old, or just under 4-years old. This was consistent with skill level 3.
At the beginning of the program year, 17 percent of the children assessed in Spanish had Spanish vocabularies equivalent to that of an average Spanish-speaking child of the same age or older. About one third of the children were a year or more behind in their Spanish vocabulary development.
SLIDE 16
SPANISH LETTER RECOGNITION
The average number of letters known by Head Start children early in the program year was 3 letters.
Approximately 6 percent of the Spanish-speaking children knew 17 or more letters. But over 90 percent identified fewer than 10 letters of the Spanish alphabet.
SLIDE 17
SPANISH EARLY MATH SKILLS
In math, the typical child assessed in Spanish could count fewer than 6 objects. 94 percent of the children could not count more than 11 objects. Only 2 percent could count 15 or more objects.
SLIDE 18
VARIATION ACROSS PROGRAMS
When we look at the fall 2004 NRS results across different Head Start programs within each region or across regions, we find that there are significant variations in average skill levels with differing demographic characteristics of programs. But these variations are not great and they are not all in the same direction.
SLIDE 19
WHICH DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS MATTER?
For example, programs who serve, on average, relatively older children are likely to score somewhat higher on the each of the assessment tasks than programs who serve relatively younger children. Similarly, children of parents with relatively higher levels of education tend to have higher assessment scores than children of less well-educated parents.
Children in programs with high concentrations of English language learners score lower on the English language screener and the English vocabulary assessment tasks than children in programs with low concentrations of language minority children, and this is as might be expected. These differences in English vocabulary exist despite the fact that it is given only to children who have passed the language screener.
On the other hand, programs with high concentrations of English Language Learners did not score lower than other programs on Letter Recognition, nor on Early Math Skills.
SLIDE 20
NARROWING THE GAP
Despite these associations between average baseline skill levels and demographic characteristics, analyses that we have done with first year NRS data show that Head Start seems to be making a difference in children’s early literacy and early numeracy skills. Over the course of the Head Start year, relationships between children’s demographic characteristics and average skill levels become weaker. The services provided by Head Start seem to be helping to narrow the gap between different groups of Head Start children.
SLIDE 21
BASELINE REFERENCE POINTS
As you review the data you will receive on the skill levels of children in your program, it is important to realize again that the scores represent children’s knowledge as they entered Head Start in the fall of last year.
They provide a baseline reference point for the progress children will make in these skill areas during the program year. In part because of children’s participation in Head Start, their knowledge in these areas is likely to increase noticeably by the end of the year, as they did in the first year implementation of the NRS. What is important is how much growth your children show by the end of the program year and the level of knowledge they have attained when they leave the program and go on to kindergarten.
SLIDE 22
DOCUMENTING PROGRESS
Based on scores from both the fall assessments and the spring assessments, we will calculate "gain scores" to document this progress in each skill area. Following the completion of the spring assessments, each of your programs will receive a customized report on the growth children in the program have shown and the levels of knowledge they have achieved.
SLIDE 23
TESTAMENT TO YOUR WORK
The high completion rates and the good quality of the fall assessment data are a testament to the hard work and care that Head Start staff throughout the United States have devoted to the National Reporting System enterprise.
But the effort is only half done. Similar diligence and care will be required to complete the spring assessments in a timely and high-quality manner. Keep up the great work in the spring.
Now I’m going to turn it over to Ruth.
Segment 1d: Head Start NRS Fall 2004 CBRS
Ruth Hubbell-McKey
Project Director
Xtria
Thanks you, Nick.
SLIDE 1
TITLE SLIDE
I will be reporting on data from the NRS Computer Based Reporting System – the CBRS. This is the web-based system that programs use to record their eligible children and provide descriptive data about the programs, centers, classrooms, teachers, assessors and children.
When the data collection period begins, programs first enter these data into the CBRS. The system assigns ID numbers to the children, and these numbers are then entered on the scoring sheets and used for the assessments. After the assessments are completed, Head Start staff go back and enter assessment completion data into the CBRS. This allows us to track how programs are doing and the numbers of assessments to expect from them. The system also provides valuable descriptive data for analysis.
SLIDE 2
FALL 2004 STATUS REPORT
We have had a very successful fall data collection period as far as CBRS data collection was concerned. Programs entered data successfully, including many that took advantage of the new copy-over and data import features to ease data entry.
For this fall, we had 1,841 or 95% of the programs log on and enter data. We closed the database in early December when all assessments should have been completed. We now have 477,915 children entered in the CBRS for the fall. Of these, 669 were not able to be assessed due to a severe disability, 718 had IEP’s that prevented assessment and 7,620 dropped out before being assessed. Therefore there were 468,908 children eligible for assessment.
SLIDE 3
Fall 2004 STATUS REPORT Continued
Of these, 6,320 children were not assessed due to parent refusal, 10,242 were not assessed due to prolonged absence and 3,470 children would not cooperate with the assessment. There were also 3,063 erroneous or missing ID’s and for 18,340 children their assessment status was unknown.
That gave us a total of 427,437 assessments that were scanned and scored. This is very good performance and shows the great effort that your programs and staff put forth.
SLIDE 4
MIGRANT STATUS REPORT (2004 DATA)
The Migrant and Seasonal programs participated in the NRS on a different schedule than the regional programs. Most of these programs begin operations in the spring and summer when the growing season starts and often operate only a few months. Only migrant programs in which children are enrolled more than 4 months were required to participate in the NRS. These programs completed their “baseline” or first set of assessments in the spring and their “growth” or second set of assessments at least four months later.
We had 40 of 68 migrant programs participate on this schedule. They entered 1,365 children in the CBRS, and we received 1,299 assessments in the baseline period and 742 in the growth period. We had 32 non-complete assessments and 37 children dropping out at the time of the baseline, and 43 non-completes and 242 children dropping out at the time of the growth assessment.
In 2004 we conducted a feasibility study of assessing children in migrant programs that operate less than 4 months. The study was conducted in 27 programs. The results of that study should be available later this spring.
Now Diane, over to you.
Segment 1e: Lessons Learned from Year 1 and Baseline Observations from Fall 2004
Diane Paulsell
Senior Researcher
Mathematica Policy Research
Thank you Ruth…
SLIDE 1
TITLE
Since the NRS was first implemented in fall 2003, the Head Start Bureau has contracted with Mathematica to conduct an independent, third-party assessment of how well the NRS is being implemented around the country. The purpose of this two-year study is to learn what is working well, and what can be improved in future years.
In the first year of implementation, we visited a nationally representative sample of 35 Head Start programs during the fall and spring assessment periods, and we visited 4 migrant Head Start programs participating in the NRS. We are visiting a different set of programs to learn about implementation during the current program year.
Our results are being reported to the Head Start Bureau, the NRS Technical Work Group, and Head Start programs.
SLIDE 2
OVERVIEW
Today I’m going to share our main findings on:
SLIDE 3
FALL OBSERVATION VISITS
During fall 2004 NRS implementation, our team visited a nationally representative sample of 34 Head Start programs. Each site visit lasted about 2 days. We observed Head Start staff conducting the NRS assessment with 354 children (295 assessed in English and 59 assessed in Spanish).
We observed a total of 126 local assessors; interviewed Head Start directors, NRS trainers, and data managers; and held focus groups with staff conducting the assessments to learn about their experiences.
SLIDE 4
LENGTH OF ASSESSMENTS
The average length of the assessments we observed was about 16 minutes on the English version and 18 minutes on the Spanish version. More than 90% of the children completed the assessment in 10-20 minutes. New assessors who had not assessed children in previous rounds took about 4 minutes longer, on average.
SLIDE 5
QUALITY OF ASSESSMENTS
Using the certification procedures as a guide, we coded the assessments we observed for errors and computed a certification score for each one. Nearly 80% of the English assessments we observed scored an 85 or higher, which is the minimum required for certification. Half scored in the 96-to-100 range. Overall, this indicates that programs did a good job in training staff to administer the assessments correctly and consistently.
We compared certification scores on assessments conducted by teachers who assessed children in their own classrooms with those of other assessors, as well as scores for experienced and new assessors. We found no significant differences in average scores for these groups.
The quality of Spanish assessments was similar. 80% scored an 85 or higher, and 65% scored in the 96-to-100 range.
We also analyzed our observations to understand more specific types of errors and problems in administering the assessment. The overall error rate was low. Compared to fall 2003, assessors made fewer errors in reading the script and scoring the items. However, they made more gesturing and coaching errors.
Gesturing errors involved omitting a gesture, making a wrong gesture, or adding a gesture where none was required. The gestures were among the more subtle and difficult aspects of NRS administration. Nevertheless, site visitors generally felt that most gesturing errors had little effect on children’s responses to the items.
Coaching errors occurred mostly in the Simon Says section, and usually involved giving nonverbal cues, such as looking down too soon for the item, “put your feet together.” Some of these actions may be unconscious and could be addressed by reinforcement of correct procedures during refresher training.
Assessors, on average, scored 97% of responses correctly. Errors occurred when assessors had difficulty seeing where the child was pointing, or when the child’s response was ambiguous. In addition, assessors had difficulty scoring the counting item correctly when children skipped marbles or counted the same marble twice.
AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT
SLIDE 6
Although assessors made few errors overall, we identified some aspects of the assessment process in which staff may need more guidance and training. These include:
SLIDE 7
CHILDREN’S RESPONSES
Staff in two-thirds of the programs reported that most children reacted positively to the assessment. Many enjoyed the one-on-one time with the assessor.
At the same time, programs cited several child behaviors that made administering the assessment challenging. These included difficulty staying on task, being shy or afraid to go with the assessor, becoming bored or distracted, crying, and being unresponsive.
Assessors tried a variety of strategies to address these behaviors, such as redirection, taking breaks, allowing children to move around, and trying again on another day. Although refresher training provided some behavior management strategies, programs requested more guidance on handling children’s negative responses to the assessment.
Assessors found the vocabulary and letter naming sections to be the most difficult to administer. Many felt these sections were too long and reported difficulty sustaining children’s attention. As in the Year 1 study, some assessors noted that it was frustrating for children who did not know the letters to be asked repeatedly if they knew any more.
SLIDE 8
ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS
71% of the programs administered the NRS assessment to English-language learners.
Overall, assessors were pleased with the changes that allowed them to assess Spanish speakers in Spanish first and then in English. They wanted children to start with a positive experience.
However, some programs had difficulty determining whether children’s home language was English or Spanish, and they used a variety of methods to do so.
As in the Year 1 study, some programs also had concerns about word usage on the Spanish version, because of variation in Spanish word usage across regions. Some program staff also felt that the Simon Says task was confusing to English-language learners because they were not familiar with the game.
SLIDE 9
CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES
All but 3 of the 34 programs we visited assessed at least one child with a disability. They made a number of accommodations for these children, including:
Two-thirds of these programs reported that the process went smoothly, and they felt comfortable deciding on the kinds of accommodations that should be made. At the same time, staff in about one-third of programs said they needed more guidance on when to administer the NRS to children with disabilities and on appropriate accommodations for these testing situations. Only a few children in the programs we visited could not complete the NRS due to a disability.
SLIDE 10
LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION APPROACHES
Most programs maintained the same basic approach to conducting the fall assessment that they used in during Year 1
More than half used at least some teachers as NRS assessors, but most of these did not allow teachers to assess children enrolled in their own classrooms.
In 26% of the sample programs, however, teachers did assess children in their own classrooms. In these programs, staff thought that children would feel more comfortable being assessed by their own teacher, and teachers would be better able to manage children’s behavioral issues.
Most programs kept their Policy Council and parents informed about NRS implementation. Overall, staff reported that most parents did not raise serious concerns or objections. In policy council meetings, the most frequently asked questions were about the purpose of the NRS, how the results would be used by the Head Start Bureau, and the appropriateness of testing 4-year-olds. Parents typically expressed interest in seeing their children’s scores on the NRS; some had questions about how the results would be used and by whom.
SLIDE 11
FALL REFRESHER TRAINING
Half of the sample programs trained at least 1 new assessor in fall 2004, and all programs provided refresher training to experienced assessors.
All but 1 of the programs followed the training agenda for new assessors, but less than half followed the guidelines for refresher training. A number of programs did not adhere to the training script, and 2 did not show the training video. Training for Spanish assessors was even less likely to follow the training protocol.
Overall, programs found the training materials helpful, especially sections of the video on handling challenging behaviors. However, they felt that the refresher training was too long and repetitive. Nearly half of the programs said they would prefer a shorter refresher training that focuses on changes to the assessment protocol and provides more time to practice with other assessors.
SLIDE 12
PROGRAM REACTIONS
During interviews, Head Start staff expressed four main concerns about the NRS. These concerns are very similar to those raised by programs that participated in the Year 1 study.
The concern expressed most often by local staff was about how the NRS results would be used at the national level. Many staff said they still did not have a clear understanding of the purpose of the NRS and its implications for local programs whose children did not perform well on the assessment.
Local staff also expressed concern about whether the NRS results would accurately reflect program performance, the amount of staff time and financial resources dedicated to the NRS, and whether the assessment process could adversely affect some Head Start programs and children by narrowing the program’s focus to the domains covered by the assessment.
SLIDE 13
VIEWS ON THE FALL NRS REPORT
In early spring 2004, each local Head Start program received a report on the results of the fall 2003 assessments. (At the time of the visits, programs had not yet received their report on the first full year of the NRS.)
Staff in about half of the programs found the report clear and easy to understand; staff in 30 percent of programs had some difficulty interpreting the information.
At the same time, staff in most programs said the results of their own local assessments were more useful to them than the NRS results, because they covered more domains, were available at the individual child and classroom levels, and were available soon after the assessments were completed. Most programs suggested that NRS results be reported by center or classroom.
Nevertheless, staff in most programs said they would use the NRS results for program improvement—to develop improvement plans, identify areas in which children did not perform well, create teacher training plans, or assess the curriculum.
In addition, staff in more than a third of the programs reported that they have already made changes in classroom practices as a result of the NRS, mostly by focusing more classroom instruction time on areas covered by the assessment. Letter recognition was a key area of increased focus.
In addition, one quarter of the programs reported using the NRS as a guide for purchasing classroom materials.
SLIDE 14
PROGRAM SUGGESTIONS
Programs made a number of suggestions for improving the NRS.
They suggested improving communication by providing more information about the purpose of the NRS and how results will be used; information about its development, validity, and reliability; and written materials for parents.
Programs also want to receive training materials and reports on NRS outcomes in a more timely fashion.
One quarter of the programs said they would like more guidance and support on using the NRS results for program improvement. Moreover, if children do not perform well in a particular domain, programs would like guidance and technical assistance on how to achieve the desired results.
SLIDE 15
SUGGESTIONS (CONT.)
Half of programs requested more training and guidance on administering the assessments. Specific topics included providing neutral encouragement, behavior management, assessing children with disabilities, and changes to the assessment and procedures.
Programs made a range of suggestions about the current assessment battery. These included combining it with the local assessment, using alternative assessment methods or materials, and suggestions for improving specific items.
Programs were split on whether new domains should be added.. Staff seemed to be torn between a desire to have their programs assessed on a broader set of outcomes—to better reflect the comprehensive nature of Head Start—and concern that a longer assessment would be more challenging for programs and children.
In summary, Mathematica’s implementation study found that programs have done a good job of administering the NRS assessment. The majority of assessments we observed met or exceeded the standards for quality established by the certification process.
We also identified some sections of the assessment that are still difficult for staff to administer or score, some areas in which staff may need more guidance and training, and some concerns that programs have about the NRS. Many of these issues were also identified in the Year 1 implementation study. We are in the process of reviewing our findings with the Head Start Bureau and the Technical Work Group, and they will use this information to plan for NRS implementation in spring 2005 and beyond.
Back to you Ann…
Segment 1f: Question and Answer Segment 1
Ann Linehan: Thank you Michelle, Nick, Ruth, and Diane. Our phone lines are now open. When you call in, please tell our operators your first name, title, affiliation and state. Please do not use your speaker phone and once you ask your question on the air, please hang up. We will attempt to get through as many calls as possible during the next 15 minutes. Remember, if you don’t get to ask your question live, we will pose representative questions and answers on the web. We will try to address the most frequently-asked questions. Every question is important to us. However, within the limited time allocated, we will provide answers to the questions that we hope will benefit the greatest number of viewers.
Ann Linehan: Thank you. Well, we need to bring this segment to a close and thanks again to all who phoned, faxed or E-mailed your questions or comments to our presenters. Following a short break, our presenters will return to discuss the spring 2005 NRS training assessment, the 2005 CBRS data collection and the sites to be visited in 2005. We’ll continue in two minutes.
Segment 2a: Spring 2005 NRS Training and Assessment
Nick Zill
Project Director
Westat
Thank you Ann.
SLIDE 1
NRS SPRING ASSESSMENT TRAINING
I will be giving an overview of the Spring 2005 Refresher training and the Spring 2005 Child Assessment.
SLIDE 2
GOALS OF TRAINING
Based on the results from the fall assessment, trainers and assessors have done an excellent job overall in terms of the quality and consistency of assessments. The goal of this refresher training is to equip you to continue that high standard of quality, so that your spring assessments show the most complete, fair and accurate picture of the progress of children in your program on the NRS measures.
Feedback from programs indicate that the refresher training materials, including the training video tapes and the role play scripts, were very helpful in preparing for last spring’s data collection.
SLIDE 3
SPRING TRAINING MATERIALS
HSNRS Spring 2005 training and child assessment materials will be automatically sent to you this spring. The materials for the spring assessments include:
Trainers should review and familiarize themselves with these new materials before conducting their local trainings.
SLIDE 4
SPRING 2005 ASSESSMENT
As in the fall, all kindergarten-eligible children will be given the same, standard direct assessment in the spring. The spring English assessment covers the same skill areas as the fall 2004 assessment, namely:
SLIDE 5
SPRING 2005 ASSESSMENT
Similarly, the spring Spanish assessment covers the same skill areas as the fall Spanish assessment, namely:
SLIDE 6
SPRING 2005 ASSESSMENT
In order to reduce the possibility of teaching to the test or practice effects, new items have been included in the Vocabulary and Early Math sections for both the English and Spanish assessments. These items have similar difficulty and cover the same content areas as the fall 2004 items. So even though new items are introduced, we will be able to compare scores from the fall and spring to measure children’s growth during the Head Start year.
The Simon Says, Art Show, and Letter Naming sections will remain the same as in the fall 2004 assessment.
SLIDE 7
SPRING 2005 ASSESSMENT
Some of the scripted instructions in the easels, such as the instructions for proper gesturing, have been simplified or clarified so that assessors and children will have a better understanding of what they are supposed to do in the task. Further, the updated assessor’s guide provides more guidance in how to score children’s responses.
SLIDE 8
REFRESHER TRAINING VIDEO
The Refresher Training Video features a demonstration of the entire Spring 2005 assessment conducted with a preschool-aged child.
The video demonstrates methods for handling various types of behaviors children may exhibit during an assessment, such as being rowdy, not paying attention, or being overly shy and reluctant to respond. Feedback from programs has indicated that this portion of the training video has been particularly helpful in assessing their children.
SLIDE 9
SPRING 2005 EASELS
New easels will be shipped to you for the Spring 2005 assessment. They contain the new items for the vocabulary and early math sections as well as the improved instructions. You should use these easels for your Spring 2005 assessor training and data collection. If you have not already done so, please collect and store the easels from previous assessments so that your assessors will not accidentally use them in your Spring 2005 assessments.
SLIDE 10
ADDENDUM TO ASSESSOR’S GUIDE
This addendum contains item-by-item instructions for the new Vocabulary and Early Math sections in the Spring 2005 assessment and answer sheets. Assessors can use these for guidance on changes to the assessment. It also includes guidance on how to handle any behavioral issues you may encounter during an assessment.
Please be sure each of your assessors has a copy of the guide with the new addendum.
SLIDE 11
BASIC FORMAT OF REFRESHER TRAINING
Instructions and a model agenda for the refresher training will be included with the training video. In the refresher training, the trainees should watch the Spring 2005 Refresher Training Video and make notes of important information for when they practice and conduct the assessments. They should also make notes of questions they want to discuss with their trainer during the question and answer period.
The trainer should take time to answer any questions that the trainees might have. This would be a good time to talk about the examples in the training video of techniques used to address behavioral challenges.
After the Q & A session, the trainees should familiarize themselves with the materials and role play the assessment. After a round of role plays, the trainer should provide feedback to the trainees on strengths and weaknesses observed in the role plays. The trainees should then go through another round of role plays.
SLIDE 12
TRAINING FOR CERTIFIED ASSESSORS
Assessors who were certified last fall must watch the refresher training video and role play with the spring assessment easel. The trainer should observe the trainees administering the assessment during the role play. These assessors do not need to be formally recertified.Once the training is completed, these assessors should use the same Assessor ID number they used in the Fall 2004 assessments.
SLIDE 13
PROCEDURES FOR PROGRAMS WITH NO SPANISH-SPEAKING CHILDREN
Programs without Spanish-speaking children (which therefore will not be training any Spanish-speaking assessors) do not have to watch the Spanish version of the video taped training.
SLIDE 14
MONOLINGUAL SPANISH PROGRAMS OR ASSESSORS
Monolingual Spanish speakers or programs with only Spanish-speaking children will only be trained on the Spanish version of the Spring assessment. As a result, these trainees would watch only the Spanish version of the refresher training video.
SLIDE 15
BILINGUAL ASSESSORS
Bilingual assessors, who will be administering both the English and the Spanish assessments, MUST watch both the English and the Spanish versions of the training. They also must participate in role plays and receive feedback for both the English and Spanish versions of the Spring assessment.
SLIDE 16
TRAINING FOR NEW ASSESSORS
New Assessors who were not certified for the fall data collection need to be certified. New Assessors should be given the one-day training in the fall 2004 assessment and be certified. As in the fall certification procedures, these new trainees must score 85% or more on both the Assessment Certification Form and the Quiz in order to become a Certified Assessor.
SLIDE 17
TRAINING FOR NEW ASSESSORS
Once they become certified, they must watch the Spring 2005 refresher training video, role play the spring 2005 assessment easel, and then be observed administering the spring 2005 assessment.
After the training, the names of these newly certified assessors should be entered into the Computer-Based Reporting System (CBRS) to obtain an Assessor ID number.
SLIDE 18
SPRING ASSESSMENTS
You will assess all 4 and 5 year old kindergarten eligible children who are in your program this spring, EVEN IF THEY WERE NOT ASSESSED IN THE FALL. If children have joined the program they need to be assessed now using only the Spring assessment. They will not be included in the change analysis from fall to spring, but they will be included in the spring only analysis, so be sure to assess them.
SLIDE 19
FOCUS ON QUALITY CONTROL
During the refresher trainings, trainers should emphasize the importance of reviewing the completed answer sheets for completeness and clarity. If Child ID numbers are missing from the answer sheet, or are inaccurately filled in, then the assessment is not usable. We want to have as complete a picture as possible of all the children in your program and we don’t want any of your hard work to be wasted because of a missing ID number. Please make certain that your assessors double-check the accuracy of Child ID numbers and birthdates.
SLIDE 20
QUESTIONS ON TRAINING OR SPRING ASSESSMENT
If you have any questions on the training procedures, please call the HSNRS ASSESSMENT HOTLINE AT 1-888-847-1176 or email questions to: HSNRShelp@westat.com
SLIDE 21
QUESTIONS ABOUT MATERIALS
If you have any questions about the shipment of the spring materials, please call the Head Start Information and Publication Center (HSIPC) at 1-866-763-6481 or email questions to: puborder@headstartinfo.org
SLIDE 22
QUESTIONS ABOUT CBRS
If you have any questions about entering or updating data in the CBRS, please call the CBRS HOTLINE at 1-800-669-2170 or email questions to: NRSTechHELP@xtria.com
SLIDE 23
NRS DEPENDS ON YOU
The successful implementation of the Head Start National Reporting System depends on your continued hard work. You did a great job last fall. Let’s do an even better job with the spring assessments.
Thank you.
Ruth…
Segment 2b: Spring 2005 CBRS Data Collection
Ruth Hubbell-McKey
Project Director
Xtria
Thanks Nick…
SLIDE 1
NEW CBRS FEATURES
Now, I would like to briefly discuss the CBRS for this spring 2005. The CBRS will open for regional programs, on March 1, 2005. You will NOT be receiving new CBRS manuals or other materials this spring. The materials you received last fall have all the information you need.
I do want to highlight some of the newer features of the CBRS. Many of you have already used the copy over and data import features. These new features were designed to make data entry easier for you.
The copy over feature allows programs to transfer all of their data into the CBRS, except for child-level data. Thus, data on the program, centers, classes, teachers and assessors were copied from last year’s database into this year’s database. Then, programs updated any information that had changed and enter all of their kindergarten-eligible children.
For the Fall 2004 data collection period, 1,290 programs used the copy over feature. These programs then entered 348,544 children.
The Data Import Feature is intended for larger programs that currently are using an automated management information system, such as ChildPlus, Galileo, or HSFIS, to track program operations. Using the Import Feature, child-level data as well as classroom, center, and teacher data can be transferred to the CBRS.
For the Fall 2004 data collection period, 87 programs used the data import feature, with 32,147 children transferred.
For Spring 2005, Regional Head Start programs cannot use the copy over feature, but you can use data import FOR NEW CHILDREN ONLY! That is, if you have had new kindergarten-eligible children enter your program that were not assessed on the NRS in the fall, you can use data import to transfer their data. When you log-in to the CBRS for the first time this spring, you will be asked to choose data import or not. You only have one chance to make your choice, so think about it carefully. There is a description of this option after you log-in and in the CBRS manuals you received last fall with your other NRS materials. If you have any questions, please call our CBRS hotline at 1-800-669-2170 or send an email to NRStechhelp@xtria.com.
Migrant Head Start programs that are starting your second baseline data collection may want to use the copy over feature. Or you may want to use data import. You must choose one or the other. So make your decision and make your choice when you log in. Call the tech helpline if you need assistance.
SLIDE 2
NEW LOG ON PAGE
When you log on to the CBRS this spring, you will notice that the log-in screen has been modified. On the left of the screen you will now see selections to click, such as “Data Import Registration” and “Frequently Asked Questions”, as well as a section to go to related links. On the right of the screen you will see a “What’s New” section, with updates about the CBRS. The center of the screen is where you will enter your user name and password to log in. We think these changes will make it a little easier for you to navigate the HSNRS website.
As some Head Start staff are more comfortable working with the system in Spanish, all you need to do is click on the Spanish link on the upper left side of the log-in screen and the entire CBRS and its data entry fields and instructions will be shown to you in Spanish.
SLIDE 3
TIPS ON MANAGING ASSESSMENT MATERIALS
Now I am going to give you some tips on managing your assessment materials to ensure that the answer sheets are received in a timely manner and the data are able to be used for analysis. You have heard this before if you watched our other satellite broadcasts. However it continues to be a problem so we want to give you some reminders.
Based upon last year’s experience, many answer sheets were unable to be used because they were lost in the mail, incompletely or inaccurately filled out, or damaged. So much hard work has been put into the assessment process, that it is a shame not to be able to use all the data collected. So in order to prevent this from occurring again, I want to review some of the necessary steps that your program can take to ensure that the data arrive in good shape. These steps are also in your trainer’s manual.
First you should have a designated NRS manager who ensures that the following tasks are performed:
SLIDE 4
TIPS ON MANAGING ASSESSMENT MATERIALS
SLIDE 5
TIPS ON MANAGING ASSESSMENT MATERIALS
Continue to check each answer sheet to be sure the spring 2005 answer sheets are used. No other versions will be accepted. Be sure the bubbles are completely filled-in, that a number 2 pencil is used, that there are no stray marks or stains on the sheet, and the sheets are not wrinkled or creased. Do not separate the pages of the answer sheets! If any of these occur, the sheet may not be able to be read by the scanning machines. If there are stray marks, stains, or wrinkles, you should recopy all the data on a clean answer sheet. Programs may want to Xerox all your answer sheets and keep the copies, just in case your sheets are lost in shipping.
SLIDE 6
TIPS ON MANAGING ASSESSMENT MATERIALS
You again will receive your answer sheets in cardboard boxes. Save these boxes! You can use these boxes to return your completed answer sheets and you will need to follow the packing instructions that come with the boxes. Also, please do not ship your answer sheets in envelopes. They will get crumpled and the envelopes may break open.
Similar to last year, ship your sheets in large batches (at least 75% of your total in the first batch and the rest in one batch as soon as possible.) If you have fewer than 100 children, ship all of them in one batch. Don’t wait too long to ship your answer sheets. Once you have completed your assessments send them in. don’t wait for the last one or two! If you wait for months, the data scanning process will be closed and your sheets cannot be scanned. Please send them in within a month after the deadline.
Again, pack the answer sheets face up and turned in the same direction.
Be sure to include the Program ID and shipment forms in each box.
SLIDE 7
TIPS ON MANAGING ASSESSMENT MATERIALS
It is important that you ship your boxes of answer sheets using a shipping company that can trace your packages, for example, Federal Express, UPS or Airborne. While this may be more expensive than mailing them, it is critical that you be able to track your shipment. A few days after you have shipped your boxes, trace them using the tracing number to be sure they arrived and were signed for at Pearson. Then, keep your tracing number in your records so that if any question arises about whether they were received you will
have your tracing number.
I know these steps may sound tedious, but it is very important to get the shipments submitted correctly so that we can analyze your data. And the sooner you send it in, the sooner we can get the results back to you.Thank you for your continuing hard work.
Now I will turn it over to Diane, who will discuss site visits for 2005.
Segment 2c: Site Visits for 2005
Diane Paulsell
Senior Researcher
Mathematica Policy Research
Thanks Ruth,
In spring 2005, Mathematica staff will visit a new, nationally representative sample of 35 Head Start programs for the Quality Assurance Study. As in previous rounds of visits, we will observe a random sample of assessments, interview selected staff about NRS implementation, and conduct a focus group with staff conducting the assessments to learn about their experiences. Each visit will last about 2 days.
We will contact each of the selected programs within the next month to discuss their participation in the study and select the sample of children whose assessments we will observe. Staff from Mathematica will work closely with each program to schedule the visits, observations, and interviews at convenient times.
Thank you.
Back to you, Ann.
Segment 2d: Question and Answer Segment 2
Ann Linehan: Thank you, Nick, Ruth, and Diane. Our phone lines are open again. As a reminder, when you call please tell our operators your first name, title, affiliation and state. Please do not use your speaker phone and once you’ve asked a question on the air, please hang up.
Ann Linehan: Thank you. Again, thanks to all who phoned, faxed or E-mailed your questions or comments to Diane, Ruth and Nick. In the next segment, Dollie Wolverton and Karen McKinney will discuss the assessment module of the Steps to Success – Early Literacy Mentor-Coaches instructional design.
We’ll continue after this short break.
Segment 3a: Assessment Module of the Steps to Success - Early Literacy Mentor-Coaches Instructional Design
E. Dollie Wolverton
Chief, Education Services Branch
Head Start Bureau
Thank you, Ann.
Hello Everyone.
It’s a great pleasure to be back in touch with you via Satellite.
I’m particularly pleased to share this segment with my colleague Karen McKinney. Together, we welcome this opportunity to discuss a very important aspect of our responsibilities and to build upon the topic of child observation and ongoing assessment.
In Head Start, independent of the National Reporting System, the Head Start Program Performance Standards require us to intentionally observe and assess children on an ongoing basis so that we have the information we need to promote and support each child’s learning and developmental progress. This is to ensure that each child is progressing as a result of their Head Start experiences and services.
The reason we’re so diligent about observations and ongoing assessments is that Head Start and Early Head Start staff use the information to adapt an age-appropriate curriculum - whether it’s for infants, toddlers, or preschoolers – with individualized experiences for each child through staff and parents working together.
This afternoon, it’s my responsibility to do two things. First, I will set the context regarding why the Head Start Program Performance Standards, which are based on sound child development principles, require that we engage in ongoing child assessment. And second, I will have the privilege of introducing the new Instructional Framework for Early Literacy Mentor Coaches entitled Steps to Success.
Following that, Karen will give us a preview of Steps to Success – with a particular focus on Unit 4: Helping Staff Use Child Assessment Information to Guide Instruction.
SLIDE 1
Head Start Program Performance Standards
In the world of Head Start, “setting the context” – invariably begins with The Head Start Program Performance Standards, which are the “must dos” – that is, the experiences and services that each program must provide.
Because of how the Standards are presented for children birth to 5, we’re able to plan and implement programming that is developmentally appropriate on two levels –
First, at a general age-level for the group of children. This is referred to as an "age-appropriate curriculum".
And within that, we individualize for each child’s
SLIDE 2
Program Performance Standard 1304.21(c)(2)
Program Performance Standard 1304.21(c)(2), which appears on page 82 of your copy of the Program Performance Standards with Guidance is the one that specifically requires that we use a variety of strategies to promote and support children’s learning and developmental progress based on the observations and ongoing assessment of each child.
We need to know which skills children have mastered, which ones are emerging, and when children are not making expected progress.
Ongoing assessment helps us decide on the best approaches for individual children as small groups and classes as a whole.
This certainly makes a great deal of sense since observation and assessment go hand-in-hand with developmentally appropriate programming.
This year marks Head Start’s 40th year. Millions of children, birth to five, and their families, including pregnant women have participated.
As the nation’s largest and only comprehensive child development program, we’ve learned a great deal regarding research-based practices, which enhance young children’s learning and development.
However, unless we ensure that children are provided meaningful and challenging learning experiences, ongoing child observation and assessment has little value.
SLIDE 3
The Leaders Guide to Positive Child Outcomes
Once again, I’d like to draw your attention to the Head Start Leaders Guide to Positive Child Outcomes. This guide is based on both the Head Start Program Performance Standards and The Head Start Child Outcomes Framework, which is a comprehensive description of school readiness in 8 child development domains:
SLIDE 4
The Leaders Guide offers many proven strategies to strengthen curriculum and to foster children’s progress in each of these domains.
The strategies in this Guide can universally assist us in forwarding our planning and our curriculum implementation regardless of the specific curriculum used in our individual programs. The Leaders Guide provides clear examples of educational quality based on-
SLIDE 5
Ensuring developmentally appropriate programming provides a meaningful basis for observing and assessing children’s progress and promoting and individualizing learning and development.
To support the ongoing practice of child observation and assessment, I want to share some exciting news about our new mentor-coaching project to help support and sustain what we have already begun.
SLIDE 6
The Head Start Act
The Head Start Act as amended in 1998 required that the Head Start Bureau take steps to provide mentor-coaching, that is, on-the-job guidance and training to Head Start staff and volunteers in order to maintain high quality education services.
Mentor-coaching is also a corner stone of Good Start, Grow Smart – the President’s Early Childhood Initiative launched in April 2002.
You may recall that in November 2002, 3,000 Early Literacy Mentor Coaches, participated in the Head Start Mentor Coach Conference in Washington, D.C.
At that time, we received your suggestions regarding specific strategies to support Early Literacy Mentor Coaches working with classroom teams and home visitors.
There was an overwhelming consensus that a technology-based network be developed to facilitate communication and exchange of ideas among mentor-coaches.
In direct support of your recommendations, Step-Net was launched shortly thereafter.
SLIDE 7
Putting the Pro in Protégé
At that same November 2002 conference, a number of Mentor-Coaches also recommended that we build on the concepts included in Putting the Pro In Protege: A Guide to Mentoring in Head Start and Early Head Start to ensure a uniform understanding and approach regarding the role of the Mentor Coach in supporting protégés as members of classroom teams and as home visitors.
Your suggestions have culminated in the development of an Instructional Framework for Head Start and Mentor Coaches entitled “Steps to Success.”
Karen is now going to give us an overview of Steps to Success and then focus on some key strategies in unit 4: Helping Staff Use Child Assessment Information to Guide Instruction.
Karen McKinney
Program Specialist
Head Start Bureau
Thank you, Dollie
I’m very happy to announce the launch of Steps to Success: An Instructional Design for Early Literacy Mentor Coaches.
This project will offer all Head Start and Early Head Start programs a consistent framework to support mentor coaching with an innovative approach using various types of technology.
Let’s first take a tour of the Steps to Success design.
As you can see in this slide, Steps to Success covers four essential areas.
SLIDE 8
Today, I want to share with you some of the strategies from Unit 4—Using Child Assessment Information to Guide Instruction.
As you will see in these videotapes from Steps to Success, classroom teams use a variety of techniques, both with infant / toddler and preschool children.
VIDEO CLIP 1
Strategies
In the next video clip from Steps to Success, a classroom teacher uses questions to actively engage a child in a conversation which builds on the little girl’s keen interest in words and poems…and imagination.
VIDEO CLIP 2
Teacher and little girl
There are a number of approaches to collecting information about children in their program and home environments.
This next video clip illustrates a variety of strategies which together provide information collected over a period of time which documents the child’s progress and provides staff with the information needed to individualize the curriculum and adapt the environment to promote and support children’s learning.
VIDEO CLIP 3
Mentor Coach and Teacher with Portfolio
As we saw, staff used a camera, an audio tape, and samples of the child’s work to create a portfolio, which not only serves as a file, but also provides a concrete way in which to share this ongoing assessment with others.
Just as Mentor Coaches and protégés take time to build trust and a strong working relationship, protégés and parents build trusting relationships to support children’s development.
SLIDE 9
Involving Parents
Head Start fully recognizes that parental involvement is especially critical during the early years.
Let’s view a video clip that illustrates how a teacher may involve parents in a discussion on child observation and assessment.
VIDEO CLIP 4
Teacher and Parents and Portfolio
As we’ve seen in this brief overview of ongoing child assessment it is critical to plan and to be intentional in the use of observation and assessment strategies.
SLIDE 10
These strategies may include:
The Steps to Success instructional Design will be launched in Spring 2005 with full implementation in each region in Fall 2005. There are two ways you can continue to keep informed about mentor coaching activities.
SLIDE 11
STEP-Net Web site information and the toll-free 877 number
I encourage you to regularly check STEP-Net.org to keep up with the latest information on Mentor Coaching. There you will find our electronic newsletter which features Head Start programs and the strategies they are implementing to support mentor coaching in their program.
Another resource for mentor coaches is a hotline at 1-877-coach-04 where a Steps to Success staff member will be happy to discuss your questions or specific strategies. Callers who speak Spanish can leave a message and a Spanish speaker will return your call.
In this segment, Dollie discussed the Head Start Program Performance Standards’ requirement to use information from observations and ongoing assessment to promote and support each child’s learning and developmental progress.
I’ve offered you a glimpse into Steps to Success and how mentor coaching can support ongoing child assessment. By using the techniques we’ve discussed today your approach to individualizing for children will become a part of your daily activities.
It is this variety of enriching activities and experiences combined with ongoing child assessment and tracking of progress that leads our Head Start children on a journey to positive outcomes and many more steps to success!
Ann…
Segment 3b: Question and Answer Segment 3
Ann Linehan: Thank you, Karen. Our phone lines are again open. As a reminder when you call, please tell our operators your first name, title, affiliation and state. Please do not use your speaker phone and once you ask your question on the air, please hang up.
Again, I would like to thank everyone who participated in the studio and to all of you in the audience. We are certain that we did not get to every question during the last two hours; however, after this broadcast you will be able to continue sending your e-mails through 6:00 pm EST today.
Representative questions and answers will be posted on the Web site address you now see on the bottom of your screen.
Thank you for joining us today. Gracias por su participación hoy.
Head
Start Bureau October Updates
National Satellite Broadcast and Web Cast
Including a Review of the National Reporting System First Year Report
Wednesday,
October 27, 2004, 2:30 - 4:30 PM EDT
One of the agenda items for this broadcast was to discuss the new Spring 2004 Growth Reports. These reports are available under the “Report” menu on the CBRS (www.hsnrs.net) under link number 10: “Spring 2004 Growth Reports”. You must be a program level user to view the reports. Sample reports are also be available for download, and a short online video demonstration on how to access the reports is available in both English and Spanish at www.hsnrs.net under “What’s New”.
The text from each segment of the October 27, 2004 Head Start Bureau Updates National Satellite Broadcast and Web Cast is available for viewing on-line. You may click on the segment number in order to view the text from that segment. Where slides were included in the presentation during the broadcast, they are available to view on-line or to download as PowerPoint files. Just click on the presentation topic to access the slides.
Segment 1a: Introduction of the NRS 2003-2004 Program Report
Tom Schultz
Senior Advisor on Outcomes
Head Start Bureau
Thanks, Ann.
We welcome this opportunity to use technology to speak directly to so many local Head Start programs and people. We asked you to take time to view this broadcast because of the significance of this first progress report on our NRS assessment of more than 400,000 preschool Head Start children. Since your spring program report is longer and more complex than the reports on the fall assessment, we believe it will be help you to hear a detailed explanation of each section of the report.
SLIDE 1
We hope that each of you has a copy of the 3 parts of a first year NRS progress report, either for your local program or our sample version. Each agency will receive a cover letter from Assistant Secretary Wade Horn, a 10-page NRS Program Report of assessment information, and a 3-page document titled “How to Use Your Spring, 2004 NRS Report”.
These materials are accessible through the Computer-Based Reporting System website. Print copies will be mailed to programs in the next several weeks.
(SHOW SAMPLE COVER LETTER, PROGRAM REPORT, AND GUIDE)
The cover letter looks like this. The program report looks like this. And the guidance on using the reports looks like this.
I’ll begin by reviewing briefly the cover letter from Dr. Horn.
SLIDE 2
He expresses appreciation for your hard work and productivity in administering nearly 850,000 child assessments last year. As we’ve said before, Head Start has successfully managed the largest early childhood assessment effort in history. He also commends you for the high quality of completed assessments. As we reported in our last broadcast, last year’s national implementation study found that assessors were following the assessment script and procedures correctly and doing a good job of accurately recording children’s responses. We were also encouraged by evidence that the quality of assessments improved this spring, when compared to the first assessment effort last fall. Programs reported fewer problems, based on their greater experience, the spring refresher training and efforts to simplify the assessment instructions.
Finally, Dr. Horn also notes that programs did an excellent job of gaining cooperation from parents and children for this new standardized assessment initiative. Roughly 98% of all parents allowed their children to participate, and only 4700 assessments out of more than 840,000 weren’t completed due to children failing to cooperate.
Like everything we do in Head Start, these achievement come from a widespread and diverse set of community-based agencies. For what we call our "supergrantees", managing the NRS required mobilizing hundreds of assessors and tracking thousands of assessment forms. For example, our largest grantee in Los Angeles, CA submitted more than 15,000 spring assessments from 28 different delegate agencies; our grantee for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico administered nearly 12,000 assessments across its 20 delegates. At the other end of the scale, several of our American Indian and Alaskan Native Head Start programs, such as the St. Regis Mohawk and the Coquille Indian Tribe programs assessed fewer than 10 children. However, regardless of their size, every program asked their children the same questions in the same way. This means we have, for the first time, consistent, comparable information on the progress of our children and their levels of competence as they leave Head Start and enter kindergarten.
Let me add one more thing: you deserve recognition for the overall levels of progress documented in the NRS assessments. As we will discuss in more detail later, at a national level, Head Start children made progress on all four of the NRS subtests. The typical Head Start child progresses in ability to understand language, and advances in knowledge in vocabulary, letter naming and early math skills. English language learners also progress in all four areas of the English language assessment and Spanish speaking children continue to enhance their home language competence.
Dr. Horn also highlights three areas of future work on the NRS:
SLIDE 3
#1 – We will work to support you in using NRS informat