1 Welcome and introductions Indicate if you are: EC, NC Pre-K, - - PDF document

1

Welcome and introductions Indicate if you are: EC, NC Pre-K, Title I, Head Start, anybody we missed? Indicate if you are a preschool coordinator? EC director? Other administrators? Anybody we missed?

2

3

Almost every state has developed early learning standards for prekindergarten-age

• children. North Carolina was one of the national leaders when they developed the

first NC Foundations for Early Learning and Development in 2003. The Infant- Toddler standards were released a couple years after the first preschool standards. Both efforts were a cross-sector, collaborative effort including staff from universities, community colleges, school systems, child care, Head Start, families, and more. Since North Carolina does not have a universal early childhood system, we must play with many partners from within and without the school systems in the early childhood field. During the revision process the decision was made to combine the Infant-Toddler and Preschool Foundations into one document and to showcase the developmental continuum that occurs across the span of time from birth to 60+ months of age for each goal. The title of this document—Foundations—was selected because the Goals and Developmental Indicators described for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers are critically important to their success later in school. What children learn between birth and the time they start kindergarten lays the Foundations for their learning and development for years to come. The team of state leaders that revised Foundations carefully studied North Carolina’s Standard Course of Study for what kindergarten children should know and be able to do. The team studied both the Common Core State Standards and North Carolina Essential Standards during the process of writing Foundations. An 4

• verview of their cross-walk can be found on page 19 of the Foundations document.

The goal was to ensure the content of Foundations aligned with the expectations for what kindergarten children learn and is appropriate for children birth through 60 months of age. This does not mean that the skills and knowledge described in Foundations are exactly the same as those included in the kindergarten standards. Rather, the focus in Foundations is on the early precursor skills that research suggests are important or lay the foundation for what children learn later. 4

The K-3 Assessment Team from the Office of Early Learning has been charged with the work of developing the entry kindergarten assessment profile, funded by the Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge grant. They too have recognized the need to develop a formative assessment process, guided by the use of learning progressions, around critical areas of development in the five domains of learning featured in the Foundations. This process of assessment for learning and development attends to the whole child and is broader in scope than the Common Core. 5

This is a visual of how each developmental domain is organized around overarching goals and the continuum of development that happens from birth to 60 months of

• age. Please note the age ranges for each of the five age bands. At first glance of

the developmental continuum you can see how development occurs around each

• goal. Please turn to page 52. This is in the domain of Social-Emotional

Development and the goal is “Children demonstrate a positive sense of self-identify and self-awareness.” Please note that as infants, children show awareness of their bodies by looking at their hands, feet, mouth, etc. When they move into the next age period they may recognize themselves in the mirror and point out their body

• parts. As an Older Toddler they may then be able to recognize themselves in a
• picture. At the Younger Preschool period they may then develop a sense of self as

demonstrated when they can tell you their first and last name. Finally, the Older Preschooler can tell you that they are a member of their family or a preschool class

• r an ethnic group. We need to point out that there are many more stages of

development that occur in between these examples, and that the “grain size” of these progressions are quite large and overlapping. That is why these standards may be used to guide instruction, but cannot really be used in the assessment

• process. This is the current work of the K-3 Assessment Team. Based on the claims

that the K-3 Assessment Think Tank developed, they are creating learning progressions around critical skills and understandings that an entering kindergarten child needs to know upon entry to school. Teachers use a formative assessment 6

process to identify where each child performs on a learning progression that begins at the 36 months level and ranges up to 72 months. 6

]. It is very important to understand the relationship between standards, curriculum and learning progressions so that we do not confuse nor use them

• inappropriately. We have adapted the work of Margaret Heritage and substitute

some early childhood language into the next three slide. This work was seminal to the development of the NC Falcon on-line training and is guiding the work of the kindergarten entry child profile development. First, the Foundations establish the expectations for what a child should know and are organized around developmental age levels 7

The early childhood curricula should provide activities to intentionally facilitate critical areas of development and learning that can be embedded in classroom routines and developmentally appropriate play and learning activities. 8

Finally the learning progression can help to lay out more increasingly complex understandings of core concepts or skills. This information will provide great support to teachers in providing differentiated instruction and conduct more accurate observation based summative assessments. 9

The current work of the K-3 Assessment Team will assist us in building professional development around formative assessment practices using learning progressions. Based on the claims that the K-3 Assessment Think Tank developed, they are creating learning progressions around critical skills and understandings that an entering kindergarten child needs to know upon entry to school. Teachers use a formative assessment process to identify where each child performs on a learning progression that begins at the 36 months level and ranges up to 72 months. It is our plan to take this work and develop the downward extension of these progressions so that our training around formative assessment will align with the K-3 assessment process. 10

This is a visual of how you might visualize the relationship between these Foundations and the NC Essential Standards. This slide shows you the broad connection for English Language Arts under the essential standard for “Identifying ideas and details” at the high school level 11

This slide depicts the relationship for the area of Mathematics under the Essential Standard for “Arithmetic with polynomials and rational expressions” for high school. 12

This depicts the relationship for Science under the Essential Standard for “Understands cells and organisms: evolution and genetics” at the high school level. 13

This depicts the relationship for Social Studies. 14

The professional development that the Department of Public Instruction provides the field around the early learning standards will attempt to align with the work of the K-3 Assessment Team. Another Department initiative that will influence this work is that of NC Falcon. This is NC’s balanced assessment system. Formative assessment is an essential component of this system because it forms the foundation for teaching and learning. We are using critical elements of that professional development content to craft training around conducting high quality formative assessment in the classroom that will inform teaching around the

• Foundations. And finally, we will be aligning with a Department wide adoption of

implementation science when developing training materials, sample professional development and implementation plans. The Office of Early Learning has recently been involved in the development of the Early Learning Network, which is a statewide professional development and technical assistance system housed out of Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center at UNC-Chapel Hill. The Early Learning Network will be central to the implementation of professional development provided to the field. The Division of Childhood Development and Early Education out of DHHS was responsible for the roll-out of the NC FOUNDATIONS. They chose to contract with Child Care Resource and Referral to deliver the professional development for these standards primarily to the child care workforce. Our team has taken that training in an effort to align our content so as to be inclusive. 15

In January, 2014 a statewide FOUNDATIONS stakeholder meeting was convened to identify: What went well with the implementation of the original Foundations, Early Learning and Development Standards? What do we need more of to be successful in the implementation of the new Foundations, Early Learning and Development Standards? What should we prioritize first? 16

Stakeholders felt very strongly about embedding both child and teaching standards into existing professional development initiatives, as well as a focus on research- based practices. Of course, the K-12 leadership structure needs to understand how these standards align with the Common Core. 17

Two key issues we hope to address in the development of FOUNDATIONS training materials center on concerns from administrators about how to identify high quality early childhood instruction when they see it in the classroom. Read the slide aloud. What are best practices and what teaching standards do they address? 18

Read the slide aloud. When a teacher implements those practices, what early learning standard is she/he addressing? 19

Video Activity- What Standards do you See? You’ll see that we’ve posted the North Carolina teaching standards listed on the walls and that you have a copy in your handouts. Now we’d like to take a moment to do an activity with you called “What Standards do You See”?. First we will ask you to watch a video of a teacher with 2 young children in the block center that showcases how to use naturally occurring situations to teach emotional

• skills. While you view the video, please look at your handout on the teaching

standards and note which of these standards you think she is demonstrating. Back story of video: Prior to the part you will see, the little girl has built a series of houses out of blocks all around the city block mat. The little boy comes in to the center to play. He plays nicely for several minutes, pushing his car around the streets and carefully avoiding the houses. He accidently knocks over one small house and he tries to rebuild it. Then you will see him knock over a row of block

• houses. Watch this clip and observe the teacher and the two children and how they

problem solve. After we watch the video, we’ll ask you to debrief on what you saw and what teaching standard it is. Debrief with audience and post comments on sticky notes. NEXT 20

We want you to watch the video clip again. Before we view the video we’d like you to turn to page 51 in your FOUNDATIONS

• manual. The page numbers are on the chart and the sections they refer to are noted.

Wait time. This clip addresses many of the domains, but for the activity we are focusing on the Emotional-Social domain. The sub-domain is Developing a Sense of

• Self. The goal is ESD-5: Children demonstrate the social and behavioral skills needed

to successfully participate in groups. Now turn to page 58 in your FOUNDATIONS

• manual. Look over the indicators listed. Allow audience time to scan these.

Next let’s watch the video clip and you make notes of the early learning standards indicator you see this teacher facilitating. Debrief with audience and post comments on sticky notes. (The indicator we are zeroing in on is: Accept adult help to resolve problems and conflicts, and cooperate when an adult redirects them from a situation that poses a problem.) Look at page 19 in your manual. This page shows the alignment between the FOUNDATIONS and the NCOS. What area of SCOS does the Emotional-Social Development clip we watched align with? (Healthful Living, Guidance) Distribute iPoint document. iPoints are Instructional Practices Observed IN Teaching Standards) that answer questions such as: For teachers What teaching standard am I addressing when I do these instructional practices? What early learning standards am I addressing when I use these instructional practices? For administrators – When I see a teacher do this instructional practice, what teacher standard does that apply to? When I see a child do this behavior in response to this instructional practice, what early learning standard is being addressed? This ‘iPoint’ gives you an example of the resources we will develop for FOUNDATIONS professional development. It shows the link between instructional practices, teacher standards, and FOUNDATIONS.

Watch the clip Large group discussion: 1) Identify the teacher standard that this practice video demonstrated, and then 2) give them instructions about the pages in the Foundations documents they will need to look at to identify what early learning standard they might see.

20

Relationship between the FOUNDATIONS and the NC Standard Course of Study We have been working with the K-3 Assessment Team to conduct a gap analysis between the Foundations and the kindergarten essential standards. This work is in the final phase of validation. We have provided each table with a draft of this cross walk, and are thinking of meaningful ways to incorporate this into the development

• f our professional development materials. Recently we have begun to understand

that this work may assist us further in the development of the iPoints for teachers and administrators by connecting the instructional practices to the early learning and development standards that are foundational to particular skills in the kindergarten essential standards. More to come on that later. Right now we’d like to tell you a story before we take a break 21

Toddlers can’t walk down the stairs with alternating steps. They just can’t. While your kindergartener bounds down the stairs taking each step in stride (or several in

• ne super-hero bound, as mine is prone to do), your toddler will cling to the wall or

rail as she takes a careful step down with one foot, then brings the other foot to that same step to stand firmly before venturing down in that same slow, tentative manner for another (step together), then another (step together), then another (step together). It generally isn’t until at least their third year that young kids begin to master this foot-switching-feat. It’s a skill that certainly requires experience and practice, but it’s not something we can teach an 18 month-old, even if he’s an accomplished

• walker. We don’t force tiny toddlers down the stairs on alternating feet in an

attempt to secure our child’s “early-alternating-foot-stair-climbing status”. It wouldn’t serve any purpose and the child would likely only get hurt. Alternating steps on stairs is perhaps a more obscure skill, but it is considered a developmental milestone because it’s indicative not only of a motor skill that you can watch your child perform right before your eyes, but because it’s a manifestation of the brain development that we can’t see. Particularly necessary is the maturation of the cerebellum and corpus callosum as well as the myelination,

• r protein coating, of millions of tiny nerve fiber pathways that eventually all work

together to make such coordination, balance, and truly sophisticated movements

• possible. This process takes time! Usually at least three years, and for some closer

22

to four. For some reason, we seem to be OK with this fact as a society and generally let kids build this skill as time, experience, and development do their magic. We don’t worry much (or even talk much) about when our child mastered this skill or compare it against when our nieces, nephews, and neighbors mastered the same task. We don’t clamor for videos and books that promise to get our kids alternating their feet sooner, to give them an head start for all the stair-climbing that lies ahead of them. We don’t introduce new standards that require each group of toddlers to begin alternating their feet just a bit earlier than the cohort group ahead of them. We don’t push them down the stairs. So why do we do it with other skills? Why do we give young children tasks, standards, and environments that are not appropriate to their developmental readiness? Why do we ignore the fact that the parts of their brains needed for these tasks are still under construction? Why do we impose timelines that turn a blind eye to developmental processes and a deaf ear to individual differences? Why do we figuratively push kids down the stairs on other skill sets, possibly causing harm and certainly creating unnecessary frustration and anxiety? Developmentally Appropriate Practice is always appropriate. 22

Break for 15 minutes 23

Implementation of a professional development initiative takes strategic planning to improve teacher and program performance in order to positively impact outcomes for children. We hope to give you suggestions for ways to develop and carry out an implementation plan that is doable for the smallest to largest school system. Since each school system has a different set of resources, the implementation plans may vary widely. We want to emphasize that it takes a team to successfully implement such a plan. 24

Many states have begun to utilize the core principles of implementation science. It takes more than just a set of steps in a plan, it takes a supportive system. 25

In North Carolina we may visualize the support system for early childhood programs through a cascading structure. In our system, this begins with the state department

• f education and the regional professional development training and technical

assistance teams they fund. Of course, the larger early childhood systems include state and local programs like Smart Start, Head Start, and Child Care that provide support and collaboration for a high quality early childhood system in the

• community. Please take a look at the functions of the Leadership Team and the

Implementation Team. The Leadership Team provides guidance, funding and political support to the Leadership structures about them. The Implementation Team provides guidance to staff and manages the implementation plan. Since each LEA program is unique, some of you already have close partnerships with these

• ther agencies. Therefore, you’ll want to include members from those agencies on

the Leadership or Implementation Team. This is part of developing your implementation plan First decide who is on your Leadership Team and then who is

• n your Implementation Team. Some may include the same people on both teams,

while other districts may have completely different members. 26

It is the Implementation Team that acts as the primary agent of change for a given

• district. This is the team that knows the teachers, children, and families and will
• versee all aspects of the implementation plan.

27

The ultimate goal of the Implementation Team is to ensure that the professional development initiative has a thoughtful process with stakeholder input to: provide the training, monitor or coach the teachers’ implementation of the teaching practices, collect data on how well those practices were incorporated into instruction, and compare to child outcomes and child progress to assess the impact of the professional development initiative. In other words, the Implementation Team must ensure the fidelity of implementation by staff so that the initiative has a true impact. 28

Research has shown us that when an implementation team is not overseeing the process in this way, effective implementation takes much longer and the percent of staff implementing the practices with fidelity is significantly smaller. Story: Several years ago there was an emphasis in one school system to implement a prescriptive program that teaches social emotional skills to promote academic achievement (Second Steps) from PreK to Middle School. The program was considered to be research based and to produce positive child outcomes. When we say this the emphasis must be on…..”Implemented with fidelity.” Positive outcomes cannot be guaranteed unless the practice is implemented with fidelity. In this case, the school system expended a great deal of money purchasing the program kits, puppets, and other required props. Then trainers from each school attended a train the trainer session conducted by representatives from the vendor. Based on a one- day training, and being given the program kits and materials, teachers were expected to incorporate the program into their daily schedules. There was no follow-up to see if teachers were actually implementing the practices other than the fact that they were expected to note the instruction on their lesson plans. Three years later, the program kits could be found in the classroom closets, but very few teachers actually incorporates the practices into their classroom schedules and cultures. 29

Since the Implementation Team is the critical element in success, please think carefully about who is on that team. We recommend that you have a teacher representative, your trainer and/or instructional coach, a principal, and someone responsible for communicating with the Leadership Team. Since each early childhood program has different configurations and resources, this team may also include stakeholders from other agencies that fund or provide training to teachers as well. The four key responsibilities of the team are to: Develop the professional development implementation plan Support the trainers Gather data to observe change in teacher practice and child progress Measure the impact of the professional development to inform program improvement.** **We will go into depth on the this is a few moments. 30

The first responsibility is to decide how the training will be delivered to staff. Based

• n our experience with the Social Emotional Foundations of Early Learning (SEFEL)

project, we recommend providing all of the training content to all staff at the beginning of the year to increase their knowledge about expectations. 31

Next we recommend that you adopt a professional learning community structure so that the content can be delivered a second time in shorter digestible chunks. This is why we’ll package the training content in 90 minute modules for you. This synthesis

• f the research by Joyce and Showers indicated that the chances of any new

practice actually being implemented with fidelity increases with adults being able to practice and gain feedback from others. If instructional coaching is added to this mix, then the likelihood of implementation in the classroom rises even more. Here are our recommendations: Seven training modules will be provided to district trainers at the summer institute. Five of the modules are on specific teaching practices. We recommend that you review one module per month. . Teachers then take the information and implement targeted strategies into their practice. We are developing teacher fidelity checklist for each of the effective practices. Teachers and or administrators can use these checklists as a means of self-assessing and providing data to the Implementation Team around the use of those practices. Since each district requires teachers to develop personal professional development plan, teachers can use these checklists to structure those plans. The handout titled “Professional Development Plan” is a sample of things that you 32

might need to incorporate into such a plan. We recommend that you develop the professional development plan prior to sending the trainers to the summer institute so that you can establish your training calendar for next year before the end of this school year. The sample professional development plan is in your handouts. Please remember you can modify, add, or embellish as you see fit. This is just a sample for you to consider. TIP: Our experience with the SEFEL project has taught us that not all program staff need to go into depth to learn every instructional practice. Some have already established, or quickly learn to establish, those practices in their daily instruction. The Implementation Team will need to develop guidance for decision making about follow-up training. For example, if all of your staff complete the fidelity checklists in each practice area at the beginning of the year, you can see whether all five practice modules, or just certain modules, should be addressed in the PLC. You may decide to address all of the modules in the PLC, but not require every staff member to attend all of the meetings. The second responsibility of the Implementation Team is to consider who will train which staff. For example, some programs may want to include in the training staff who are not employed by the school system but do provide instruction for children for whom the schools are responsible. Such staff may include, for example, those from community developmental day programs or Head Start programs. Another example is when trainers from a community early childhood program actually provide training to staff employed by the school system. For example, in some communities staff from Smart Start may actually provide the professional development to teachers funded by NC PreK but administered by the school district. In that case, you may want to designate such staff persons as trainers who will attend the Foundations Summer Institutes. Please understand that our capacity for training this first year is not exhaustive. So it is important to us that you develop an implementation plan that is efficient and collaborative with others. 32

The notion that programs must use data to assess how well practices are implemented and if those practices actually have an impact on child outcomes is

• critical. This is a visual representation of the improvement cycle process. The

“Plan” phase includes the development of the implementation plan which includes the professional development calendar and process. On the “Do” phase includes the training, implementation of the practices by the teachers, and completion of the fidelity instructional practice checklists. During the “Study” phase of the overall improvement cycle of a program, we conduct a Developmental Review. We will use the phrase “Developmental Program Review” to imply that we are building a high quality program and that it is under

• development. The process of analyzing data each year is critical to developing the

roadmap for the next logical step in what this graphic calls “act.” Good Implementation Teams present data to Leadership Teams to justify the use of resources, the need for additional resources, and development or revision of the plan for improvement. Our plan is to provide you with content on universal instructional practices that address those areas of development which lead to a child’s success and readiness for Kindergarten. Additional research based instructional practices for early childhood focusing on language, literacy, math, science, problem solving, and more 33

will be developed and delivered to you in the future. However, we suggest you use the notion of conducting a developmental review each year to assess the effectiveness of the training and instructional coaching you provide. 33

As part of the developmental program review process, here are three critical questions to ask. You will want to look at the data by staff member and by the

• verall program

To what extent did this staff member implement these instructional practices? To what extent did the children taught by this staff member improve performance in these areas of development as measured by curriculum assessment tools you are already using? What trends do we see by classroom and across the overall program? We will develop sample program developmental review documents for your use during this step in the improvement cycle. We’ll provide these materials to trainers who attend the Foundations Summer Institute and, afterward, hold webinars to show how a program may want to use the developmental review process to plan for program improvement. 34

Now let us review the goals of our first Foundations Summer Institute training

• modules. The modules are intended for the use of your identified trainers. In your

packets is a memo outlining the details for the Summer Institute, including the dates, locations and registration links. Due to limitations on space, we can only accommodate up to 2 trainers per school systems. Small scholarships to cover travel costs for attending the three day session will be available. The requirement for receiving scholarship funds is that you provide the state with information about your professional development plan for delivering training. We will also ask your staff to complete on-line evaluations after each training session. This will help us keep our finger on the pulse of systems implementing FOUNDATIONS professional development program and to help us improve our modules and plan for future modules. 35

Our goal is to develop modules that can be delivered in 90 minute sessions. You can offer the sessions in various combinations. During the FOUNDATIONS Summer Institutes we will review the modules, provide “tips for trainers,” and give your trainers all of the PowerPoint presentations, with scripts for delivery, video clips, and the applicable handouts. 36

The first module is an overview of the Foundations, focused on understanding the difference between standards, curriculum, and formative assessment guided by learning progressions. Practical tips for including the standards into the lesson planning process will also be included. The second module will focus on conducting formative assessment in the early childhood classroom. We will align this information with that provided by NC Falcon. In addition, we will align the modules with the work of the K-3 Assessment team, including the introduction of the notion

• f learning progressions.

37

The last five modules center on instructional practices that support social- emotional, language, and cognitive development. Input from our FOUNDATIONS stakeholders noted that we need to infuse information about the standards into existing professional development initiatives. They emphasized that we need to include information about both our teaching standards and the early learning and development standards. 38

This is the NC representation of the pyramid model of Social Emotional Foundations for Early Learning (SEFEL) that we have been implementing for the past 4 years. Currently we have 27 school systems engaged in district wide implementation that includes: Training on each module Coaching to targeted classroom teachers Use of a teacher fidelity measurement tool called the Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool, or ‘TPOT’ Administration of a child outcomes measure called the Social Skills Improvement System, or ‘SSIS’ Regular implementation team meetings to review program data and support staff. We decided to begin with strategies for universal promotion of social-emotional development for this coming year. 39

Based on SEFEL professional development materials, we will add some critical pieces to each module. First, each module will have a teacher fidelity checklist. The teacher may complete this fidelity measure pre-and post-training, or an administrator may complete the measure by observing the teacher. Each program will need to establish a process to follow to collect these data. We will ask you to include the data in the classroom and program developmental review process. Second, we want to include suggestions for engaging families related to each practice. Third, we want to provide activities that engage teachers in conducting formative assessment for each practice. 40

Fourth, we want to include information about how certain practices may be adapted for children with significant disabilities, as well as children from African American, Latino, and Low-Income families. Finally, we want to develop some “talking point” documents for teachers and administrators around how each of these practices addresses the teaching and early learning and development standards. These are the iPoints we showed as an example earlier. 41

iPoints documents are the talking points for teachers and administrators. From the teacher’s perspective. What teaching standard am I addressing when I do these instructional practices? What early learning standards am I addressing with children when I use these instructional practices? 42

From the administrator’s perspective: When I see a teacher do this instructional practice, what teacher standard does that apply to? When I see a child do this behavior in response to this instructional practice, what early learning standard is being addressed? 43

So to re-cap, we want you to leave here with several big ‘take-away’ messages: The FOUNDATIONS are aligned with the Common Core. Practices that encourage development in the early learning standards help ensure that children are ready for school as they enter Kindergarten. Professional Development modules on research based instructional practices for young children are being developed by the Office of Early Learning and the Early Learning Network. 44

District trainers will be given the opportunity to attend a Summer Institute covering the first 7 modules in the series. Districts are encouraged to form Implementation Teams who develop an implementation plan that charts progress for staff and children in order to inform decisions about program improvement. 45

NECTAC/ECO/WRRC 2012 46