and Mobilizing EDI 1 Christine Beresford, Data Analysis - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

THE EARLY DEVELOPMENT INSTRUMENT (EDI): A Population-Based Measure for Communities Interpreting and Mobilizing EDI

1

Christine Beresford, Data Analysis Coordinator 255-5200 ext 5136 cberesford@city.windsor.on.ca

2

• The Early Development Instrument (EDI)
• Benefits, Macro-level and Micro-level

Reports

• Local Highlights
• Interpreting EDI Results
• Next Steps

Today‟s Presentation

3

• A teacher-completed questionnaire (for each Senior

Kindergarten student) measuring the outcome of the early years by providing information on children’s readiness to learn at school

• Completed 3 times in 3-year cycles in Windsor-
• Essex. Last completed in the 2007-2008 school year
• Completed in most Provinces in most communities

and many other Countries since 1997

http://www.offordcentre.com

4

• It measures children’s readiness to learn as they

enter the school system, in 5 domains of development:

• physical health and well-being,
• social competence,
• emotional maturity,
• language and cognitive development, and
• communication skills and general knowledge
• Divided further into 16 ‘sub-domains’ which can really

highlight Neighbourhood differences. Children are mapped by the postal code where they live

5

6

25 50 15 10

Very Ready Ready At risk Vulnerable 100-75% 75-25% 25-10% 10%

The EDI average scores for each of the 5 developmental areas or “domains” are divided into categories representing the highest scores to the lowest scores in the community. Children that score in the lowest “10th percentile” are considered „vulnerable‟ and not ready to learn in school. On Track Not On Track

• Provides information about groups of children in
• rder to
• report on areas of strengths and weaknesses for

populations of children,

• establish base-lines,
• monitor populations overtime, and
• predict how children will do in school
• Data-Analysis Coordinators from Ontario Early

Years Centres are the local EDI Coordinators and its their job to help put it all into local context

http://www.offordcentre.com

7

MCYS Strategic Framework 2008-2012

Realizing Potential: Our Children, Our Youth, Our Future

8 Source: MCYS

“25 in 5” – A Bold But Achie hievable le Target et

• Represents 90,000 children living

in poverty (reduction of 25% in 5 years)

• DACs have a role in measuring

and monitoring changes in some

• f the community data
• Poverty Reduction strategies,

EDI implementation and analysis, Full-Day Learning planning and outcomes, Early Years Programming, etc.

Source: MCYS

The Opportunity Wheel

Ont.ario.ca/breakingthecycle 9

10

EDI and the Poverty Reduction Plan

Question: Are investments effectively minimizing the effects of poverty on young children and families?

• A steeper line indicates greater inequalities for low income families
• A flat line indicates greater equality of outcomes for families
• Decreasing the slope of the line indicates that investments are better able

to support low income children and families; that children from low income families are supported to the degree that they are able to achieve the same level of outcomes as non-disadvantaged children % Vulnerable Children % low income current desired

Source: MCYS

• Transforms simple and complex, small or lengthy

tables, files and reports into a simple visual and spatial representation

• Users understand the data more quickly
• Helps spot vulnerabilities, strengths and service gaps
• Facilitates sharing and collaborative processes
• Can be customized for local needs
• Outcomes can be monitored and compared over long

periods of time

Why “Mapping”?

“Yuck, who has time for this?”

11

Health Unit School l Board OEYC Network Child ldcare Coalit itio ion

Question: Where are the lowest birth weights in comparison to early learning supports?

SPSS Database by postal code of low birth weights

Excel spreadsheet of school names and addresses OEYC printed advertisement with map of locations Word listing of Childcare Centres and locations

A simple ‘mapping’ example…

Community stakeholders Data Sources Create a Visual Representation Coordination of Data Collection

• r Analysis

Data Analysis sis Coordinator

Physical Health & Well- Being Domain Map

12

Macro-level Reporting

“Big Picture” or “Global” vs. Micro-level reports at the Neighbourhood level

• Pan-Canadian EDI

(http://www.councilecd.ca/?q=edi)

• Provincial (baseline) and National Group

reports

• Site Reports and Group Comparisons

13

Group Comparisons

• These groups scored statistically significantly higher than (less

vulnerable) their counterparts:

• Girls and children that attended JK in all 5 domains
• Children born earlier in the year and children in French

immersion, particularly for Emotional Maturity

• Children that attended part-time pre-school programs

scored higher or equal for Physical Health & Well-being, Language and Cognitive Development and General Knowledge and Communication.

• This includes “only pre-school programs that do not provide main (full-

day) child care arrangements, are not part of a child care centre, and do not involve an intervention/therapy/resource component. These may be weekly music/art classes, twice-weekly regular morning playgroup programs etc.”

14

Group Comparisons

These groups scored statistically significantly lower than (more vulnerable) their counterparts:

• Children who attended Early Intervention Programs in all 5

domains

• Children with ESL/FSL status in all 5 domains, except for

Physical Health and Well-being

• Children who had a full-time non-parental child care

arrangement scored lower than those who attended part- time non-parental child care. Significant for Physical Health & Well-being

• This includes "Centre-based, licensed, for profit and non-profit child

care, home-based licensed and unlicensed with or without a relative and care in the child’s home with our without a relative”. Full-time is at least 6 hrs/day, 5 days a week.

15

Group Comparisons

• Overall, children who attended schools of the

French Catholic Board, CSDESCO, scored higher for Physical Health & Well-being, but lower for Emotional Maturity. This was consistent with other francophone communities in Ont.

• 67% of the children from CSDESCO had French as a

second language and English as a first. So ESL/FSL status had less impact as on those with neither

• Children (from all school boards) whom the teachers

felt needed further assessment and were included in the normative data, scored similarly to those that had been formally assessed

16

Micro-Level Reporting

• School level (confidential) and Neighbourhood

(Public) level analysis highlight differences, weaknesses and strengths in not only the ability

• f the preschool population but also our

community’s ability to assess its early years supports and mobilize the data

• EDI data can not explain the differences and
• ther data (i.e. demographics) and exploration

by community partners is needed

• Can be subject to personal interpretation

17

18

Consistent use of boundaries, baseline measures and data is key to sharing data, making comparisons and tracking changes

Local Highlights

• Only children that were not identified as having

special needs and had a valid questionnaire were included in the current map set and reports. This includes 4,040 students from 3 school boards

• A separate group report was prepared by the Offord

Centre for those with special needs. This includes 169 students, with nearly 70% male, 17% ESL/FSL, 5% Fr. Immersion, and 38% having multiple challenges

19

Local Highlights— Strong Neighbourhoods

4 neighbourhoods where the percentage of vulnerable children was less than the Ont. baseline in all domains and Sub-domains:

• East Riverside,
• Roseland,
• South Windsor and
• South Tecumseh

This represent 637 students or 15.8% of total sample

20

Local Highlights— Vulnerable Neighbourhoods

• 2 domains that might be of most concern are Physical

Health and Well-Being and Language and Cognitive Development, when looking at percentages of children in the lowest 10th percentile

• All neighbourhoods scored the same or higher than the
• Ont. Baseline for the Physical Independence sub-

domain and East Windsor did for all 3 sub-domains (phwb)

• Several neighbourhoods had higher percentages than
• Ont. for all 4 sub-domains of Language and Cognitive

Development – Walkerville, Harrow, Forest Glade, Cottam, Gosfield North and South, Lakeshore East and the Town of Leamington

21

Local Highlights— Vulnerable Neighbourhoods

• MCI (Multiple Challenge Index) – areas of concern are the

Towns of Leamington and Amherstburg, but sample size also increased. Windsor east of downtown still a concern,

• ie. Walkerville, East Windsor, Fountainbleu, Riverside and

Forest Glade. Possible improvement in LaSalle South, Town

• f Essex and Rochester
• The ‘Vulnerable Neighbourhoods Tables’ focus on those

with a higher MCI, but also show other neighbourhoods that have both a high percentage and high count of students with low scores. For example, Remington Park, Sandwich, University and the Stoney Point/Lakeshore East

• neighbourhoods. Also note the Town of Leamington

22

Consistent use of boundaries, baseline measures and data is key to comparison and tracking changes

23

936 Students Site total = 23.2% Ont total = 27.3%

The number of children that scored low on 2 or more domains is about ½ of those who scored low on only 1

24

467 Students Site total = 11.6% Ont total = 13.8%

Teachers felt 426 children required further assessment. Some of them would be included in this group of 99

25

99 Students Site total = 2.5% Ont total = 4.2%

Dual Maps for the 5 Domains show a Domain or Means Score (1 to 10) and the # of Vulnerable Children (or can be shown as a percentage) who are not ready to learn when they enter school

26

Walkerville Example – looking at the percentage of students in the lowest 10th percentile

Best Start Neighbourhood Natural Neighbourhood Sample Total

Physical Health & Well-being Domain Physical Readiness for School Day Physical Independence Gross and Fine Motor Skills #Sub-domains Greater than

• Ont. Baselline

Ont.ario Baseline 12.9%

8.3%

8.9% 27.4% Windsor-Essex 11.6%

3.1%

9.0% 18.9% Amherstburg Amherstburg North 61 9.8% 0.0% 6.6% 26.2% Amherstburg Amherstburg Town 103 13.6% 1.9% 8.7% 16.5% Amherstburg Anderdon 19 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.3% Amherstburg Malden Centre 38 5.3% 0.0% 2.6% 5.3% Amherstburg McGregor West 10 30.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0%

2

Central City Centre 76 11.8% 1.3% 7.9% 7.9% Central South Central 79 5.1% 5.1% 3.8% 8.9% Central South Walkerville 46 4.3% 0.0% 0.0% 6.5% Central

Walkerville

165 17.0%

5.5%

12.7% 25.5%

1

Physical Readiness for School Day 5.5%

• Ont. Baseline

Windsor-Essex Baseline

Best Start Neighbourhood Natural Neighbourhood Total SK Children

Physical Health & Well-being Domain

Physical Readiness for School Day Physical Independence Gross and Fine Motor Skills

Ont.ario Baseline

12.9% 8.3% 8.9% 27.4%

Windsor-Essex

11.6% 3.1% 9.0% 18.9%

Anderdon

19

1 Amherstburg North

61

6 4 16 Amherstburg Town

103

14 2 9 17 Malden Centre

38

2 1 2 McGregor West

10

3 2 2 2 Amherstburg

231

25 4 16 38 South Walkerville

46

2 3

Walkerville 165

28

9

21 42 City Centre

76

9 1 6 6 South Central

79

4 4 3 7 Central

366

43 14 30 58

28

Physical Readiness for School Day 9/165 students

Walkerville Example – looking at the count of students in the lowest 10th percentile. Is this high? What is high in your opinion?

Total SK Children

29

22-- East Windsor 9-- Walkerville 1-- City Centre

Walkerville Example – when compared to other neighbourhoods does your

• pinion change? Are they always relevant?

Some Sub-Domains impact a greater number of children. 763 Gross and Fine Motor Skills vs. 363 Physical Independence. Note: 1,107 Children scored in the lowest percentile for “Prosocial and Helping Behaviour” Sub-domain

30

These Neighbourhoods scored low in all 4 Sub-domains of Language and Cognitive Development: Walkerville, Harrow, Forest Glade, Cottam, Gosfield North and South, Lakeshore East and the Town of Leamington

31

The Basic Literacy and Numeracy have been used to plan OEYC and childcare programs in some communities

32

33

What’s Next?

34

• Research and Publication Webpage and “E-Alert”– City of

Windsor Website, Children’s Services

• 50 “Early Years Snapshots” and “EDI Neigbhourhood Level

Reports”

• Mapping of Relevant Demographics and Early Years Services
• New Partnerships to Share Data and Collaborate on

Community Level Reports

• EDI Professional Development Event (Fall 2010) and related

reports

• 2010/2011 EDI Implementation and linked to Kindergarten

Parent Survey

• Prior Period Comparisons
• Early Years “Map My City” Webpage (Windsor-Essex)

Thank you for your attention today!

“ A picture is worth a thousand words A map is worth a thousand statistics”

35