Early Childhood Educators: Claiming our Name
By Lynn Andrews
Once again, the inability of our field to clearly define itself is getting us in trouble. This time it’s with the US Dept. of Labor. Recently, their Wage and Hour Division has been conducting audits on early childhood education programs around Colorado – checking that programs are compensating employees for overtime according to the law. This includes paying employees for attending required training after hours and evening parent meetings. This rule assumes that classroom staff in early childhood programs should not be classified as exempt employees because for the most part, they don’t meet the Dept. of Labor’s definition of “professionals.” Here is what they have to say about Preschool Teachers: www.dol.gov/whd/regs/compliance/whdfs46.htm. (link opens new window)
“Bona fide teachers in preschool and kindergarten settings may qualify for exemption from the minimum wage and overtime pay requirements as “professionals” under the same conditions as a teacher in an elementary or secondary school. Teachers are exempt if their primary duty is teaching in (an) educational establishment. It should be noted that, although a preschool(s) may engage in some educational activities, preschool employees whose primary duty is to care for the physical needs for the facility’s children would ordinarily not meet the requirements for exception as teachers under the applicable regulations.”
In addition, to be considered a “professional”, the employee must make at least $455 per 40-hr. week (about $11.37 per hour), and be doing work that requires “advanced knowledge” gained through a combination of experience and “intellectual instruction” beyond high school.
In programs that have been audited, the two points of contention are whether ECE teachers are really teaching, and if so, whether they are teaching in an “educational establishment.”
Certainly, we know that our teachers are focused on children’s development and learning, not just their physical care. Of course, we have yet to adequately address the compensation issue for ECE teachers – so many working today would not meet the wage test. We are however making strides in requiring ECE teachers to have more formal education at the college level. Despite these attempts to professionalize our field, we are still viewed by many outside as providing primarily custodial care – strike two on the “educational establishment” test.
Now, I realize that advocating for our teachers to be recognized as professionals, and therefore eligible to be classified as exempt employees, doesn’t come without its challenges. Many programs do not have sufficient income to pay teachers the required minimum salary, or to give teachers the paid time off that generally comes with a professional position. We need to continue to work on this issue. But there is a lot of energy going into how to legitimately work around the issues identified in the audits – such as making ongoing training requirements the responsibility of the individual rather than of the program that employs them. But what message are we sending to our teachers, to the government, and to the public with this approach? Do we not want our programs to be considered educational establishments? Do we not want families, and other educators, and policymakers to see us as professionals? Is our best defense to try to change our system to fit ourselves into the current definitions, or should we be working to change the rules - to define ourselves in a way that truly reflects the value of the work we do?
ECE Reversal Decsion in Colorado Colleges
By dsweeney
One of the first research papers I wrote during my pursuit of a degree in Early Childhood Education (ECE) showed the correlation between highly educated teachers to high student outcomes. While I would agree with those who believe that a teacher’s educational level does not always result in an exceptional teacher, I am very excited about the recent conversations among the Colorado Commission on Higher Education (CCHE), leading to their reversal of their previous decision in 1986 prohibiting Colorado colleges from offering Bachelor’s degrees in ECE. On April 6, 2012, CCHE officially recognized the importance of Bachelor’s degrees in the field of ECE, citing the voice of the community as one of the factors driving the change. Lieutenant Governor Joe Garcia told the Denver Post recently, “Whenever we talked with people in that community, we consistently heard that we needed to professionalize this career. This allows us a much bigger impact on having more effective teachers and helping more of our children be successful when they reach kindergarten,” (Anthony Cotton, Denver Post 4/6/12).
In our work at Clayton Early Learning, this decision is of particular benefit as it will create opportunities for teachers to meet the federal Head Start regulation, which requires 50% of ECE teachers to obtain Bachelor’s degree in Early Childhood Education by 2013. In years past, teachers were required to complete degrees in a subject area, such as English, history, or mathematics since it was believed these degrees were more rigorous and provided more content expertise than a degree in ECE (CCHE 4/5/12 Agenda Item III, A). This reversal also benefits teachers pursuing an elementary education (ELED) degree. The CCHE determined that, “… Bachelor’s degrees in ELED would now be more interdisciplinary, innovative, communication rich, technology laden, and assessment driven than previous Elementary Education majors” (CCHE 4/5/12/ Agenda Item III, A p.3).
One of the ways this new decision will benefit Colorado teachers is by making the transfer from two-year institutions to four-year institutions smoother. Problems in the recent past included students credits in ECE not transferring from Community Colleges to four-year institutions. The reversal will allow four-year institutions to accept much more, if not all of the ECE credits, creating, “…a more seamless revision of the statewide articulation agreement in early childhood teacher education (CCHE, 4/5/12, Agenda Item III, A, p. 5). Interestingly, according to the Lt. Governor’s Head Start State Collaboration Director, only 12% of ECE teachers in Colorado currently hold a Bachelor’s degree in ECE and 20% hold a Bachelor’s degree in a related field (CCHE, 4/5/12, Agenda Item III, A, p. 6).
After following this story and reflecting on the outcome for Colorado and the field of Early Childhood Education, I am convinced that through ongoing discussions and our continued push to advocate for our rightful place as professionals in education, there is power to change for the better the course of ECE. As we continue the day to day work with the young children and families we serve, we should be proud of our role in their lives. Like so many rights we hold today, let us celebrate this victory, knowing that it did not come quickly or easily, but that we now are empowered to hold the credentials so necessary in our work.
Males in Early Childhood Education
By SorenG
Can you think back to how many males in Early Childhood Education (ECE) have you worked with or currently encounter? What is the communication like with males? It is different than when you address females in the workplace?
Nationally, only about 2-5% of the ECE workforce is male, so chances for interactions and conversations with male ECE professionals are limited. With females in the majority in the Early Childhood field men can often feel like a minority. If you are a male ECE professional, you may be the only one at your workplace, making relating to coworkers difficult at times.
We may all be able to agree that women communicate verbally more each day than men. Studies on the subject show females talking anywhere from 7,000 to 20,000 words on an average day compared to males speaking 2,000 to 7,000 words. At this rate, the typical quieter female is speaking the same amount of words as the most talkative male. Whatever your experience may entail, females characteristically talk more then males. Keep this in mind when communicating with men in your professional setting. It may just be one of the reasons for their reserved and/or quiet nature.
Male educators can provide extra benefits to the center’s/school’s population, assisting children, parents, coworkers and administration, including additional active movement (gross motor) play throughout the day. Men tend to allow male parental figures to be more comfortable interacting in classrooms and with teachers. What better way to teach children equality than by placing men in ECE positions along with female educators as well?
Possibilities exist to increase the number of males working in Early Childhood, but it is extremely important to determine how we can retain the limited amount of males currently employed in the field. At the Colorado Head Start Association conference in March 2012, I will be presenting along with fellow members of Men In Early Childhood - Colorado (www.mec-colorado.org). During our presentation, ideas and strategies to help us retain male ECE professionals will be discussed. Suggestions will include, providing social events (baseball games, hiking events, and holiday-related parties), educational seminars related specifically to male ECE professionals, and music camps for ECE children hosted by Men in Early Childhood - Colorado. Please attend the Colorado Head Start conference in March, including MEC’s informational presentation, to learn how you can build stronger coworkers relationships. What ideas do you have for increasing the number of males working in early childhood?
Children’s Behaviors: When Parents and Teachers See Things Differently
By Mary Klute
I got an email from my son’s teacher the other day to let me know that he hit another child in the face at school. She also mentioned that she was having optional spring parent-teacher conferences, just in case we wanted to sign up for a time. The fact that she paired these two messages in one email left me wondering if she might have more to tell us about his behavior at school. I’ll find out in an hour, when I go to the conference. I think my son is a sweetie. Sure, he is a handful sometimes, but generally speaking, he is a good kid. But I’m probably biased. And maybe he just behave
s differently when he is at home and at school.
As part of some of our research projects, we ask parents and teachers to rate children’s socioemotional development. We find in our data that parents and teachers often rate children quite differently. At first, I was surprised by this, but then I did a little reading. I found out that previous research has demonstrated that parents’ and teachers’ reports don’t tend to be highly correlated, with correlations in the .2 to .3 range (Achenbach et al., 1987; Cai et al., 2004; Crane et al., 2011; LeBuffe & Naglieri, 1999; Winsler & Wallace, 2002). This left me curious about why this is, so I started poking around in our data to answer the question: When are parents and teachers more likely to agree and when are their views more likely to be different?
Before turning to the data, I did some more reading and came across another line of research examining parent stress and other parent risk factors in relation to child socioemotional development. Studies have found a link between parenting stress and children’s socioemotional functioning as rated by parents and teachers (e.g., Anthony, Anthony, Glanville, Naiman, Waanders & Shaffer, 2005; Whittaker, Jones Harden, See, Meisch & Westbrook, 2011). Others have demonstrated links between parent mental health (e.g., depression, psychopathology) and ratings of children’s socioemotional functioning (e.g., Jones Harden, Winslow, Kendziora, Shahinfar et al., 2000; Linver, Brooks-Gunn & Kohen, 2002). Others have demonstrated links between distal risk factors, such as adequacy of financial resources, and children’s socioemotional functioning (Jones Harden et al., 2000; Linver et al., 2002). It is noteworthy that all but one of these studies used either parents’ or teachers’ ratings of children’s socioemotional functioning, but not both.
We have some information about parents in our dataset, so I decided to take a look to see if these things were related to parents’ and teachers’ ratings. Specifically, I looked at the following child characteristics: age, gender, IEP status, and child’s general health. I also focused on three parent factors: parent depression, parenting stress and food insecurity.
When we looked at child characteristics, we didn’t find a strong pattern of findings. However, when we looked at the parent characteristics, the data told a more consistent story. Parents experiencing depression, higher levels of parenting stress and food insecurity tended to rate their children more negatively than those without these stressors, while teachers’ ratings were similar for both groups.
This pattern of results indicates that parents’ reports of their children’s socioemotional development tend to be less positive when parents are under stress. However, children from high stress families tended to be rated similarly to their peers by their teachers. This pattern of findings suggests that some children who appear to be doing well in the classroom environment may be struggling socioemotionally at home. To fully support all children’s development, it is important for programs to consider the totality of the context in which they are growing up to ensure that all children and families get the support they need.
I’ll be presenting this research at the Head Start National Research Conference in Washington DC in June 2012. If you are there, please drop by and say hi!
Teachers Engaging Their Children’s First Teachers
By thouse@claytonearlylearning.org
Many people in Early Childhood Education (ECE) often say, "Parents are a child's first teacher." However, when parents enroll their children in various forms of ECE (child care, preschool, pre- K, family child care, Head Start), teachers, providers, and administrators often struggle with how to effectively engage families in the activities of the program. Thus begins what can become a series of miscues in communication between what families want and what educators think is best for children. The relationships can become more tension filled when the race, ethnicity, nationality, social class and/or expectations of the parents and program staff are different. ECE professionals must take intentional steps to blend their knowledge with parental knowledge in order for children to succeed. Stephen Covey (1989) has said that we should "seek first to understand" if we wish to be effective leaders and relationship builders. By that he means that we should stop and listen carefully, asking questions using nonjudgmental language to make sure the essence of the other person's point of view is clear to us. According to the book Using Skilled Dialogue to Transform Challenging Interactions, the authors note that it is all too common for us to focus on the challenge in challenging behaviors. They suggest we need to see the challenges as bumps that can serve as triggers for unseen options outside of our familiar paradigms (Barrera and Kramer, 2007).
Recognizing parents for their good intentions helps parents feel valued and builds trust in the relationship. Intentionally building trust makes it much easier to relate to parents in positive, respectful ways when (1) we engage in a two-way conversation (listening carefully as well as speaking) and (2) we try to recognize the potential for good ideas behind parental requests and behaviors. Janis Keyser, author of From Parents to Partners: Building a Family Centered Early Childhood Program (2007), encourages early childhood practitioners to look for the good idea behind a parent request or demand that may initially seem strange or inappropriate. Looking for the good idea is a way of building on a parent's strengths, of beginning to understand a person whose culture may be very different from your own.
When my child’s teacher assumed that my child had behavior consistent with Attention Deficit Disorder, she contacted me in a very authoritative manner as if she knew everything about the disorder, and my child and I knew nothing. After she took the time to find out that I had worked with children with this type of disability for many years, she realized that she wasn’t the only one with some options. We started chatting about our educational history and found something in common which led us to find a solution to the problem at hand, my daughter’s behavior. Together we threw out a few ideas and came to a strategy that both of us could use at school and home. We decided to have her sit and face in a different direction so the stimulation of looking at the students and the activity in the room wouldn’t be distracting.
Ultimately, if we intentionally consider and seek to understand that different values, attitudes, and behaviors of families and staff are not wrong, but are rich in information about a child, family and their culture, will it be possible for ECE teachers to form collaborative partnerships with their children's "first teachers?" Please share your stories of how you engaged your children’s first teachers-their parents!
Appropriate Preschool Assessment Doesn’t Take Time Away From Play
By Mary Klute
This is a busy time of year for me at work Every fall, staff in the Research and Evaluation Department here at Clayton Early Learning conduct standardized assessments with over 200 preschool-aged children in our program. After we finish assessing all the children, we meet to go over individual scores with the classroom teachers, the child-family educator who works with the program, and the mentor-coach for the classroom. We do all of this so that teachers can use the data we collect in combination with their own observations and assessments of children to guide what they do with each individual child in the classroom.
I had a half-hour between meetings earlier this week and I used the time to catch up on some of the blogs I follow. I ran across this post about a recent article in Scientific American Mind, that makes the case that play is far more important (and effective) for children’s development than direct instruction. I’m totally on board with that argument. You won’t find me advocating for flash cards, lectures and structured seat work for preschoolers….and I love it when the popular press shouts that message from the rooftops! But then I noticed the title of the preview of the Scientific American Mind article on their website: “Preschool Testing Takes Time Away from Play—And Learning” and I thought, “uh, wait a minute…I have 6 appointments on my calendar today to share the results of testing with teachers.”
Scientific American Mind’s website only gives a little snippet of the article, so I quickly bought it and read the whole article, which, by the way, actually has the title, “The Death of Preschool.” Interestingly, the article makes absolutely no reference to testing in preschool. The only reference they make to testing is a passing reference to the testing required starting in third grade by No Child Left Behind. What the article does describe is a preschool where children are quizzed on topics like parts of the human skeleton and the geography of Southeast Asia. It describes a school where children spend their day in an environment that sounds more structured than my daughter’s third grade classroom.
So the title of the teaser on Scientific American Mind’s website is unfortunate and inaccurate. It prompted at least one sale of that issue of their magazine, so from their point of view, it is probably a success. However, another benefit of it, I suppose, is that it prompted me to reflect in my free moments in the past few days about why we assess children in our Educare School. All Educare Schools are guided by 12 Core Features. One of these core features is “Use Research-Based Strategies,” which includes a commitment to continuous improvement and use of a local evaluation partner and participation in a national, multi-site evaluation. As we implement this core feature, we engage in the very rewarding, but very hard work of developing a research-program partnership. We strive to gather rich information about the children and families we work with in our program. We, as the local evaluation partner, work to bring the information we collect back to the Educare School at multiple times and in multiple ways. We share individual child scores (as I described above) two times per year with each classroom team. We share “hot off the presses” aggregate data with program leadership about every other month. Finally, we share our more thoroughly and thoughtfully analyzed data with program leadership, staff, parents and our Board annually through our Annual Evaluation Report.
We do all of this for two main reasons: 1) to provide information that can be used in combination with many other sources of information (e.g., teachers’ observations, authentic assessments, other data collected by the program, etc.) to guide planning for individual children and for the program as a whole. 2) To tell the story of the great things that happen every day in our Educare School, none of which, by the way, involve the use of flash cards or quizzing children on the location of countries in Southeast Asia. Our efforts are far from perfect, but we try to learn from our mistakes and missteps and continually improve because we believe that this is an important and valuable use of data and testing that doesn’t take away from play and learning, but actually promotes it. What do you think?
Home Language, Vocabulary and Early Literacy
By thouse@claytonearlylearning.org
How can families be intentionally engaged in supporting young children’s literacy development even before birth? I observed three workshops for parents last week and was thrilled to see how much the parents and other home caregivers enjoyed learning about how they are helping their children to develop literacy skills just through conversation, and lots of it!
The parents learned about the importance of using lots of vocabulary, no matter what language your family speaks at home. Some native Spanish speaking parents thought that speaking Spanish at home would make it harder for their children to learn English, so they spoke fewer words and often didn’t use complete sentences or proper grammar in their home language because they didn’t want to confuse their child who is learning English. When the presenter showed the research by Linda Espinosa that strong first language skills facilitate English language learning, (October, 2011, Slide 27), the parents were amazed, but realized that it made sense. So, speaking the first language in the home does not confuse the child; it actually helps the child! Several studies have shown that the loss of a home language is linked to poor long-term academic outcomes (Slavin & Cheung, 2005; Oller & Eilers, 2002; Thomas and Collier, 2002).
Babies can learn two languages more easily than older children and adults, and this improves the likelihood of academic success. The parents learned that the more words that a child has a deep understanding of, the more concepts the child has created in the brain. Then it is much easier to transfer the Spanish word into English, because the children already have an idea of what that word means. If they never heard the concept before, it is harder for them to think about it in a second language (October, 2011, Slide 27).
The parents talked about how they use language at home and practiced having conversations with their young children using toys and books. The presenter emphasized the importance of talking a lot about what is happening in the world around them, singing songs during routine times, and saying rhymes and poems in your own home language. These are fun ways for children to learn and grow both cognitively and socially. Parents were also surprised at how often they listen to their children and how often we tune them out. They were reminded to give children a chance to talk and take turns talking and listening. Parents realized that lots of language and vocabulary development is critical for future reading success, because children need to understand what they are reading, not just recognizing the words. It was fun to see the parents and caregivers get so excited about what they can do to encourage literacy development by using lots of vocabulary through daily, fun conversations.
I found a great video on TED.com to watch about just how smart babies really are. Take a peek and you’ll see how much talking and interacting with your baby sets the stage for all future development.
Teachers and Coaches: Radical Learners?
By Lynn Andrews
What will it take to make early childhood programs the best that they can be? Jim Knight, director of the Kansas Coaching Project at the University of Kansas, believes that Radical Learners will be the people to “save our schools” – and I think his ideas apply to our field as well. He describes radical learners as people who, among other qualities:
• believe we are here on earth to learn, so they are turned on by every chance they get to discover something new
• have hope because they know that to teach without hope is to damage, but to teach with hope can save the world
• have mentors and coaches
• mentor and coach others
• are brutally honest about what is really happening in their classroom and would welcome any visitor who could help them improve
• don’t blame others but accept personal responsibility
• infect everybody with their love of learning, most importantly the children they teach
His list includes passion for learning as a key quality for creating educational change, but I was also struck by his inclusion of mentoring and coaching. There is growing evidence that coaching improves performance and job satisfaction for new teachers, but Knight suggests that more experienced teachers (and, I would suggest, any early childhood professionals) can benefit from coaching, as well. Knight’s description of Radical Learners implies that both people in a coaching relationship have to demonstrate these qualities for coaching to be effective.
Regardless of how much expertise we have gained, there is always room to grow. And it is difficult to observe our own behavior objectively – we often “don’t know what we don’t know.” Knight teaches coaches to observe, attending to several critical learning environment dimensions that translate well to early childhood settings: whether the teacher has an effective plan for instruction, whether the students are engaged and interact respectfully, and whether there are intentional conversations taking place. Then coaches initiate conversations designed to help the teacher observed reflect on her practice (perhaps with the help of video), mainly by asking questions such as “What worked well?” “What didn’t work so well?” and “What did you notice?” before pointing out what the coach has seen. Usually, this is followed by a problem-solving conversation in which both coach and teacher brainstorm ways to address the issues identified. The coach needs to be a willing learner and a non-judgmental and caring reporter who can help the teacher focus on the children’s experience and learning, and the teacher needs to be open to seeing where there is room for improvement and taking responsibility to change her practice. This can be a challenge on both sides when it’s just part of our nature to think our ideas are right and to want to be seen as competent professionals.
In his Radical Learners blog, Knight states “The real joy of teaching is learning how to reach all the students we teach.” Perhaps for coaches, it should be “The real joy of coaching is learning how to help all the teachers we coach.” So whether you’re a teacher, or a program director, or any other early childhood professional, are you feeling it? Do you consider yourself a Radical Learner?
There’s an Outside World Waiting for Our Children
By Brenda Hoge
“Time in nature is not leisure time; it’s an essential investment in our children’s health.” Richard Louv, author of “Last Child in the Woods”
Close your eyes and think back to a happy time in your childhood. What were you doing? Who were you with? For most of us, including myself, I think about all of the time I spent outdoors as a child. In the summer, my neighborhood friends and I would get up and spend the entire day outdoors. We played at the park, we played at the school playground, we searched creeks for roly-poly’s, and we rode our bikes all around our part of town (and yes, with no helmets ). Our play wasn’t organized by the adults and there were no boundaries to our creativity-okay, maybe a few boundaries like “don’t attach that rope to the highest tree limb and try to swing off of it.” We stayed outside until we were called in for dinner and then, if it was a great day, we would all meet again after dinner to play a game of “Kick the Can” before bedtime.
Now think about our children today. Do they have these same opportunities to have un-organized free play outdoors? Do they get to explore the natural world around them? I was pondering these questions as I was traveling in France and Italy last month. In Nice, we came across a playground that was full of children playing. There was not one more spot for a child on the climbing net. And in Levanto, Italy, every day after school the children of all ages would meet and play in the town center. Some were playing on the playground, some were organizing a soccer game, and some were riding their bikes. When was the last time you have seen this in America? The only time I can think of when I’ve seen that many children playing recently is indoors at the Cherry Creek Mall where children were climbing on the “Looney Tunes” characters. Yes, it’s good they are playing but it’s indoors and it’s "Looney Tunes" rather than nature. This can’t be good for our children.
But where did outdoor play go? Often the first thing to get the blame is children’s increased access to computer games, the internet and television. And yes, those probably have a lot to do with it. But what about our role as parents and teachers? In a study conducted in the late 1990’s, Rhonda Clements surveyed 830 mothers throughout the U.S. 85 percent of mothers cited television viewing and 81 percent cited computer play as among the reasons why their children played outdoors so infrequently. However, in the same survey, most of the mothers admitted that they themselves restricted their children’s outdoor play, and 82 percent cited safety concerns, including fear of crime, as reasons for doing so.
And as teachers it’s also important to recognize our role in preventing children’s access to outdoor time. In a recent study based on interviews with preschool teachers in Ohio, Participants noted physical and socio-emotional benefits of physical activity particular to preschoolers (e.g. gross motor skill development, self-confidence after mastery of new skills and improved mood, attention and napping after exercise) but also noted several barriers including their own personal attitudes (e.g. low self-efficacy) and preferences to avoid the outdoors (e.g. don’t like hot/cold weather, getting dirty, chaos of playground). Because individual teachers determine daily schedules and ultimately make the decision whether to take the children outdoors, they serve as gatekeepers to the playground.
And what are the benefits for our children if they play outdoors? Physically, outdoor play increases fitness levels and builds active, healthy bodies which helps combat the current rise in obesity among children. Spending time outside also raises levels of Vitamin D, helping protect children from future bone problems, heart disease, diabetes and other health issues.
Cognitively, exposure to natural settings may be widely effective in reducing ADHD symptoms. In addition, schools with environmental education programs score higher on standardized tests in math, reading, writing and listening.
And social-emotionally, studies have found that children’s stress levels fall within minutes of seeing green spaces. Play also protects children’s emotional development whereas loss of free time and a hurried lifestyle can contribute to anxiety and depression. And finally, the success of children's interactions is measured by the ability of children to develop and sustain friendships, to cooperate, to lead, and to follow. Unstructured active play with others, including with parents, siblings, and peers, is a major opportunity to cultivate social skills. All of this leads children to develop social and emotional capabilities such as empathy, flexibility, self-awareness, and self-regulation which continues into their adult life.
So it’s time. Time to start taking action by not letting another generation of children grow up without having an opportunity to play outdoors. Because if those of us who had the opportunity to spend the entire day outdoors have raised children who don’t have the same opportunity, what kind of children will our children raise?
*If you would like more information on the importance of outdoor play and/or creating a natural outdoor learning environment for children, the Environmental Rating Scales team at Clayton provides a training on this for child care programs. You can find the information on our Clayton website.
Authentic Assessment of Infants and Toddlers: Exciting New Research on the Learning Through Relating System
By Mary Klute
Think back to the greatest teachers you ever had. When I do, I think of teachers who challenged me, rarely presenting me with material or tasks that were too easy for me. And when they challenged me, they did so by pushing me to achieve things that required real effort, but weren’t so hard that I felt frustrated. Doing this for every child in a classroom is precisely what educators are talking about when they use terms like “individualization” (in the early childhood world) and “differentiation” (in the K-12 world). When you consider how varied children are in their abilities in different areas, you can appreciate what a monumental task it is to meet each and every child where they are and support them to get to the next level.
Before a teacher can engage in this monumental task, they have to get some idea of where each child is developmentally. In a high quality early childhood program, teachers do this via a process called authentic assessment. Authentic assessment is the process of on-going observation in the context of everyday classroom environments. Teachers make notes throughout the day when they see children display various skills while participating in classroom activities. Using authentic assessment techniques, children are not put in a testing situation, rather, teachers document relevant observations in the form of ‘anecdotes’ that they refer to later when completing a developmental checklist.
Many authentic assessment tools are available for the preschool age range and to guide early intervention efforts. However, few options exist for authentic assessment during the infant and toddler period. In response to this, the Learning Through Relating system was developed with funding from the Administration for Children and Families. When this project started, my colleague, Amanda Moreno and I were working at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center. Amanda was working closely with the staff here at Clayton Early Learning Institute, particularly Chris Sciarrino, to create an authentic assessment for infants and toddlers. When the grant opportunity came along, we were thrilled to obtain funding to further develop the system and to conduct research on it. With this funding, we were able to implement the curriculum in Clayton’s Early Head Start program and provide intensive coaching to support teachers and home visitors to use the curriculum well.
Learning Through Relating is unique in that it is not a downward extension of a preschool curriculum. Instead, it was created with the key developmental tasks for infants and toddlers in mind. In addition, the system includes a curriculum that is linked to the assessment. The curriculum offers caregivers guidance about how to provide meaningful learning opportunities for children that can be customized to meet each child where he or she is.
One of the most frequent questions I’ve heard when I’ve spoken to people about Learning Through Relating has been, “that sounds great, but is it reliable and valid?” I’m thrilled to now be able to answer that question, “YES!” A journal article documenting the reliability and validity of the Learning Through Relating Child Assets Record was published in this month’s issue of Early Childhood Research Quarterly.
The development and refinement of the Learning Through Relating System has truly been the result of an ongoing partnership. Over the years, many people have provided valuable input to refine the Learning Through Relating system including teachers and home visitors in Clayton’s Early Head Start program and Clayton infant-toddler coaches, Shelly Anderson and Laura Rothe. We are deeply grateful to them for their contributions.