e a r l y developments

 Summer 2000 Volume 4, Number 2

Improving

Early Child Care

and Education

 F r a n k P o r t e r G r a h a m C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t C e n t e r at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Volume 4 No.2

Summer 2000

Supervising Editors

Virginia Buysse, Pam Winton

Editor

Loyd Little

Graphic Design

Turner McCollum

Circulation

Jay Hargrove

Photography

Don Trull

Editorial Offices

521 Greensboro Street, Suite 206

Carrboro, NC 27510

Postal Address

Send change of address to:

Jay Hargrove

Campus Box 8185, UNC-CH

Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8185

Periodicals postage paid

at Chapel Hill, NC

www.fpg.unc.edu

www.ncedl.org

Early Developments is published three times a year by the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center at The University of North Carolina at Chapel

Hill. It is funded in part by The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and in part by PR/Award Number R307A60004, administered by the Office of

Educational Research and Improvement, National Institute on Early Childhood Development and Education, US Department of Education. Contents of

articles do not necessarily represent the positions of the U.S. Department of Education. Endorsement by the federal government should not be assumed.
earlydevelopments 1 summer 2000

Nearly four years ago, our initial issue of Early Developments

dealt with quality care. Since then, communities and states

have begun implementing higher standards and more families

have become aware of and are looking for higher quality.

Attempts to improve quality take many forms and equally

diverse is the research into the nature of care and outcomes

for children and families.

Our research at the Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center (FPG) keeps

pace with the times, and in this issue, we offer an update on our first issue. In an

article beginning on page 6, we focus on how our own state – North Carolina –

is making major changes in rating child care centers. The impact of these changes

is examined at several levels: centers, the training of assessors, and state policy.

In a study discussed on page 4, FPG researchers found that a comprehensive

community initiative can improve child care quality if significant funds and activities

are focused on the issue. Quality was significantly related to the number of local

quality improvement activities in which the child cares centers participated.

Researchers also looked at one nationally recognized program – North Carolina’s

Smart Start – and found that assistance to child care centers helps young children come

to school ready to succeed if the assistance is directly related to quality improvement.

This story begins on page 2.

We have also analyzed the relationship between state regulations and child care

in four states. In an article on page 10, research indicates that policies set higher

standards for child protection than for enhancement of development and learning.

Analysts said, “Such regulations support the image of child care programs being a

safe haven rather than for development enhancement. The limited requirements

for child care personnel and for community interaction also encourage that image.

These minimum standards departed substantially from professional judgements

about what is needed in child care settings.”

In a survey, described in an article beginning on page 14, teachers of

preschoolers report that they are able, generally, to engage in the practices they

endorse. Some barriers were found: the most common were “children with behavior

problems interfere” and a “lack of planning time.” This article is in our special section

devoted to the National Center for Early Development & Learning.

From the Director

Don Bailey

Contents

From the Director 1

Targeting the Right Stuff 2

Targeting activities directly related

to quality improvement in child care

Focused Use of Money,

Activities Can Improve

Child Care Quality 4

FPG Recent Publications 5

Reaching for the Stars 6

Attaining quality in child care

Safe Haven 10

The view of early child care is

changing from a “safe haven” to

“developmental enhancement”

NCEDL NEWS

Transition Connections 12

Collaboration of families & schools

Barriers 14

Preschool teachers indicate barriers

they encounter in their work

New Book Review 16
earlydevelopments 2 summer 2000

Child outcomes IMPROVE if aid to

child care centers is DIRECTLY RELATED

to quality improvement

 assistance to child care centers

helps young children come to school ready

to succeed if the assistance is directly related

to quality improvement, according to a new

study conducted by researchers at the Frank

Porter Graham Center at UNC-Chapel Hill.

Specifically, children who attended child

care centers that participated in Smart Start

activities directly related to improving quality

had better cognitive and language skills when

they entered kindergarten than did children

from other child care centers or family child

care homes. Additionally, fewer children in

the Smart Start-Direct group were rated

as having behavior problems by their

kindergarten teachers.

Smart Start is a partnership between North Carolina state government and local leaders,

service providers, and families to better serve children under six and their families. The state

distributes money to county partnerships, which are non-profit corporations established

specifically for the purpose of administering Smart Start activities. The primary goal is to

ensure that all children enter school healthy and prepared to succeed.

This new study, which included a total of 508 children, looked at a group of children

attending Smart Start centers and children attending other child care centers or family child

care homes. Within the Smart Start group, researchers identified 142 children who attended

centers participating in activities directly related to improving child care quality. The others in

the Smart Start group attended centers with activities described as supportive. (See sidebar.)

AdobeImageLibrary
earlydevelopments 3 summer 2000

Activities DIRECTLY RELATED to improving quality

• Enhanced subsidies for higher

child care quality

• Enhanced subsidies for

higher teacher education

• License upgrades

• On-site technical assistance

• Quality improvement and facility grants

• TEACH (Teacher Education and Compensation Helps) scholarships, which provide

education scholarships and support for

release time for child care teachers.

• Teacher education scholarships

• Teacher salary supplements

Activities INDIRECTLY RELATED to improving quality

• CPR training

• Developmental screenings

• Director administrative training

• Enrichment activities

• Expansion and start up grants

• Health and safety assessments

• Playground safety

• Teacher substitutes

• Transportation

• Specialists

• Subsidies (not tied to quality)

• Workshops

the right stuff

“Findings suggest that program change

efforts need to be directly related to improving the quality of child care if they are to

have an effect on children’s school entry

skills. To affect school entry skills, the type–

not just quantity–of support is important,”

said Kelly Maxwell, lead researcher on

the project.

“The findings and recommendations from

this study should not be construed to mean

that local partnerships should provide none

of the activities listed under the indirect

category,” said Donna Bryant, principal

investigator of the FPG-UNC Smart Start

evaluation team.

 “Ensuring that all teachers are certified in

CPR, for instance, is important for children’s

health, but should not be expected to raise

children’s kindergarten entry skills,” she said.

 Bryant said she thinks the local Smart Start

partnerships need to pay more attention to

the linkages between the activities they fund

and the outcomes they intend to achieve.
earlydevelopments 4 summer 2000

The quality of child care, as measured by the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale

(ECERS), at 180 child care centers in North Carolina was significantly higher in 1996 than

1994. The quality was significantly related to the number of local quality improvement

activities in which the child care centers participated.

Some of the centers in this study were part of the state’s Smart Start initiative; others

were randomly sampled. The state gives money to county partnerships, which are

established specifically for administering Smart Start. These partnerships plan how to

best meet their own community needs, improve existing programs and design new ones.

Changes in quality were related to Smart Start participation. Quality ratings were

specifically tied to the number of Smart Start quality improvement activities in which a

center participated, the percent of full-funding allocation received by the county, and the

proportion of Smart Start funds designated for child care. Many centers took advantage

of multiple Smart Start opportunities.

Further, the rate of increase in the proportion of centers licensed at the higher AA level

was higher in Smart Start counties than in other N.C. counties.

Other findings:

• Overall, only 14% of the preschool classes in 1994 were providing good quality care.

In 1996, 25% of the preschool classes were providing good quality care.

• Money spent on child care quality improvement efforts was related to ECERS quality,

particularly for counties that received more Smart Start funding.

Researchers cautioned that there was still much room for improvement,

however, with 75% of the centers still below the quality threshold.

NOTE: Since data were collected for this study, North Carolina has directed that at least

70% of the Smart Start partnerships’ budgets be allocated to child care.

Editor’s note: The above excerpts are from Effects of a Community Initiative on the Quality of Child Care

by FPG researchers Donna M. Bryant, Kelly L. Maxwell & Margaret Burchinal. The article appeared in

Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1999, Vol. 14, pages 449-464.

A comprehensive community

initiative can improve child care

quality if significant funds and

activities are focused on the

issue, according to a study by

researchers at the Frank Porter

Graham Center at UNCChapel Hill.

Focused use of money, activities

can improve child care quality

Targeting the right stuff (Continued)
earlydevelopments 5 summer 2000

Issues in Disability & Health. Simeonsson, R.J., & McDevitt,

L.N. (Eds.). (1999). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina,

Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center.

The Transition to Kindergarten. Pianta, R.C., & Cox, M.J.

(Eds). Bailey, D.B. (Series Ed.). (1999). Baltimore, MD:

Brookes Publishing.

Family systems. Winton, P.J., & Winton, R.E. (2000).

In J. Solomon (Ed.), Pediatric skills for occupational therapy

assistants (pp. 11-22). St. Louis, MO: Mosby.

Moving towards cross-cultural competence in lifelong

personnel development: A review of the literature. Hains, A.,

Lynch, E., & Winton, P.J. (1999). Champaign, IL: Culturally

and Linguistically Appropriate Service Institute.

Lives in Progress: Case Stories in Early Intervention.

McWilliam, P.J. (2000). Baltimore: Brookes Publishing.

Effects of a community initiative on the quality of child care.

Bryant, D., Maxwell, K., & Burchinal, M. (1999).

Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 14, 449-464.

Quality of early childhood programs in inclusive and

noninclusive settings. Buysse, V., Wesley, P. W., Bryant, D.,

& Gardner, D. (1999). Exceptional Children, 65, 301-314.

The environment and mental retardation. Bryant, D., &

Maxwell, K. (1999). International Review of Psychiatry, 11,

56-67.

A review of interventions for preschoolers with aggressive

and disruptive behavior. Bryant, D., Vizzard, L. H.,

Willoughby, M., & Kupersmidt, J. (1999). Early Education

and Development, 10(1), 47-68.

Qualitative analysis of Latino parents’ religious interpretations

of their child’s disability. Skinner, D., Rodriguez, P., & Bailey,

D.B. (1999). Journal of Early Intervention, 22, 271-285.

Educating exceptional children (9th ed.). Kirk, S., Gallagher,

J., & Anastasiow, N. (2000). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Policy and the transition process. Gallagher, J. (1999).

In R. Pianta and M. Cox (Eds.), The transition to kindergarten

(pp. 351-362). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.

Knowledge versus policy in special education. Gallagher, J.

(1999). In R. Gallimore, L. Bernheimer, D. MacMillan,

D. Speece, & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Developmental perspectives on

children with high-incidence disabilities (pp. 245-261).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Unthinkable thoughts. Gallagher, J. (2000).

Gifted Child Quarterly, 44(1), 5-12.

Child care licensing regulations and child care quality in

four states. Gallagher, J., Rooney, R., & Campbell, S. (1999).

Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 14(3), 313-333.

Policy options for early childhood: A model for decision

making. Gallagher, J. & Rooney, R. (1999). Early Education

and Development, 10(1), 69-83.

Early development, temperament, and functional impairment

in autism and fragile X syndrome. Bailey, D.B., Hatton, D.D.,

Mesibov, G., & Ament, N. (2000). Journal of Autism and

Developmental Disabilities, (30), 557-567.

Taking the Lead: 1999 Highlights from 10 local education

agencies serving preschool children with disabilities.

Weston, M. (1999). Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina,

FPG Child Development Center.

It’s only natural...to have early intervention in the environments where it’s needed. McWilliam, R. A. (1999, September).

Top Notes (Alabama Early Intervention Newsletter).

Integrating therapies into the classroom.

Scott, S. M., McWilliam, R. A., & Mayhew, L. (1999).

Young Exceptional Children, 2(3), 15-24.

Interpreting infant conceptual categorization. Reznick, J. S.

(2000). Journal of Cognition and Development, 1, 63-66.

Can prenatal caffeine exposure affect behavioral inhibition?

Reznick, J. S. (1999). Review of General Psychology, 3,

118-132.

Influences on maternal attribution of infant intentionality.

Reznick, J. S. (1999). In P. D. Zelazo, J. W. Astington, & D.R.

Olson (Eds.), Developing theories of intention: Social understanding and self control (pp. 243-267). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Measuring infant spatial working memory using a modified

delayed-response procedure. Schwartz, B. B., & Reznick, J. S.

(1999). Memory, 7, 1-17.

What twins can tell us about the development of intelligence

— a case study. Reznick, J. S., & Corley, R. (1999).

In M. Anderson (Ed.), The Development of intelligence

(pp. 105-136). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.

 F r a n k P o r t e r G r a h a m C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t C e n t e r at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Recent Publications
Reaching for the Stars

The rated license or star system, as it’s called, adds three voluntary levels of quality to the two basic levels previously

available in North Carolina. Centers and family child care homes can earn licenses with up to five stars based on a point

system composed of three components: staff and director education, compliance history, and program standards.

Although the rated license does not solve all problems associated with attaining quality in child care, it does help

parents become informed consumers who can choose better care for their children.
earlydevelopments 7 summer 2000

The new star system affects nearly 9,000 centers in North Carolina

that care for nearly a third of the state’s children under five

“Next on the video is an art activity. Ready? Roll the tape.”

A group of children are playing with modeling dough at a picnic table in

a yard. A teacher shows how to use a thick dowel to roll the dough flat.

Some of the preschoolers pay attention while others smack their dough

delightedly with their hands. Everyone seems to be having a fine time.

Those watching the tape include five women from various areas of North

Carolina who are beginning training on using the Family Day Care

Rating Scale (FDCRS) to judge the quality of a family child care home.

After a minute or two, the video stops. Cathy Riley, one of the trainers,

says, “All right. Now rate the center on ‘Art,’ which is item 19 in your

video training guide.” The trainees silently grade the family child care

home on art. Then they discuss their rankings. Most give it a four.

They discuss whether they could say with certainty that the children

were offered art at least three times a week and how creative the

teacher was allowing the children to be.

At one point, Trainer Riley says, “You rate what you observe.”

In fact, she adds, “When you first go into the family child care home

in the morning, tell the owner/operator that you will want to observe

everything. And that includes preparing the food, diapering, taking

children to the bathroom, naps – everything.”

The group then re-starts the video to find out how experts had

rated this home’s art. They had given it a four.

Using videotape taken in a child care facility to learn how to

judge the quality of care is the start of intensive training for

these North Carolina Rated License Assessors. They are part of

a cadre being trained to implement a new rated license adopted last year

in North Carolina.

 After video training, trainees complete a number of live observations

under the direction of the trainers from FPG, Lisa Waller, Cathy Riley and

Kris Fulkerson. The overall training is directed by Thelma Harms and

Debby Cryer, co-authors of the environment rating scales, who also

conduct the final practice observations before certifying that trainees are

ready to be official assessors for the North Carolina rated license.

The assessors must reach a reliability of 85%

(within one point) on each of the four environment rating scales before they can conduct

assessments of child care programs for infants

and toddlers, preschoolers, and school-age

children in centers, schools and family child care

homes. After each live practice observation, the

trainer and trainees compare their scores and

talk about discrepancies of more than one point.

The accuracy and objectivity of the assessors

is key to the credibility of any certification

system. As one trainee put it, “The child care

providers really want to know who we are, what

our training is, and what level of reliability we’ve

been trained to. I tell them we’ve been trained

to 85% accuracy by the authors of the scales.

That seems to carry some weight.”

In addition to providing the initial training,

FPG trainers conduct a reliability check on each

assessor at the sixth assessment completed with

each scale. This check assures that assessors

maintain their level of reliability. So far, 19

assessors have been hired across the state, some

full time and some part time. The new system

affects the nearly 9,000 centers in the state that

care for nearly a third of the state’s children

under five. It does not change the minimum

standards for child care, but it does add higher

gradations in standards.

The rated license or star system, as it’s called,

adds three voluntary levels of quality to the two

basic levels previously available in the state.

Centers and family child care homes can earn

licenses with up to five stars based on a point

system composed of three components:

staff and director education, compliance history,

and program standards.

Today’s training class will help these assessors

determine the average score on

the FDCRS rating scale used as part of the

program standards component for family child

care homes. The other scales are the

Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale,

(continued on page 8)
earlydevelopments 8 summer 2000

 “Research at FPG shows that many parents

find it difficult to tell the difference between

good programs and bad programs,” said

Cryer. If parents can’t really tell what the

quality is, there’s a problem with the

consumer information that parents have.”

She said that according to one study, parents

on average spend less than one minute a day

in their child’s program, making it difficult for

them to know what happens to their child

once they have left.

The format of the new license makes it

easy to see at a glance how many of the five

stars a facility has earned, because only the

earned stars are filled in [See picture of

sample license on this page]. State officials

say they’re hoping that parents will ask what’s

required to fill in the rest of the stars.

The new license has specific requirements

for each component, designed to improve the

quality of care for children. When centers and

homes receive their star rating from the

licensing consultant, they also receive a

comprehensive report on every component.

The report includes written detailed feedback

from the assessor who observed in their

facility about areas of strength and areas

where improvement is needed. This detailed

report gives the child care providers a

blueprint for improvement.

Getting a five star license requires centers

and family child care homes to provide high

quality in many areas including: protection of

children’s health and safety, organization of

the caregiving space, provision of appropriate

materials for play and learning, practice of

positive and supportive interaction with

children, and stimulation of language and

thinking skills through engaging activities.

Each child care facility will have different

areas of strengths and weaknesses. Some may

need to make or purchase additional materials while others may need to seek training for

their staff so that the materials they have will

be put to better use.

Centers and family child

care homes can earn licenses

with up to five stars based on

a point system composed of

three components:

1. staff and director education,

2. compliance history, and

3. program standards.

(continued from page 7) Infant-Toddler

Environmental Rating Scale and the

School-Age Care Environment Rating Scale.

Whichever scale is being used, it is

particularly important because it is based on

observation in classrooms. Observation with

a valid and reliable instrument is used to

show the ongoing daily quality of care

and education experienced by children.

The star system, which is administered by

the N.C. Division of Child Development, was

designed to give parents a better idea of how

good their child care center is, as well as

giving center operators clear indicators to

guide program improvement.

Graphic:TurnerMcCollum
earlydevelopments 9 summer 2000

If you want to know more

NCEDL Spotlight #18:

Teacher education, wages key to outcomes.

< www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/PDFs/spot18.pdf >

NCEDL Spotlight #2: Quality Child Care

< www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/Pages/spotlt2.htm >

NCEDL Policy Brief on Quality Care

< www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/PDFs/briefI1.pdf >

The children of the cost, quality, & outcomes study

go to school: Executive summary. Peisner-Feinberg,

E. S., Clifford, R. M., Burchinal, M. R., Culkin, M.,

Howes, C., Kagan, S. L., Yazejian, N., Byler, P., & Rustici,

J. (1999). Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North

Carolina at Chapel Hill, FPG.

< www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/Pages/cq.htm >

Some may need to improve their classroom discipline techniques

while others may need to establish better relationships with parents.

Although spending more is not the determining factor in getting a

good rating, the director of the N.C. Division of Child Development,

Stephanie Fanjul, said the state is sensitive to the fact that meeting

higher standards may cost more.

That’s one reason that multiple stars are voluntary. A center can

operate with only one star, which means minimum requirements are met.

Centers that had the old “A” rating automatically get one star. The state

has allocated $15 million a year so that centers can improve. This money

goes to centers that already receive state subsidies. Operators can earn

between $14 and $25 extra per subsidized child per month, depending

on how many stars they have.

In addition, millions of dollars have been funneled into the state’s

Smart Start partnership system. [See related stories beginning on page 2

and page 4.] For example, in Wake County, centers that add more stars

could receive between 5% and 40% more money per child through

Smart Start.

Some critics have said that while the

five-star system is a good start, it’s still

weak in some areas. “We’re especially

lax on ratios, group size, and especially

teacher education,” Cryer said. “I go to

centers and I realize that many staff

members lack training and some have

been hired on the spot, with no

reference checks.”

Studies show that across the US,

child care providers earn an average

of only $7.50 an hour or $13,125 a year.

This is considered a major reason for

the problem in recruiting and retaining

qualified staff. Turnover in child care

staff ranges from 25-50% nationally.

Fanjul said she wishes the state could

do more. “I wish we financed it. I wish

we’d make it possible for every child to

get high quality care and for every child

care teacher to be paid appropriately.

We’re not there yet.”

Although the rated license does not

solve all problems associated with

attaining quality in child care, it does help

parents become informed consumers who

can choose better care for their children.
earlydevelopments 10 summer 2000

A study of child care regulations in four states – California, Colorado,

Connecticut, and North Carolina – shows that state policies generally set

higher standards for child protection than for enhancement of development,

according to a new study by researchers at the Frank Porter Graham Center

at UNC-Chapel Hill.

“Such regulations support the image of child care programs as being a

safe haven rather than for development enhancement. The limited requirements for child care personnel and for community interaction also encourage that image,” said Jim Gallagher, one of the researchers on the study.

He said, “These minimum standards departed substantially from professional judgements about what is needed in child care settings.”

The study analyzed the rules and regulations for center-based care from

the four states that had previously been studied for the national Cost,

Quality and Outcomes study.

Investigators developed and applied rubrics to compare policies with

recommended practices in the areas of structure, operations, personnel

and context.

Researchers did a separate analysis comparing regulations for protecting

the child versus regulations for enhancing child development.

“While we recognize that state standards represent minimum requirements, it is still important to focus on what we consider as “minimum” for

“As we enter

the 21st century

it is clear that

we are changing

our view of

early child care

from one of a

safe haven to one

of developmental

enhancement.

We need to make

sure that our

regulations

reflect that

changed view.”

– Jim Gallagher

child care and child development,” said Robin

Rooney, another researcher with the project.

It appears easier, from these findings, to

establish standards for child protection than

for enhancement of child development,

she said.

“This may be because there is a strong

consensus about just what is required for

protection of safety and freedom from abuse

than about what is needed to enhance

development, or it can also mean that, as a

society, we are not quite determined to use

child care programs to enhance child

development through regulations. We can

easily agree on safety standards, but we may

differ from one another on how to best help

the child reach higher levels of cognitive,

social, and motor development,” said Rooney.

These findings indicate that the minimum

standards for these four states do not include

many standards for child development that

would be considered important by professionals in the field, Gallagher said.

“While we should be cautious in assuming

a causal relationship between minimal state

standards and the number of inadequate or

mediocre child care settings that we found in

these four states (as well as some outstanding

programs), it seems likely that hard pressed

directors of child care centers will meet the

minimum standards first and then consider

what else they should be doing,” he said.

“If we do wish for a strong role for child

care centers to enhance development, then

some higher and more specific development

enhancement standards need to be written,”

said Gallagher.

‘A safe haven’ is just the beginning in child care and education

SAFE HAVEN
earlydevelopments 11 summer 2000

If you want to know more:

Kagan, S.L., & Cohen, N.E. (1997).

Not by chance: Creating an early care

and education system for America’s

children. Executive summary. New

Haven, CT: Bush Center in Child

Development and Social Policy at Yale.

Love, J., Schochet, P.Z., & Meckstrom,

A.L. (1996). Are they in any real danger?

What research does – and doesn’t –tell us

about child care quality and children’s

well being. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica

Policy Research Inc.

National Association for the Education of

Young Children. (1998). NAEYC position

statement on licensing and public

regulation of early childhood programs.

Young Children, 43-50.

Child care licensing regulations and

childcare quality in four states.

Gallagher, J., Rooney, R., & Campbell, S.

(1999). Early Childhood Research

Quarterly, 14(3), 313-333.

The above content analysis summary of state regulations is a composite

rating of four states – California, Colorado, Connecticut, and North Carolina.

For each target area, researchers developed separate rubrics for differential

analysis of child protection (health and safety) and the enhancement

of child development aspects of the policies.

Encourage developmental enhancement

One important role for professional groups

and associations at the state and federal level

would be to review periodically the rules and

standards for child care to assure that they

match current thinking in the field.

One of the eight National Goals in Education endorsed by the 50 governors and the

president was that “all children should arrive

at school ready to learn.” Gallagher said,

“As we enter the 21st century it is clear that

we are changing our view of early child care

from one of a safe haven to one of developmental enhancement. We need to make sure

that our regulations reflect that changed

view.”

Personnel requirements (higher level of

professional preparation) should be made

explicit.

Gallagher and Rooney conducted the

research for the National Center for Early

Development & Learning based at UNCChapel Hill.

Researcher’s recommendations

Eliminate lowest standards

These analyses point out that “we still are

a long way from matching child care regulations with what we know as quality. A strong

step in the right direction could be made by

eliminating some of the lowest standards that

are now considered acceptable.”

The researchers said, “We should recognize

that policymakers might dilute standards to

avoid the political ramifications of shutting

down non-responsive child care centers.

However, state licensing agencies could

offer incentives for meeting higher standards

through increased public subsidies for

personnel preparation and by delaying the

time that child care providers have in meeting

high standards so that they can be reasonably

reached. For example: By the year 2004,

we will expect directors to have advanced

levels of preparation in child development

administration.”

More precise language

Regulators should describe the practices

they intend to promote. Expectations for

health and safety practices were more

frequently described in detail, while

other quality practices – particularly

those related to child development –

were referred to vaguely, or not at all.

To link policy with quality practices, such

as specific levels of personnel training, access

to stimulating materials, and positive relationships with families, descriptive language and

examples of how that expectation might be

implemented are needed. Without language

to describe quality practices, such practices

may be assumed to be optional.

Gallagher said, “A message needs to be

sent through our regulations that we expect

children to have positive experiences that

enhance development in child care as well

as keeping children healthy and safe.”

Graphic:TurnerMcCollum
T

 

he Kindergarten Transition Project at the

National Center for Early Development & Learning has developed a school-based approach

designed to enhance connections among

children, families, teachers and peers during

the transition to kindergarten.

University of Virginia Researchers Marcia

Kraft-Sayre and Robert Pianta say these

connections can be important supports to children and families during this period of change

and reflect recent attempts to describe what

“ready schools” can do to ease transitions

(National Education Goals Panel, 1997).

Activities are intended to increase familiarity

with school, provide for consistent expectations

between home and school, and make children

and families more comfortable interacting

with school.

“In addition, these relationships enable

kindergarten teachers to more easily, and earlier,

use the resources of families to support children’s

competence in school,” Kraft-Sayre said.

How the program was developed

Researchers collaborated with preschools,

elementary schools, a summer pre-kindergarten

program, and parents to learn about current

transition practices, and then cooperatively

designed a set of activities to foster positive

transition experiences.

Regular meetings were held with teachers,

family support workers, and principals to discuss

factors that enhanced or hindered these

kindergarten transition activities. In addition,

families were asked about their experiences

with their children’s transition to kindergarten.

Recommended activities

“A package of activities affecting many

connections – child-teacher, family-teacher,

child-peer, and others – is more likely to support

a successful transition, than any one activity

alone. For example, children in one school system

Making Transition

Connections:

A collaboration of

families and schools

Get on the ENews List

NCEDL’s free monthly Enewsletter

To get on the ENews List

Go to our web site at

<www.needl.org> and

fill in the ENewsletter box

with your email address.

or

email Loyd Little at

<loyd_little@unc.edu> and

ask to receive the ENewsletter.

National Center for Early Development & Learning 12 Summer 2000

are enrolled in preschool with peers with whom

they will go to elementary school,” Pianta said.

By arranging with elementary school principals

and teachers for these children to be in the same

kindergarten classroom together, peer relationships developed in preschool can be carried over

into kindergarten.

Several preschools promote family-school

connections by providing family support services.

A family support worker, who is assigned to the

preschool and elementary school, meets regularly

with families in their homes, connects them to

community resources when needed, provides

opportunities for involvement in groups to

discuss shared interests and address transition

issues, and works to engage families in positive

relationships with school.

Meetings between parents and kindergarten

teachers before the onset of kindergarten, are

arranged by the teacher and family support

worker to help establish parent-teacher communication. The family support worker can be a

bridge of continuity for families as their children

transition to kindergarten and by accompanying

them during visits to the elementary school

when needed.

An additional connection involves linking

pre-kindergarten children with their anticipated

elementary school through opportunities for

rising kindergarten children to visit their classroom in the spring before their kindergarten year.

Children from four-year-old classes and from

special education classrooms are included, and

can visit the kindergarten classroom, tour the

school, participate in recess and eat lunch in

the cafeteria.

Familiarizing children with their kindergarten

teacher and specific classroom activities prior to

school entry, in conjunction with a number of

other transition activities reduces uncertainty

for the child.

Finally, said Pianta, perhaps the most important activity to enhance kindergarten transitions

has been collaborative group meetings where

key players in the transition process – the

National Center for Early

Development & Learning

AdobeImageLibrary
National Center for Early Development & Learning 13 Summer 2000

Suggested peer connections

• Arrange for children to interact with future

kindergarten classmates at preschool or

outside the classroom setting.

• Identify a current kindergartner to serve as

“buddy” to a preschooler. Plan visits to the

kindergarten classroom when the kindergarten

“buddy” reads a story, demonstrates how to

play a game, or shows the younger child how

to use the classroom computer.

Suggested program connections

• Arrange discussions between preschool

and kindergarten personnel about classroom

practices and specific needs of individual

children.

If you want to know more

Pianta, R. C., & Walsh, D. J. (1996). High-risk

children in schools: Creating sustaining relationships. New York: Routledge, Kegan-Paul.

The transition to kindergarten. Pianta, R.C., & Cox,

M.J. (Eds). Bailey, D.B. (Series Ed.). (1999).

Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,

Administration for Children, Youth and Families,

Head Start Bureau. (1996). Effective transition

practices: Facilitating continuity: Training guide

for the Head Start learning community. Aspen, CO:

Systems Corporation.

teachers, principals, and family workers –

all work together.

These meetings allow discussion of problems

and solutions and build connections among

program staff. For example, preschool and

kindergarten staff, with the mutually shared goal

of having preschool peers together in kindergarten, are working together to achieve this goal

when kindergarten placement decisions

are made.

Collaboration is fundamental

The researchers said collaboration among

everyone involved is fundamental to both the

development and implementation of a kindergarten transition program.

Suggested family/school connections

• Arrange a time for parents to meet with the

preschool and kindergarten teachers to discuss

the expectations of kindergarten and their

children’s specific needs.

• Organize an informal dinner with parents and

kindergarten teachers in conjunction with

school open houses or back to school nights.

• Place children with kindergarten teachers

who taught their older siblings to build

upon pre-existing family-teacher bonds.

• Encourage families to engage their children

in literacy activities at home, such as

reading together.

Suggested child/school connections

• Provide opportunities for children to interact

directly with their anticipated kindergarten

teachers by arranging visits to kindergarten

classrooms during story time, center time,

recess, or a special school function.

• Familiarize children with their kindergarten

teachers by reviewing their names, showing

their pictures, and discussing what the

kindergarten classroom will be like.

• Orient preschool children to the expectations

of kindergarten, discuss the rules for learning

and behaving, such as walking in a

“kindergarten line.”

“Popsicle night”

promotes transition in a fun way

The following vignette exemplifies

the transition activities used by NCEDL

researchers in the kindergarten

transition project:

During the summer prior to the start

of kindergarten, a playground “popsicle

night” was offered for the rising kindergartners, parents, siblings and other

family members. This informal, low-key

activity enabled the children and their

families to experience the school in a

fun and non-demanding manner.

It was held from 6:30-7:30 PM, so

that parents who worked during the day

could attend. Unlike a kindergarten

orientation, there was no formal agenda.

Elementary school personnel and the

family worker joined families on the

playground and answered questions.

For example, one parent asked about

immunizations for school entry. The principal explained the process and offered

to follow up with the family.

The turnout for this was actually

better than for the more formal kindergarten orientation at one of the schools.

Several of the children were initially

hesitant to play and stayed close by

their families, but quickly warmed up

as their preschool friends arrived.

Children were able to reconnect with

preschool peers, and become familiar

with the school playground.

Families met other families of classmates of the children, and were able

to interact informally with school staff.

All and all, this activity helped ease the

transition to school in a relaxed and

fun way.
A national survey of 1,902 preschool

teachers reveals that they are able, generally, to

engage in the practices they endorse.

Teachers were given a list of twenty-one

practices and asked to rate to what extent a

practice happened in their classroom and to what

extent they would want the practice to occur “in

a perfect world.” Few discrepancies were found

between reported and ideal practices.

Although teachers endorsed a variety of

practices, on most items teachers said that they

are able to use the practices they endorse,

according to Diane Early and Richard Clifford

at UNC-Chapel Hill and Carollee Howes at

UCLA who conducted the study for NCEDL.

Smallest discrepancies

On many items teachers reported almost no

difference between their practices and their

ideals. The four items with the smallest discrepancies between beliefs and practices were:

• All children in the group have to take part

in all activities.

• Children practice skills on worksheets.

• Children are involved in group lessons.

• Children spend time playing.

Largest discrepancies

Teachers reported that in a perfect world, they

would engage in some practices slightly more.

The four items with the largest discrepancies

between beliefs and practices were:

• We have a daily science experience.

• Children have time to be alone when

they want it.

• We have a daily math experience.

• We have a daily music activity.

Preschool teachers report

engaging in practices they

endorse

Demographic variables

There were significant differences found in

examining which teachers endorsed groupcentered beliefs based on the sponsorship of

their center, said Early. Group-centered beliefs

are those that encourage all children to engage

in the same activities at the same time and at the

same pace. It is the opposite of child-centered

beliefs that encourage individualized activities

and pacing.

Teachers in public schools, Head Starts, and

other non-profit centers endorse group-centered

beliefs significantly less than do teachers in

religiously affiliated or for-profit settings, the

data indicated. Additionally, teachers with more

education endorse group-centered beliefs less.

To measure group-centered beliefs, teachers

were asked a series of questions about how

often they believe certain practices would take

place in a perfect world. Teachers with more

education had lower scores on the measure

of group-centered beliefs.

Interestingly, teachers with larger groups

endorse fewer group-centered practices, said

Clifford. There was no relation between the

amount of time a teacher has worked at the

center and her group-centered beliefs.

National Center for Early Development & Learning 14 Summer 2000
Conclusions and implications

Early childhood teachers largely see themselves

as engaging in the practices that they endorse,

said Early. On average, they do not report many

barriers to conducting their classes in the ways

they think are best (as evidenced both by the

small discrepancies between their reported

practices and beliefs and by the low ratings they

give to the barriers listed in the survey).

Different teachers do endorse different practices, especially with regard to group-centered

versus child-centered practices. Although

teachers uniformly agree that reading, math,

science and music activities should take place

daily, there is not uniform agreement with

respect to beliefs about practices like involving

children in group instruction and insisting that

children complete all activities.

Attention should be paid to helping teachers

adopt knowledge and values related to childcentered practices, Early and Clifford said.

Other research has indicated that child-centered

practices predict the best outcomes for children.

These data indicate that teachers who endorse

such practices report being able to engage in

them. However, teachers do not uniformly

endorse child-centered practices. Changing

teachers’ knowledge and values may be a key

to improving practice.

National Center for Early Development & Learning 15 Summer 2000

Barriers to endorsed practices

The listing below indicates the top-rated barriers to engaging in endorsed

practice. Not surprisingly, all the barriers were given relatively low ratings.

Earlier, the answers to questions about practices and beliefs indicated that

teachers see themselves as employing the practices they endorse.

Most commonly cited barriers

The survey asked teachers, “How often do the following prevent you from

teaching/caring for your group in the way you would in a perfect world?”

Children with behavior problems interfere (2.8)

Lack of planning time (2.3)

My group is too large (2.2)

Not enough adults in the room (2.1)

Parents do not support my ideas (2.0)

Not enough materials (1.9)

Too little pay to put in the extra effort (1.9)

High turnover & teacher absences make planning difficult (1.9)

I get tired and irritable because I’m worried about money (1.8)

Graphic:TurnerMcCollum
“

Our aim in this book is to provide a

comprehensive treatment of an area of knowledge that has been neglected for too long and is

need of systematic attention.... We want to help

organize and frame the debate on critical issues

regarding the early primary education of an

increasingly diverse group of young children.”

The above quote is from the preface of

The Transition to Kindergarten, which has

been published as the first in a series by the

National Center for Early Development &

Learning at the University of North Carolina at

Chapel Hill.

Editors Robert Pianta of the University of

Virginia and Martha Cox of UNC-Chapel Hill

said, “The education of young children is

receiving an unprecedented level of attention in

the United States and, for good or bad, will be a

focus of educational reform as the twenty-first

century begins. Understanding and influencing

the transition from home to school, from child

care to school, and from early childhood to

elementary programs will likely be a focus of a

great deal of attention in the policy, research,

and practice communities.”

Chapter subjects

1. “An Ecological Approach to Kindergarten

Transition” provides a conceptual model

for looking at transitions.

2. “Early Schooling and Social Stratification”

looks at how early school experiences provide

advantages for some children and disadvantages for others that then reinforce the

sorting of individuals into the hierarchical

layers characteristic of societies.

3. “Assessing Readiness” examines the national

“ready for school” goal and other key issues

regarding readiness.

4. “Promoting Education Equity and Excellence in

Kindergarten” looks at demographic trends

and educational experiences by groups of

children from different backgrounds and

different kindergarten programs they attend.

5. “Diverse Perspectives on Kindergarten

Contexts and Practices” focuses on research

related to teachers’ practices in kindergarten

classrooms.

New book examines critical

issues in transitions

This book contains ten chapters

presented at a national transitions

synthesis conference sponsored

by NCEDL. An additional five

chapters were written after the

conference, and reflect the

discussions and deliberations

of the synthesis groups.

416 pages

Brookes Publishing Co., Baltimore,MD

National Center for Early Development & Learning 16 Summer 2000

6. “Families and Schools: Rights, Responsibilities,

Resources, and Relationships” reviews and

identifies critical issues for families and

schools in the context of children’s transition

to school.

7. “Changing Schools for Changing Families”

examines the nature of, and barriers to,

parent involvement and innovations in

school-based support for families.

8. “Beginning School for Children at Risk”

reviews why the transition to school for

children in poverty is considered important

for scientific inquiry, education improvement

and societal concern.

9. “Children with Disabilities in Early Elementary

School” looks at research and practices

related to the transition to school-age services

for young children with disabilities and their

families.

10. “Kindergarten Practices with Children from

Low-Income Families” discusses research on

low-income children and families and

implications for schools and classrooms.

11. “Research on the Transition to Kindergarten”

examines how research design and methodology constrain the current knowledge base

on transitions.

12. “Personnel Preparation and the Transition

to Kindergarten” suggests a rethinking of

the preparation of teachers and other staff

serving children and their families.

13. “The Practice of Effective Transition”

offers recommendations and rationales

for practices for those involved in children’s

transition into kindergarten.

14. “Policy and the Transition Process” discusses

specific issues with policy implications and

advances a set of principles for analyzing

policy related to transitions.

15. “The Changing Nature of the Transition

to School” suggests significant trends for the

next decade in relation to shifting demography, education of young children in public

schools, and the changing nature of families

and schools.
Subscription information

contact Nancy Pruden

at (919) 966-4221

or email:

pubs@mail.fpg.unc.edu

Website:

www.fpg.unc.edu

See you in the fall issue

Colophon

Typefaces:

Frutiger, Garamond, Impact

Paper stock:

Roland Opaque, 70lb.Text.

PhoeniXmotion, 100lb.Text-Cover

8500 copies printed at a cost of $0.92 copy.

Photography:TurnerMcCollum

 F r a n k P o r t e r G r a h a m C h i l d D e v e l o p m e n t C e n t e r e a r l y developments
Campus Box 8185, UNC-CH

Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8185

Address Service Requested

Non-Profit Org

U.S. Postage

Paid

Permit 177

Chapel Hill, NC