ed

early developments Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute

Fall 2003 | Volume 7 #2

Rating Early Childhood Environments

Director's Notes

A Place for Eliot

A Whole New Yardstick

A Giant in Her Field

A Star Performer

Roadmaps to Quality

FPG Publications

NCEDL Meets with State Representatives

NCEDL Publications

PDF version Early Developments © 2003 Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

 Fall 2003 | Volume 7, #2 Rating Early Childhood Environments

FPG

Child

Development

Institute

The University of North Carolina

at Chapel Hillearlydevelopments
news

OUR ELECTRONIC NEWSLETTER will deliver summaries (with 

links) of our latest research fi ndings and other news 

straight into your in-box once a month. To sign up, go to 

www.fpg.unc.edu/mediaInfo/newsletter/index.cfm, type your 

email address into the box, and click Sign Up Now! 

J

IM GALLAGHER, FPG senior scientist and Kenan 

Professor Emeritus, was one of 24 psychologists 

among the 53 most infl uential people in gifted 

education, according to a survey of programs and centers 

for gifted and talented education. The list was published in 

Gifted Child Today (Vol. 25, No. 4). The survey was also 

cited in the May edition of the American Psychological 

Association’s Monitor. 

FPG-ENews Don Trull
ISSN 1536-4739

Supervising Editors

Pam Winton, Virginia Buysse

Writer

John Manuel

Designer

Gina Harrison

Photographers

Don Trull

Ryann Donnelly

Assistant Editor

Anna Mitchell

www.fpg.unc.edu

www.ncedl.org

Early Developments is published three times 

a year by the FPG Child Development Institute 

at The University of North Carolina at Chapel 

Hill. It is funded in part by UNC-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. Content 

of articles does not necessarily represent the 

position of the US Deparment of Education. 

Endorsements by the federal government 

should not be assumed.

To subscribe or

to change your address

contact Jay Hargrove

CB #8185, UNC-CH

Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8185

(919) 966-0888

hargrove@mail.fpg.unc.edu

To order additional copies

contact FPG Publications Office

(919) 966-4221

pubs@mail.fpg.unc.edu

Periodicals postage paid at 

Chapel Hill, NC

Cover photos by Don Trull

Total design, production, & printing costs 

of this issue of Early Developments

were $8564. 

9,000 copies of this document were 

printed at a cost of $5804, or 64¢ each.

|ed|

early developments

Fall 2003 | Volume 7 #2 

Director’s Notes

4

A Place for Eliot

6

A Whole New Yardstick

8

A Giant in Her Field

12

contents

A Star Performer

16

Quality

Training

Collaboration Consultation

Roadmap to Quality

18

FPG Publications

20

NCEDL Meets with 

State Representatives

21

NCEDL Publications

 15

ryann donnelly
4 early developments | fall 2003 

Director’s Notes by Don Bailey, Director

I

came to UNC in 1979 as a 

faculty member in the School of 

Education to direct a master’s 

degree program in early 

childhood special education. 

When I arrived, I realized that 

funds from several grants had 

been pooled together to create 

this position, including funds from 

FPG, and thus I had a few other jobs as well! Fortunately 

for me, one of those assignments was to work with Thelma 

Harms and Dick Clifford on a grant to train social workers 

in normal and atypical child development. Together we 

traveled around the state conducting several workshops. My 

job was to provide information on children with disabilities, 

while Thelma and Dick shared information on normal 

child development and appropriate environments for young 

children.

At first I focused primarily on my own talks. Having just 

finished my PhD at the University of Washington, I felt that I 

knew a lot about the topic but was nervous about talking to 

practitioners. Initially, I probably didn’t pay much attention 

to what Dick and Thelma were saying. But once I calmed 

down, I began to listen. 

T

heir message was simple but 

powerful—children don’t develop 

in a vacuum, but in the context 

of the environments in which their 

lives are lived. Having been trained 

as a behaviorist, this was not a new 

message to me. But my training in the 

disability world had focused almost 

entirely on direct instruction, the things 

that teachers do directly to teach children. Dick and Thelma 

showed me that both development and instruction occur 

in physical environments that shape development and set 

a tone for learning in ways that are not always obvious. In 

fact, I began to realize that the environment is a powerful 

tool that can be used to teach children, to promote social 

development and to help children feel comfortable, safe 

and happy.

I was also introduced to the idea that the quality of the 

early childhood environment could actually be measured. 

Through this I first learned about the Early Childhood 

Environment Rating Scale (ECERS). My behavioral training 

had taught me that measurement was central to any 

teaching, but it had focused mostly on ways to count what 

children did. The idea of using a rating scale to measure 

quality didn’t fit with what I had been taught, but the 

usefulness of this approach became quickly apparent. 

Sure, you could go in and count the number of toys in 

Don Bailey during his early years at FPG.

FPG Archives
fall 2003 | early developments 5

the room or measure square feet per child. But this kind 

of measurement misses much of what is important about 

environments for children. A rating scale, one that provides 

clear guidelines for differing levels of quality, in the hands 

of a trained and knowledgeable observer could capture 

quality in a way that mere counting could not.

I began to think about preschool environments for 

children with disabilities, the environments in which I had 

taught, had supervised student teachers and conducted 

research. As I reflected on those environments and listened 

to what Thelma and Dick were saying, I realized that much 

of it was foreign to early childhood special educators. 

This was at a time when most children with disabilities 

were in self-contained programs with other children with 

disabilities, separated from the normal “mainstream” 

programs for other young children. Together we planned 

and implemented a study that became one of my first 

databased publications. We used the 

ECERS to rate the quality of 25 programs 

for preschoolers with disabilities 

and compared those ratings with 56 

classrooms for typically developing 

children in Missouri and North 

Carolina. The study confirmed our 

hypothesis. We found that preschool 

environments for young children 

with disabilities consistently received 

lower ratings of quality than did 

environments for typically developing 

children. In fact, often they were 

barren and sterile places that limited 

opportunities for learning and certainly 

did not help children feel safe, secure, 

or happy. This study helped us and the 

early childhood special education field 

realize that high-quality environments 

are important for all children. Since 

then, much work has occurred to 

assure that environments for children 

with disabilities are developmentally 

appropriate.

My story could be told over and over again by 

other researchers, policymakers and practitioners 

around the world, for whom the Early Childhood 

Environment Rating Scale and the ideas behind its 

development have shaped their thinking about quality and 

its meaning for children. The ECERS and the other scales 

that evolved from it now form the basis for many research 

studies as well as for program improvement initiatives. 

These studies have consistently documented the range 

of quality of care in the US and elsewhere, often showing 

that quality of care for young children 

is inadequate. Other studies have 

provided clear evidence that quality 

matters in the learning and social 

outcomes for children. Collectively, 

the scales have had a profound impact 

on how we think about care for young 

children.

This issue of Early Developments is 

devoted to the scales and to its authors. 

Through stories and interviews, 

you will learn how the scales were 

developed and see a few of the many 

examples of their influence. One lesson 

from this work, which now spans more 

than 20 years, is that a good tool can 

facilitate the work of many people, 

and its use can extend well beyond the 

place where it was first developed. And 

how about this for a slogan: Quality 

counts, so count quality! |ed|

The ECERS and 

the other scales 

that evolved from it 

now form the basis 

for many research 

studies as well 

as for program 

improvement 

initiatives.
6 early developments | fall 2003 

Ryann Donnelly

C

HOOSING A CHILD CARE CENTER is one of the most important decisions parents make for their 

young children. Not only is the child’s immediate well-being at stake, studies have shown 

that the quality of care children receive in a prekindergarten setting affects their outcomes 

in kindergarten and beyond. Too often, however, parents select child care centers based largely on 

matters of convenience (closeness to home or work, accommodating hours), appearance or the 

recommendations of friends. 

Over the past 25 years, FPG has developed a series of rating scales that provide a detailed 

assessment of the child care environment, including such factors as space and furnishings, personal 

care routines, language/reasoning activities and staff training and competency. Four states, including 

North Carolina, use these scales as the base for a rating system of licensed child care centers. North 

Carolina uses a star system, granting one to five stars based on the level of quality. A look at one 

family’s experience provides an example for how the rating system can facilitate the informed choice 

of a child care center.

a place for eliot

6 early developments | fall 2003
fall 2003 | early developments 7

Alison and Andy Duncan found in June 2001 that they 

would be having a baby. Typical of many young couples, 

they lead busy lives: Andy is a graduate student at Duke 

University and Alison is a graphic designer. Although they 

intended to start seeking out child care options during the 

summer, fall rolled around and they still had not visited 

centers.

Fortunately, Duke University maintained a web site 

that listed child care options in the area, including their 

rating according to North Carolina’s five-star system. A 

connecting web site explained what the star ratings meant. 

“We used the star system primarily as a means for 

deciding which centers to visit,” Alison says. “It helped 

us rule out many centers, because we made the unspoken 

decision to try to stick with centers of four stars or more.”

Andy and Alison contacted approximately eight child 

care centers by phone, and with the advice of friends with 

young children in child care, they narrowed their selection 

down to four. The couple visited each center, focusing on 

the infant rooms (they planned to put their son in child 

care at three months of age), but also visiting the toddler 

and preschool rooms.

“For older rooms, we mainly looked for structured 

activities, attentiveness of the teachers/caregivers and the 

comfort and complacency of the children,” Alison says. 

“Our attention to the infant rooms was much greater. I 

considered, ‘Does the room look and feel comfortable? 

What are the caregivers’ attitudes? How do they interact 

with the children? What is their experience? Are they not 

only experienced with baby care, but are they nice people? 

Are they OK with unannounced parent visits? Is the room 

clean? What steps do they take to prevent the passing of 

germs? Is the sleeping area safe and within sight of the 

teachers? Are the children safe and comfortable? What is 

the teacher-to-child ratio?’”

The Duncan’s were most impressed with the one fivestar center they visited, but that center did not have any 

open spaces. They chose a four-star center and have been 

happy with their decision.

“We found that the rating system matched up pretty 

well with what we observed in our site visits,” Andy says. 

“The center we chose has definitely stood up to its four-star 

rating. Eliot has been very happy there.”

Based on their experience, the Duncans strongly endorse 

the use of a rating system to help parents narrow down 

their search of child care options. Beyond that, they have 

several recommendations.

“Visit centers that you are interested in several times and 

at different times of day,” Alison says. “The first time we 

visited our child care center, it was early morning, and the 

children had just arrived. They hadn’t really had a chance 

to begin playing yet, so we didn’t see the child-to-child 

interaction and activities we wanted to see. The merits of 

this center brought us back for a second look, and this time 

we visited later in the day. What a difference! The older 

babies were playing with each other, toys were spread out, 

and some children were in a circle with the teacher.” 

“Second and third visits give you the opportunity to catch 

details you missed on your first trip,” Alison adds. “When 

you’ve narrowed down your choices, you can really fine 

tune what you’re looking for.”

Rating systems for child care centers are a new 

phenomenon in this country. While the public sees only 

the end product of the rating process, reflected in such 

tools as North Carolina’s five-star rating, the scales used to 

rate classrooms are the result of an impressive amount of 

research and development. In this issue we trace the history 

and development of the FPG rating scales and feature some 

of the ways information about program quality is being 

used today. |ed|

fall 2003 | early developments 7
8 early developments | fall 2003 

A Whole New 
fall 2003 | early developments 9

 Yardstick

T

hough they were initially designed to allow teachers, administrators and 

supervisors to better assess the quality of child care centers, ECERS (Early 

Childhood Environmental Rating Scale) and its companion scales have 

become valuable tools for research in the fi eld of early childhood care and 

education. ECERS has been used in at least half-a-dozen major studies here and 

abroad, as well as numerous small studies. Indeed, ECERS provides researchers 

with a means of measuring quality that didn’t exist before their creation.

Developing the Scales

Researchers have confi dence in ECERS as an assessment 

tool in large part because the scale itself was developed 

and continues to be refi ned through a combination of 

solid research and direct work with practitioners in the 

fi eld. The fi rst version of the scale was developed in the 

mid-1970s by FPG investigators Thelma Harms and Dick 

Clifford. The scale was based on a checklist of items 

for improving the quality of environments in early 

childhood classrooms that Harms had compiled during 

her nearly 20 years of teaching and observation (see A 

Giant in Her Field, page 12). 

Recognizing the need for more systematic and 

reliable ways of assessing program quality, Harms and 

Clifford developed a series of items based on Harms’ 

earlier checklist focusing more comprehensively on 

quality issues. They then asked a group of county 

child care coordinators from across North Carolina 

to test the items in actual child care settings. With 

the coordinators’ feedback, the FPG researchers made 

additions and modifi cations to the various items. 

Harms and Clifford then sent this modifi ed list to 

a number of nationally recognized early childhood 

experts, asking them to review it for relevance and 

importance. The scale was fi nalized and published 

as a fi eld-test edition by FPG in 1978.

Two years of fi eld testing followed, documenting 

the ability of trained observers to use the 

instrument reliably in typical early childhood 

settings. Harms and Clifford trained a team of 

students to use the scale and sent them out to 

assess a selected group of early childhood centers 

in North Carolina. Pairs of observers conducted 

assessments and compared the results to check 

for degree of conformity. Six weeks later, the same 

centers were assessed again to determine the 

stability of the measure of the environment.

Finally, Clifford and Harms solicited a team of 

independent experts to visit 30 early childhood 

programs in North Carolina and rate them according 

to the general aspects addressed in the rating scale. 

FPG researchers then rated those programs with the 

actual scale. The experts’ assessments compared 

well with the scale ratings of these programs. 

Satisfi ed with the reliability and validity of the 

measurement device, the authors published the fi rst 

version of ECERS (Teachers College Press) in 1980. 

 Don Trull
10 early developments | fall 2003 

ECERS divides the early childhood 

environment into seven areas or 

sub-scales: Space and Furnishings, 

Personal Care Routines, LanguageReasoning, Activities, Interaction, 

Program Structure, and Parents and 

Staff. Within these seven areas, 

specifi c items, such as availability of 

books and pictures, 

are scored according 

to their adequacy. 

Under each item, 

relevant indicators of 

quality (e.g., very few 

books accessible) are 

scored either yes or no. 

Assessors total their scores 

in each of these sub-scales 

to provide a numerical 

profi le of the early childhood 

environment.

ECERS has been designed 

such that it captures an accurate 

picture of the total classroom 

environment. “We are often asked if 

people can’t ‘fake it’ when they know 

we are coming,” Clifford says. “The 

answer is ‘no.’ They might be able to 

fake it for the fi rst 30–40 minutes, but 

the assessment takes 3–4 hours, during 

which time people inevitably resort to 

their normal way of doing things.”

Substantial revisions were made 

for the most current edition of ECERS, 

published in 1998 as ECERS-R with 

Debby Cryer as co-author. Separate 

versions of the scale designed 

specifi cally for infant-toddler settings 

(ITERS), family child care (FDCRS), and 

school-aged programs (SACERS) have 

been developed to provide similar 

means of assessing a wide variety of 

settings for young children. ITERS was 

co-authored with Debby Cryer, and 

SACERS with Ellen Vineberg Jacobs and 

Donna Romano.

Research with the Scales

Because ECERS has been so thoroughly 

researched and fi eld tested, professionals feel confi dent using it as 

an assessment tool for all manner of 

research. In 1993, FPG researchers 

used ECERS to rate the quality of child 

care centers in four states as part of 

the Cost-Quality-Outcomes Study. This 

study was conducted with colleagues 

at the University of Colorado at 

Denver, University of California at Los 

Angeles and Yale University. The study 

examined over 400 randomly selected 

early childhood centers in four states 

chosen to represent the diversity of 

child care provisions in the nation. 

“This study raised big questions 

about the quality of child care in the 

US, especially for children under age 

three,” Clifford says. 

“Nearly 40 percent of the infanttoddler classrooms we studied were of 

poor quality, potentially compromising 

children’s basic health and safety. 

Only 8 percent were good quality, 

what we would consider to be 

providing developmentally appropriate 

practices. While the quality was higher 

for preschoolers, it was not what 

we felt was needed for America’s 

youngest citizens. That study was 

reported in almost every major 

newspaper in the US and is still the 

most quoted study about child care in 

America.”

That study has spurred action on 

a variety of fronts. Many states have 

used the results to argue for more 

stringent regulation of early childhood 

programs. New approaches to licensing 

with differentiations based on ratings 

of quality have been developed 

because the tools existed to make such 

distinctions. Additional funding has 

been made available to help support 

the higher quality desired.

Staff. Within these seven areas, 

specific items, such as availability of 

books and pictures, 

are scored according 

to their adequacy. 

Under each item, 

relevant indicators of 

quality (e.g., very few 

books accessible) are 

scored either yes or no. 

Assessors total their scores 

in each of these sub-scales 

to provide a numerical 

profile of the early childhood 

environment.

ECERS has been designed
fall 2003 | early developments 11

To learn more

Cost, quality, and child outcomes in child care centers: Public report. Cost, Quality, and Child Outcomes Study Team. (1995). Denver, CO: Economics 

Department, University of Colorado–Denver.

CQO children go to school. (NCEDL Spotlights No. 11). National Center for Early Development & Learning. (1999, June). Chapel Hill: The University of 

North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, NCEDL. 

[www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/pages/spotlts.htm]

Quality of center child care and infant cognitive and language development. Burchinal, M. R., Roberts, J. E., Nabors, L. A., & Bryant, D. M. (1996). Child 

Development, 67, 606-620.

Quality in child care centers. National Center for Early Development & Learning. (1997, Summer). Early Childhood Research & Policy Briefs, (1)1. Chapel 

Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, NCEDL.

[www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/pages/prdcts.htm]

The relation of preschool child care quality to children’s cognitive and social developmental trajectories through second grade. Peisner-Feinberg, E. S., Burchinal, M. R., 

Clifford, R. M., Culkin, M., Howes, C., Kagan, S. L., & Yazejian, N. (2001). Child Development, 72(5), 1534-1553.

In 2003, FPG released the results of 

a long-term evaluation of the Smart 

Start Initiative in North Carolina. 

Smart Start is a highly acclaimed 

program aimed at making high quality 

early childhood services available to 

all children who need it. The newly 

released study shows that early 

childhood programs that are actively 

involved in Smart Start had higher 

quality than other programs, and 

that the programs with higher quality 

had a positive impact on children’s 

performance. 

“The fact that they were able to 

demonstrate this change is huge,” 

Clifford says. “It clearly demonstrates 

that if a state is willing to invest 

in raising quality on a large scale 

basis, it can indeed make significant 

improvements across the board.”

Ongoing research at FPG using the 

scales includes a Continuity of Care 

study, which is following the progress 

of very young children who have the 

same teacher for three years versus 

those who move to different teachers 

at least once a year. 

Clifford is the first to admit that 

ECERS is not the perfect assessment 

tool. “Research has not identified 

specific factors about the child care 

environment that are more important 

than others,” he says. “The factors 

are all intertwined, and it’s extremely 

difficult to tease out the effects of any 

one over another.”

Still, Clifford takes satisfaction in 

helping to produce a measurement 

device that simply did not exist 

beforehand. “Looking at the progress 

of society over time, the invention of 

new ways of measuring things has 

been hugely important,” he says. 

“In its own little way, ECERS has 

contributed by giving people who run 

child care and other early childhood 

programs a new tool to use in their 

work, a way to think differently about 

what they do.” |ed|
12 early developments | fall 2003

WHEN THELMA HARMS ENGAGES YOU IN CONVERSATION, the room 

comes alive. She exudes enthusiasm, voice breathless, eyes 

bright. When you speak, you get the feeling that she is paying 

close attention. Indeed, Harms has made a career of being a 

keen observer both of people and environments. Semi-retired from FPG

after 45 years of professional involvement in early childhood education, 

Harms has as many projects and commitments as ever.

Harms is known around the world for many accomplishments, but 

the one that stands out above all else is her lead authorship of the 

Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS), and its companion 

rating scales for infants and toddlers (ITERS), family day care (FDCERS), 

and school-age care (SACERS) environments. Employed as evaluative, 

research and training tools in every state in the Union and many foreign 

countries, these scales are changing the face of child care. They may 

not be the last word in defi ning quality, but they speak so loudly as to 

overshadow virtually every other tool.

A Giant 

in Her 

Field

Don Trull
The evolution of the scales and of Harms’ career in early childhood goes back 

to her days as a young mother raising two sons and a daughter in Berkeley, 

CA. Harms decided to take a hiatus from her job teaching English and German 

literature to stay home with her children. The delight she took in watching her 

children grow steered her in a new direction.

“Every child in the neighborhood played at our house,” Harms says. 

“Eventually, a neighbor asked me to take care of her two young school-aged 

sons. In effect, I became a family child care provider and found that I really liked 

it. When I went back to school, I wanted to do something that brought together 

my interests in psychology, teaching and children. I decided to pursue a master’s 

degree in Child Development at UC-Berkeley.”

As it happened, Harms landed in the mecca of early childhood research. The 

University of California at Berkeley is home to the Harold E. Jones Child Study 

Center, a multi-disciplinary research center with a preschool program similar in 

nature to FPG’s. While pursuing a master’s degree, Harms taught at the Berkeley 

Public Schools Parent Cooperative. There she was exposed to parents and 

children of all different racial and ethnic groups. She later became head teacher 

at the Jones Center while pursuing a doctorate. 

“I had 15 years of being questioned, challenged and prodded by bright, eager 

grad students from various disciplines who wanted to learn 

the best way to educate young children,” Harms says. 

“I realized my point of view was extremely eclectic. It 

combined intellectual and social development with freedom 

to experiment and create.”

In 1975, Harms was offered a position at FPG as Director of 

Curriculum Development, then a new initiative at the center. 

Harms and FPG researcher Richard M. Clifford decided to take 

the best of what was known through research and writing in 

the field and turn this into practical materials that could be 

used to improve the quality of care. 

“I was always interested in developing materials to be 

used in early childhood education,” Harms says. “At FPG, I 

was given free reign to see what was needed in the field. Jim 

Gallagher encouraged me to visit other programs in the US

practicing different approaches to curriculum development.”

During her first year at FPG, Harms traveled to community 

colleges all over North Carolina, explaining what she and 

others had learned about quality environments through 

both research and teaching. At one of her training sessions, 

a county child care coordinator told Harms she needed 

to provide some kind of written material that listed what 

should be done to improve quality at child care centers. 

Harms had a good idea of what to draw upon. 

“While teaching at Berkeley, I was very much interested in 

assessment,” Harms says. “At the end of each day, I and my 

graduate students would evaluate what we had seen, asking 

how different areas of the room and different materials 

were employed. I had developed and published a checklist 

of what I considered important for a quality learning 

environment. This proved to be the foundation of ECERS.” Harms came to UNC in 1975 as Director of Curriculum 

Development at FPG.

... my point of view 

was extremely 

eclectic. 

It combined 

intellectual and 

social development 

with freedom to 

experiment 

and create.

—Thelma Harms

photo courtesy of Thelma Harms
Since the release of ECERS, Harms has ridden a whirlwind of publishing, 

training and research and development projects related to the rating scales. 

From 1987 through 1990, Harms helped write and produce a 10-part Public 

Broadcasting television series called “Raising America’s Children.” Funded 

by the Smith-Richardson Foundation, the Xerox Corporation and the Janirve 

Foundation, in cooperation with the North Carolina Center for Public Television, 

this series was widely shown throughout the US and overseas. Other notable 

publications include the seven-volume Active Learning Series with lead author 

Debby Cryer, which have been widely used as a curriculum for 

infants through kindergarteners.

Harms has been a panelist or keynote speaker at more than 

200 state, national and international conferences on child 

care. She has led more than 100 training sessions on the use 

of the rating scales, both here and abroad. She has served as 

a consultant to non-profi t organizations, states, colleges, the 

military services and international ministries of health. 

The success of Harms’ work overseas testifi es both to 

her interest in and ability to work with people of different 

nationalities and to the widespread applicability of the rating 

scales. The scales have been translated into many languages, 

including Spanish, Swedish, Italian, French Canadian, Norwegian, 

Icelandic, Hungarian and Russian. In the mid-1980s, Harms and Clifford 

traveled to Germany to provide guest seminars on the use of the rating 

scales. Fluent in German, Harms later helped fi eld test the translation 

ECERS into that language. She visited German centers with child care 

professionals and helped them adapt the scale to a German context.

Today, ECERS-R is widely used in Germany, as are ITERS, FDCRS and SACERS. 

Professionals say Harms’ infl uence is affecting the way child care is viewed 

throughout the country. “There is now an increasing belief that quality in child 

care can be measured and enhanced in a planned way,” says Wolfgang Tietze, 

professor at the Institut fur Kleinkindpadagogik in Berlin. “The starting point for 

quality assessment was inspired by Thelma’s work.” 

Icelandic, Hungarian and Russian. In the mid-1980s, Harms and Clifford 

traveled to Germany to provide guest seminars on the use of the rating 

scales. Fluent in German, Harms later helped field test the translation 

of 

professionals and helped them adapt the scale to a German context.

Today, 

Professionals say Harms’ influence is affecting the way child care is viewed 

throughout the country. “There is now an increasing belief that quality in child 

Key Dates in 

Harms’ Career

1959

Named head teacher 

at Harold E. Jones 

Child Study Center 

at the University of 

California at Berkeley

1962

Instructor in 

Early Childhood 

Education, 

UC-Berkeley 

Extension Division

1975

Received PhD in 

Early Childhood 

Education from 

UC-Berkeley

Hired as Director 

of Curriculum 

Development at 

the FPG Child 

Development Center

1980

Publication of 

ECERS

(with 

Richard M. Clifford)

1988–1996

Publication of 

Active Learning 

Series, curriculum 

for infants through 

kindergartners 

(with Debby Cryer)

1989

Publication of 

FDCERS

(with 

Richard M. Clifford)
Cathy Sylva, professor at the University of Oxford, sees similar effects in 

England from Harms’ work. “Thelma has made a substantial contribution 

to research in the United Kingdom on early childhood education and 

care,’ Sylva says. “Many of us have used ECERS for studying quality across 

a range of British settings. She has shared her experiences with us from 

countries around the world and asked us the kinds of searching questions 

that have enabled us to improve our own work.”

Most recently, Harms has served as Co-Principal Investigator with 

FPG’s Lynette Aytch of the Quality Care for Children Initiative 

(QCCI) in Washington, DC. Funded by the District of Columbia 

Offi ce of Early Childhood Education, QCCI is training a team of 

local professionals to provide on-site consultation and technical 

assistance to child care providers throughout the District, using 

rating scale assessments as a basis for program improvement. 

Now in its third phase, the initiative has led to an explosion of 

national accreditation of child care centers in DC, from only 7 in 

2000 to 63 in 2003.

Barbara Ferguson Kamara is Executive Director of the Offi ce 

of Early Childhood Development and Harms’ lifelong friend 

and colleague. Kamara is especially complimentary about Harms’ ability to 

convince people from different racial and socio/economic backgrounds of the 

value of the rating scales. 

“Thelma came into communities of color without fear,” Kamara says. “If she 

faced criticism, she’d say, ‘Let’s sit down and talk about it.’

“Thelma has been a giant in the fi eld in terms of giving people a way to 

assess how they’re doing in creating learning environments for young people,” 

Kamara says. “She has never strayed from that path.”

Don Bailey echoes Kamara’s thoughts. “Thelma is one of those rare 

individuals who truly has made a difference in the lives of literally thousands of 

children, families and professionals,” Bailey says. “Her work has always been 

driven by a single goal—to assure a high quality early childhood experience 

for every child. The scales that she and her colleagues have developed are 

recognized around the world for their importance, and their impact on research 

and services will continue to be felt for years to come.” |ed|

fall 2003 | early developments 15

1990

Release of public 

television series 

“Raising America’s 

Children”

(with Debby Cryer)

Publication of ITERS

(with Debby Cryer & 

Richard M. Clifford)

1996

Publication of 

SACERS 

(with Ellen Jacobs & 

Donna White)

1998

Publication of 

ECERS-R 

(with 

Richard M. Clifford & 

Debby Cryer)

1999

Principal Investigator, 

Quality Care for 

Children Initiative

2002

Publication of 

Spanish translation 

of ECERS-R

2003

Publication of 

ITERS-R

(with Debby Cryer &

Richard M. Clifford)
16 early developments | fall 2003 

A Star 

Performer

A

LONG WITH THEIR APPLICATIONS for research and 

training, FPG’s environment rating scales 

(ECERS, ITERS, FDCRS and SACERS) are being 

 used widely to support the improvements of 

 quality in early care and education across 

 the country. 

In 1997, North Carolina passed legislation requiring 

all early care and education teachers including family 

child care homes as well as centers, to be licensed by the 

state. To encourage higher quality and to help the public 

differentiate between providers of varying quality, the state 

decided in 1999 to offer a Five-Star Rating System. This 

system is based on the environment rating scales and other 

quality criteria, such as ensuring higher levels of teacher 

education and fewer children per teacher. Centers that meet 

the minimum state requirements are given a one-star rating. 

Applying for more than a one-star rating is not required; 

however, doing so can give programs a competitive 

advantage over other centers. For example, high star ratings 

can enable centers to receive higher subsidies for providing 

early care and education to children from economically 

disadvantaged families. 

Centers applying for higher numbers of stars are visited 

by assessors from the North Carolina Rated License 

Project, funded by the NC Division of Child Development 

and coordinated by The University of North Carolina at 

Greensboro. Using the rating scales, assessors conduct an 

extensive evaluation of what children experience in the 

classrooms. These assessors were initially trained in the 

use of the rating scales by FPG staff, who conduct regular 

follow-up checks to verify the assessors’ reliability.

“It’s very important to us and to the state that the 

assessors continue to do their work in a reliable way,” says 

Cathy Riley, trainer in the Rated License Project. “We want 

to avoid the situation where one assessor awards a certain 

number of points and another gives a widely different 

score. Our follow-up checks help take the subjectivity out of 

the process and ensure a degree of fairness and uniformity.”

Janice Fain is program manager with the NC Division of 

Child Development. Asked why the state chose FPG’s scales 

to back up its rating system, Fain says, “They [the scales] 

are nationally recognized and based on solid research.”

Fain says the star system has served as a motivation for 

centers across the state to improve their services. “We’ve 

seen a big increase in three- to five-star programs in the 
fall 2003 | early developments 17

To Learn More

Child Care Licensing. (NCEDL Spotlights No. 36). National Center for Early 

Development & Learning. (2002, April). Chapel Hill: The University of 

North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, NCEDL. 

[www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/pages/prdcts.htm#SpotlightAnchor.]

Regulation of child care. National Center for Early Development & Learning. 

(2002, Winter). Early Childhood Research & Policy Briefs, (2)1. Chapel 

Hill: The University of North Carolina, FPG Child Development Institute, 

NCEDL. 

[www.fpg.unc.edu/~ncedl/pages/prdcts.htm#BriefsAnchor]

Parents as child care consumers. Cryer, D., & Burchinal, M. (1997). Early 

Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 35-58.

Debby Cryer, during her tenure as Director of the FPG Family & Child 

Care Program.

years we’ve been running the program,” she says. “These 

centers chose to upgrade in order to get those stars.” 

Parents clearly benefit from having a rating system as a 

guide (see page 6), and for reasons other than one might 

predict. Debby Cryer, FPG investigator and coauthor of 

the rating scales, has found that parents almost always 

significantly overestimate the quality of their child’s day 

care. As part of the Cost-Quality-Outcomes Study conducted 

in 1993, thousands of parents were asked to assess 

the quality of their children’s early childhood settings, 

considering the same aspects of care that are evaluated 

in the environment rating scales. Trained assessors then 

compared the parents’ findings to an assessment using the 

scales. Researchers found that parents tended to rate the 

quality of services far higher than the assessors did using 

the rating scales. 

“Part of the reason for this discrepancy is that parents 

naturally want to believe that they are providing their 

children with the best care,” Cryer says. 

“But parents aren’t there to see what goes on during the 

course of the day. Further, parents may not understand 

what is needed to maintain a high-quality group care 

environment. For example, a parent may not wash their 

hands after changing their own baby’s diaper at home. 

That’s not as big of a problem when you’re dealing with 

just one child. But if child care providers fail to wash their 

hands after changing diapers, they can quickly spread 

disease into many families and the greater community.”

“The effects of child care are largely imperceptible to 

parents,” Cryer says. “That’s why the stars system was 

developed.”

Three other states, Oklahoma, Kentucky and Tennessee, 

now have rated licenses based on the scales. Arkansas is 

using the scales as a basis for granting special recognition 

to high-quality early care and education centers, and the 

cities of Las Vegas and Salt Lake are pressing for regulations 

using the scales as the basis for evaluating quality. The 

scales are performing a starring role in promoting better 

early childhood environments for young children across 

the country. |ed|

fall 2003 | early developments 17

Don Trull
18 early developments | fall 2003 

POKE AROUND THE HALLS OF THE FPG CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE these days 

and you might see a lot of empty offices. This is not because staff have been 

laid off or are on vacation. More than likely, they are out doing some kind of 

training or technical assistance, often related to the use of the environment rating scales 

). Asked how many people FPG has trained in the last 20 

years, Debby Cryer laughs. “Thousands,” she says, “a nd the demand keeps growing all 

the time. One of our goals for the coming year is to train other people to take 

on the role of trainers. It’s more than we can keep up with.”

Currently, FPG’s rating scales are being used for 

training and technical assistance in every state and at 

least half-a-dozen countries. Cryer cites two reasons for the scales’ 

popularity as training tools. “First, research has validated their ability to 

determine what helps children do well in school,” she says. “Second, the 

formatting of the scales shows how to improve quality for each item. The 

scales are very systematic about showing you where you are and where 

you need to go. They provide a roadmap for change.”

Training and technical assistance using the scales is currently provided 

through various programs at FPG. Each year, FPG offers short courses 

(generally three days) and a weeklong institute that provide a basic 

introduction in the use of the scales. These are held approximately four times a year 

and offered to early childhood center directors, state licensing offi cials, researchers and others.

“At fi rst, most of the people who came were from North Carolina,” Cryer says. “Now, they are from 

all over the country and abroad. We’ve got a long list of people waiting to attend.”

Training to encourage accurate use of the scales is just the beginning of moving towards quality 

improvement. Once people know how to administer the scales accurately, they can employ the scales 

to pinpoint exactly where classroom improvements are most needed and focus technical assistance 

specifi cally on those areas. 

“The scales take much of the guesswork out of targeting technical assistance, and allow people to 

make the changes most needed to impact the positive development of children,” Cryer says.

To make the necessary improvements, a systematic approach is required to guide staff in their 

quality enhancement efforts. FPG’s Partnership for Inclusion (PFI) exemplifi es one technical 

assistance model employing the rating scales. Through grants provided by the NC Department 

of Health and Human Services and the NC Department of Public Instruction, PFI offers early childhood 

teachers free consultations on how to upgrade their programs and then works with them to achieve 

those goals. PFI focuses most of their attention, however, on preparing early childhood professionals 

ROADMAPS

to QUALITY

and you might see a lot of empty offices. This is not because staff have been 

Training and technical assistance using the scales is currently provided 

through various programs at 

(generally three days) and a weeklong institute that provide a basic 

Pand you might see a lot of empty offices. This is not because staff have been laid off or are on vacation. More than likely, they are out doing some kind of 

training or technical assistance, often related to the use of the environment rating scales 

). Asked how many people 

years, Debby Cryer laughs. “Thousands,” she says, “a nd the demand keeps growing all 

the time. One of our goals for the coming year is to train other people to take 

on the role of trainers. It’s more than we can keep up with.”

training and technical assistance in every state and at 

least half-a-dozen countries. Cryer cites two reasons for the scales’ 

popularity as training tools. “First, research has validated their ability to 

determine what helps children do well in school,” she says. “Second, the 

formatting of the scales shows how to improve quality for each item. The 

scales are very systematic about showing you where you are and where 

you need to go. They provide a roadmap for change.”

Pand you might see a lot of empty offices. This is not because staff have been laid off or are on vacation. More than likely, they are out doing some kind of 

training or technical assistance, often related to the use of the environment rating scales 

(ECERS, ITERS, FDCRS, SACERS). Asked how many people 

years, Debby Cryer laughs. “Thousands,” she says, “a nd the demand keeps growing all 

the time. One of our goals for the coming year is to train other people to take 

on the role of trainers. It’s more than we can keep up with.”

training and technical assistance in every state and at 

least half-a-dozen countries. Cryer cites two reasons for the scales’ 

popularity as training tools. “First, research has validated their ability to 

determine what helps children do well in school,” she says. “Second, the 

formatting of the scales shows how to improve quality for each item. The 

scales are very systematic about showing you where you are and where 

you need to go. They provide a roadmap for change.”

Training and technical assistance using the scales is currently provided 

through various programs at 

Quality

Training

Collaboration

Consultation

18 early developments | fall 2003
fall 2003 | early developments 19

as consultants themselves. Through 

the project’s sessions, trainees learn an 

intensive mode of on-site collaborative 

consultation that has been proven time 

and again to increase program quality.

At the request of an early childhood 

teacher, PFI-trained consultants 

conduct an assessment of the 

classroom using the rating scales. At 

the same time, teachers and other 

classroom staff, often trained by these 

consultants, assess the classroom 

using their own copies of the rating 

scales. The consultants and consultees 

compare their findings, and reach 

a consensus on the areas needing 

change. Over the next 6 to 10 months, 

the consultant makes repeated visits 

to the center to help in whatever 

way desired, such as rearranging 

the classroom, providing additional 

training, or referring the consultee to 

relevant resources. 

“We’ve come to realize that if 

you want sustained and meaningful 

change in early childhood environments, you’ve got to involve the 

consultee in calling the shots,” says 

Pat Wesley, director of PFI. “The rating 

scales are used as a springboard 

for change, but the emphasis is on 

collaboration.”

To date, PFI has trained more than 

900 consultants in this on-site model 

and has worked with at least that 

many early childhood teachers.

Asimilar collaborative 

approach is employed in the 

Quality Care for Children 

Initiative (QCCI), sponsored by FPG, 

the District of Columbia’s Office 

of Early Childhood Development 

(OECD) and the University of the 

District of Columbia. Washington, 

DC has a large population of children 

considered at-risk for school failure, 

many of whom live in non-English 

speaking households. Faced with 

these challenges, the sponsors 

have launched QCCI with the goal 

of building the capacity within the 

District to improve and sustain quality 

care and education services.

“Our main strategy to achieve this 

goal is to train a group of local early 

care and education professionals—

the QCCI Leadership Corps,” says 

Barbara Ferguson Kamara, director 

of OECD. “Using the rating scales 

as the foundation for assessment, 

these professionals provide on-site 

consultation and technical assistance 

to child care providers to improve 

the quality of care and education 

environments throughout the District.”

Each person in the Leadership Corps 

is assigned one center to contact each 

week with the goal of developing a 

close partnership and identifying areas 

for improvement. Using the Infant/

Toddler Environmental Rating Scale

(ITERS), these consultants conduct 

an assessment of a classroom and 

then work with the center to make 

improvements over time. Now in 

its third phase, QCCI has 19 trained 

consultants working with 20 early 

childhood centers in the District.

“The beauty of this program is 

that it’s a true partnership rather 

than a hierarchy,” says Lynette 

Aytch, Co-Principal Investigator with 

Thelma Harms. “The Corp members 

themselves have their own centers 

rated by other consultants, so it is a 

mutual learning process.”

I

n North Carolina, The Duke 

Endowment funds a project that 

uses the scales as a major building 

block to improve the quality of child 

care. The project is establishing high 

quality early childhood programs in 

a select group of centers, which are 

designed to serve as models for the 

rest of the state. Cryer is heading a 

FPG project that provides technical 

assistance to these model centers, 

so they can reach and maintain the 

required high level of quality. The 

rating scales serve as the roadmap, 

showing staff where improvement is 

needed and what steps need to be 

taken to get there. Once the model 

centers are up to speed, the staff then 

offer similar technical assistance to 

other programs in the area to meet the 

higher quality standards. 

“People in the model centers learn 

the key ingredients to quality early 

care and education, but that is not the 

end of the effort,” Cryer says. “They 

pass their knowledge on to other child 

care practitioners, creating a multiplier 

effect.” |ed|

To learn more

Early intervention consultants in the classroom: 

Simple steps for building strong collaboration. 

Wesley, P. (2002). Young Children, 57(4), 

30-34. 

Improving quality in early childhood environments 

through on-site consultation. Palsha, S., & Wesley, 

P. (1998). Topics in Early Childhood Special 

Education, 18(4), 243-253.

Pat Wesley, Project Director

pat_wesley@unc.edu

919.966.7532

www.fpg.unc.edu/~pfi/

quality care for children 

initiative

Lynette Aytch, Princial Investigator

aytch@mail.fpg.unc.edu

919.962.7377

Thelma Harms, Principal Investigator

harms@mail.fpg.unc.edu

919.962.7358

fall 2003 | early developments 19
20 early developments | fall 2003 

fpg recent 

publications

Infant/Toddler environment rating scale: Revised Edition.

Harms, T., Cryer, D. & Clifford, R.M. (2003). New 

York: Teachers College Press.

Interdisciplinary collaboration among early intervention 

faculty members. Mellin, A., & Winton, P. (2003). 

Journal of Early Intervention, 25(3), 173-188.

Resources within reason: Supporting infants and toddlers 

in intensive care units (ICUs) and their families. Catlett, 

C., Winton, P., & Mitchell, A. (2002). Young 

Exceptional Children, 6(2), 28.

Resources within reason: Very young children who are 

deaf or hard-of-hearing and their families. McNally, 

A., Catlett, C., & Winton, P. (2002). Young 

Exceptional Children, 6(1), 28.

Self-injurious behavior in young boys with fragile X 

syndrome. Symons, F. J., Clark, R. D., Hatton, D. 

D., Skinner, M., & Bailey, D.B. (2003). American 

Journal of Medical Genetics, 118A, 115-121.

Video observation training package for the Infant/Toddler 

environment rating scale—Revised edition. Harms, T., 

& Cryer, D. (2003). New York: Teachers College 

Press.

Assessing infants and preschoolers with special needs

(3rd Ed.). McLean, M., Wolery, M., & Bailey, D.B. 

(2003). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Child welfare and mental health initiatives. Kupersmidt, 

J., McCabe, L., & Bryant, D. (2003). In J. BrooksGunn, A. S. Fuligni, & L. Berlin (Eds.), Early child 

development in the 21st century: Profiles of 

current research initiatives (pp. 145-162). New 

York: Teachers College Press.

Communities of practice: Connecting what we know with 

what we do. Buysse, V., Sparkman, K., & Wesley, P. 

W. (2003). Exceptional Children, 69(3), 263-277.

Discovering fragile X syndrome: Family experiences and 

perceptions. Bailey, D.B., Skinner, D., & Sparkman, 

K. (2003). Pediatrics, 111, 407-416.

Early childhood education and care in the USA. Cryer, D., 

& Clifford, R.M. (Eds.). (2003). Baltimore: Paul H. 

Brookes Publishing Co.

Early childhood special education research: Testimony 

to the President’s Commission on Excellence in Special 

Education. Wolery, M., & Bailey, D.B. (2002). 

Journal of Early Intervention, 25, 88-107.

Group interventions and exercises for enhancing 

children’s communication, cooperation, and confidence.

DeRosier, M. E. (2002). Sarasota, FL: Professional 

Resources Press.

f

or more information 

about FPG publications, 

see the FPG web site at

www.fpg.unc.edu

or contact the 

FPG Publications Office 

at 919•966•4221 or 

pubs@mail.fpg.unc.edu

20 early developments | fall 2003
fall 2003 | early developments 21

settings, family settings and student performance from 

prekindergarten to kindergarten. 

An important part of NCEDL’s study design includes ongoing dissemination of information among the participating 

states, as well as feedback from those states on further 

interpretation and refinement of the data. With the 

first year of data gathering complete, the April meeting 

provided a forum for the release of preliminary findings. 

Representatives of nine states attended the meeting, 6 of 

those from participating states and 3 from a larger group of 

10 states that serve as an advisory group. 

The meeting included presentations of preliminary data 

on teacher and child characteristics, classroom quality, 

classroom practices, child outcomes and family data. 

Discussion sessions were held on subtleties in the data and 

how those should be interpreted. For example, the study 

gathered data on whether or not child care instructors held 

state teaching credentials 

(asked as a “yes/no” 

question.) State officials 

pointed out that a “yes” 

response could have different implications, as some states 

require coursework in early childhood education as a 

condition of receiving teaching credentials and others do 

not.

“This kind of thing will lead to a reanalysis or 

reinterpretation of the data, as need be,” says Diane Early, 

assistant director of NCEDL. “This is the nature of data 

collection and analysis in a large, complex study.”

NCEDL 

 Meets with 

 State Representatives

THE PICTURE OF HOW PREKINDERGARTEN

PROGRAMS (state-funded educational 

programs for children prior to kindergarten 

entry) are faring among states that have 

invested significant resources in those 

initiatives came into sharper focus when 

state representatives met in Chapel Hill, NC, April 28 and 

29, 2003. The meeting was sponsored by the National 

Center for Early Development & Learning (NCEDL) as part 

of its groundbreaking multi-state study on prekindergarten. 

The study’s findings are eagerly awaited by states as they 

consider how much to invest and how best to invest in 

prekindergarten programs to improve children’s educational 

outcomes.

Under the collaborative leadership of researchers from 

FPG, the University of California at Los Angeles and the 

University of Virginia, the multi-state study has been 

gathering data from 

40 classrooms across 

6 states—California, 

Georgia, Illinois, 

Kentucky, New York and Ohio. The data includes detailed 

information about instructional practices, student 

performance in both prekindergarten and kindergarten and 

students’ home life with respect to socio-economic status, 

family educational practices and beliefs, and the nature and 

quality of home-school relationships. The study is the first 

to examine in detail the interrelationship among classroom 

ncedl

news

UNC UCLA UVA
22 early developments | fall 2003 

The meeting also served as a forum 

for participants to talk informally 

about the particular challenges of 

implementing the study in their states. 

Sharon Hawley, administrator with the 

Childhood Development Division in the 

California Department of Education, 

serves as a liaison between state 

officials, child care program operators 

and data gatherers in the field. 

“The real challenge has been to track 

kids from a pre-k to a kindergarten 

setting,” Hawley says. “After pre-k, 

these kids scatter out to all different 

schools. We had to get cooperation 

from the teachers and parents to follow 

these kids at each location. No state 

had a ready way to track these kids, so 

we had to improvise.”

Hawley compliments NCEDL project 

managers for their willingness and 

ability to work with each state to 

structure the study in a way that will 

help them provide the most valuable 

information and to accommodate the 

needs and desires of state and local 

officials. 

“I’ve really appreciated the contact 

that NCEDL has maintained throughout 

the process,” Hawley says. “They’ve helped us do things 

like write letters to the school districts explaining what the 

The real challenge 

has been to track kids 

from a pre-k to a 

kindergarten setting. 

—Sharon Hawley

study is about and the importance of 

being able to follow these kids.”

Bob Pianta, William Clay Parrish 

Professor at the University of Virginia, 

serves as one of the Principal 

Investigator for the study. He has been 

impressed with how well the regional 

coordinators have worked together and 

how smoothly the data collection has 

gone. 

“As researchers, we didn’t know 

whether this type of data collection was 

really possible,” Pianta says. “Here we 

are in Virginia trying to coordinate data 

collection in Ohio and New York. It’s 

actually worked quite well, thanks in 

large part to information technology. 

We get daily emails from our data 

collectors, so we can keep abreast of 

their work. ”

“In a lot of ways, this study has been 

a model for how you can do larger scale 

research across universities and have a 

high quality of data,” Pianta says. 

At this point, NCEDL has finished 

its kindergarten data collection 

and is preparing first grade teacher 

questionnaires to track children’s 

progress. NCEDL will be submitting 

findings to peer-reviewed journals, where colleagues in 

the field will have a chance to examine them. |ed|

To Learn More 

www.ncedl.org

Don Trull
fall 2003 | early developments 23

ncedlpublications

Child care program and teacher practices: Associations 

with quality and children’s experiences. Wishard, A., 

Shivers, E. M. Howes, C., & Ritchie, S. (2003). 

Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 75-103.

Exploring patterns in time children spend in a variety 

of child care activities: Associations with environmental 

quality, ethnicity, and gender. Tonyan, H. A., & Howes, 

C. (2003). Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 

18, 121-142.

Pathways to effective teaching. Howes, C., James, J., 

& Ritchie, S. (2003). Early Childhood Research 

Quarterly, 18, 104-120.

Preschool to kindergarten transition activities: Involvement 

and satisfaction of families and teachers. LaParo, K. L., 

Kraft-Sayre, M.E., & Pianta, R.C. (2003). Journal 

of Research in Childhood Education, 17(2).

Successful kindergarten transition: Your guide to 

connecting children, families, and schools. Pianta, R. C., 

& Kraft-Sayre, M. E. (2003). Baltimore: Paul H. 

Brookes Publishing Co.

Teacher-rated family involvement and children’s social and 

academic outcomes in kindergarten. Rimm-Kaufman, 

S. E., Pianta, R. C., Cox, M., & Bradley, R. 

(2003). Early Education and Development, 14(2), 

179–198.
ed

early developments

Non-Profi t Org

US Postage Paid

Permit 177

Chapel Hill, NC

ISSN 1536-4739

Visit us online

www.fpg.unc.edu

www.ncedl.org

FPG Child Development Institute

CB 8185, UNC-CH

Chapel Hill, NC 27599-8185

 Address Service Requested