Pre-K Professional Development Evaluation
Georgia’sPre-K ProfessionalDevelopment Evaluation:Final ReportDecember 2014
Georgia’sPre-K ProfessionalDevelopment Evaluation:Final ReportDecember 2014Diane M. EarlyFrank Porter Graham Child Development InstituteUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillKelly L. MaxwellChild TrendsDebra Skinner, Syndee Kraus, Katie Hume, Yi PanFrank Porter Graham Child Development InstituteUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillSuggested citation: Early, D. M., Maxwell, K. L., Skinner, D., Kraus, S., Hume, K., & Pan, Y. (2014). Georgia’s Pre-K Professional Development Evaluation: Final report. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.This study was funded by Bright from the Start: Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning (DECAL). The opinions in this report do not necessarily reflect those of the funding agency.Acknowledgements: We are very grateful to the Georgia’s Pre-K consultants who provided the professional development supports to the teachers. We also wish to thank Dean Bragg, Patricia Cambron, Betty Carroll, Daphne Collins,Elizabeth Crofton, Natasha Griffin, Rashida Mathis, Tonantzin Mitre, Ann O’Mahoney, Jacqueline Schultz, Virgil Thomas,and Othondra Williams-Hicks, who worked so hard to collect these data, and Vicki Boggs, who provided administrative support. We are grateful for the help of FPG’s Data Management and Analysis Center, especially Elizabeth Gunn,Kirsten Kainz, Adam Mack, Jan Misenheimer, Angelia Baldwin, Joe Jungers, and Dawn Shafar. We appreciate thecooperation and support received from DECAL, especially Susan Adams, Assistant Commissioner for Pre-K; BentleyPonder, Director of Research and Evaluation; Pam Bojo, Director of Field Operations for Pre-K; Monica Warren, formerDirector of Georgia’s Pre-K, and Rob O’Callaghan, Research and Evaluation Specialist. We also wish to thank Amy M.Jacobs, Commissioner of Bright from the Start: Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning, and Bobby Cagle,former Commissioner of Bright from the Start: Georgia Department of Early Care and Learning for their support ofthis work. Special thanks to Tamara Halle, Richard Lambert, and Deborah Phillips for their very helpful feedback onan earlier draft of this report. We appreciate the work of August Aldebot-Green and Heather Ryan at Child Trends,in designing the final report. Most importantly, we are very appreciative of the teachers who welcomed us into theirprograms and classrooms to complete this work.The report is available at www.decal.ga.gov. A technical appendix that provides more details about the research methods and analyses is also available at www.decal.ga.gov.
Table of tive SummaryIntroductionProfessional Development ModelsPrimary Evaluation QuestionsKey Strengths of the ImplementationMethodStudy OverviewTeacher Selection and Random AssignmentParticipation in the Professional Development ActivitiesInformation CollectedSemi-Structured Interviews with MTP Coaches and MMCI InstructorsResultsDescriptive InformationDid MTP or MMCI Lead to Better Teacher-Child Interactions?Did MTP or MMCI Lead to High-Quality Interactions?Did Teachers’ Knowledge of Effective Teacher-Child Interactions Change?Did the Groups Vary in How They Viewed the Professional Development?Did MMCI or MTP Benefit Some Teachers More Than Others?How did MMCI Instructors and MTP Coaches View the Interventions?Discussion and ConclusionsStrengths of the Study DesignStudy LimitationsConclusionsReferences
Georgia’s Pre-K Professional Development Evaluation: Final ReportGeorgia’s Pre-K ProfessionalDevelopment EvaluationExecutive SummaryGeorgia has been at the forefrontof the pre-kindergarten movement since implementing its pre-kprogram in 1992 and creating thenation’s first state-funded universal pre-k program in 1995. Georgia’s Pre-K, administered by Bright from the Start: Georgia Departmentof Early Care and Learning (DECAL), aims to providehigh-quality preschool experiences to four-year-oldsto help prepare them for kindergarten. Past researchindicates that participation in state-funded pre-k islinked to higher academic and social skills in childrenwhen they enter school (Gormley, Gayer, Phillips, &Dawson, 2005), with higher quality programs linkedto greater gains (Howes et al., 2008). Thus, the qualityof classroom practices and teacher-child interactionsis critical to ensuring that pre-k provides maximumbenefits to children.This study evaluated the impact of two professionaldevelopment models—Making the Most of ClassroomInteractions and MyTeachingPartnerTM—onteacher-child interactions in Georgia’s Pre-K classrooms. At the start of each school year of this threeyear study (2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14), lead teachers (n 486 over the entire project) were randomly selectedto participate and randomly assigned to one of theprofessional development models or a control group.Because of this rigorous design, we can be confidentthat any differences between the groups at the end ofthe study were caused by the professional development activities and that the findings reflect the typeof change we would anticipate among Georgia’s Pre-Kteachers if these models were broadly implemented.Data collection included pre- and posttest classroomobservations and teacher questionnaires, as well ascoach/instructor questionnaires and administrativeinformation regarding participation in the professionaldevelopment activities.Professional Development ModelsThe two professional development models evaluated inthis study are designed to improve teacher-child interactions as measured by the Classroom AssessmentScoring SystemTM (CLASS). The CLASS focuses on threedomains of teacher-child interaction: Emotional Support,Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support. Thesupports for both models were delivered by Georgia’sPre-K consultants, as part of their regular job duties.Making the Most of Classroom Interactions (MMCI).MMCI is a face-to-face professional developmentmodel, in which a group of teachers meets regularly1with trained instructors to learn to identify and analyze effective interactions in classrooms and discussways to interact intentionally to increase children’slearning. Teachers have access to an online library ofvideo clips demonstrating best practice in variousaspects of teacher-child interactions, and completehomework assignments that involve watching specificvideos and practicing interactions in the classroom.For the current project, the 10 MMCI workshops weredelivered over five training days.MyTeachingPartnerTM(MTP). MTP is a one-to-one,remote coaching model that provides specific feedback to teachers about Emotional Support, Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support usinga standardized coaching cycle format. Additionally,teachers have access to an online library of video clipsdemonstrating best practice in various aspects ofteacher-child interactions.Primary Evaluation QuestionsThis evaluation was designed primarily to address twomajor questions:1. Were the interventions effective in improvingteacher-child interactions in pre-kindergartenclassrooms?2. How were the interventions perceived by Georgia’sPre-K consultants and teachers?In addition to these major questions, Georgia’s Pre-Kleaders were interested in examining whether theinterventions were more effective in certain circumstances, for certain kinds of teachers, or with certaintypes of consultants.Method 486 Georgia’s Pre-K lead teachers were randomlyselected to participate from counties being targetedfor support by Georgia’s Race to the Top (RT3) K-12grant.Selected teachers were randomly assigned to one ofthree groups: 175 to MMCI, 151 to MTP, 160 to control.CLASS observations and teacher questionnaireswere collected in the fall and spring.MMCI instructors and MTP coaches also completedquestionnaires and participated in semi-structuredinterviews.ResultsThe 10-session MMCI course, which used a cohort model to improve teacher-child interactions, was an effective means of increasing emotional and instructionalsupport in Georgia’s Pre-K classrooms. Further, teachers who took part in MMCI had greater knowledge ofeffective teacher-child interactions after participationthan did their peers in the MTP or control groups andthought their professional development was morevaluable than did their peers in the control group. Their
Georgia’s Pre-K Professional Development Evaluation: Final Report2Summary of Evaluation FindingsMMMCI vs. controlMTP vs. controlMMCI vs. MTPMMCI controlMTP controlNo differenceNo differenceNo differenceNo differenceInstructional SupportMMCI controlNo differenceNo differenceKnowledge ofEffective Teacher-Child InteractionsMMCI controlNo differenceMMCI MTPPerceived Value of the ProfessionalDevelopmentMMCI controlMTP controlNo differenceRelationship with the Coach/InstructorNot applicableNot applicableMTP MMCIEmotional SupportClassroomOrganizationrelationships with their instructors were positive, butsomewhat less positive than those reported by teachers participating in MTP. Interviews with MMCI instructors suggest that they had very positive experienceswith the model and felt it was a good fit for the state.Teacher-child interactions among teachers in theone-to-one MTP coaching group also showed someimprovement, but less than the MMCI teachers. Emotional Support increased as a result of participation inMTP; Classroom Organization, Instructional Support,and knowledge of effective teacher-child interactionsdid not. MTP teachers saw their professional development activities as more valuable than control-groupteachers, and MTP teachers reported more positiverelationships with their coach than did MMCI teachers.ConclusionsGeorgia’s Pre-K teachers benefited from and liked boththe MMCI and MTP interventions. This study soughtto test MMCI and MTP as possible ways to improveteacher-child interactions in real-world conditions,such as delivery of the intervention by program staffand randomly selecting teachers rather than askingfor volunteers. When compared to teachers in thecontrol group, MMCI resulted in improvements in twodomains; MTP resulted in improvements in one domain. Pre-k teachers rated both interventions morefavorably than did teachers in the control group.MMCI is a feasible intervention for large-scale adoption.MMCI requires fewer staff members and less time toimplement than MTP, which makes it more feasibleand sustainable for large-scale implementation. Georgia’s Pre-K consultants, who served as MTP coachesand MMCI instructors, also expressed their support ofthe relative feasibility of MMCI. MTP coaches reportedthat although they valued the MTP experience, statewide implementation was not achievable and that itscosts (in terms of time, money, and effort) were toogreat for the amount of benefit. MMCI, on the otherhand, was generally viewed by instructors as bothpracticable and beneficial for teachers.Additional research is needed to understand better thecircumstances under which MMCI and MTP are mostlikely to support meaningful improvements inteacher-child interactions. The findings from thisevaluation add to the literature about the MMCI andMTP interventions (e.g., Downer et al., 2009; Hamreet al., 2012) and provide some data about the factors(e.g., teacher education, ratios) that may influencethe effectiveness of the interventions. There are manyimportant questions still to answer about these interventions. For instance, is there a minimum, maximum,or ideal number of MTP cycles that yields the greatestchange in teacher practice? This study provides important information about the likely attainable dosagewithin a large-scale implementation, which was lessthan the dosage received when MTP was implemented by its developers (Pianta et al., 2014). We needadditional work, however, to understand the range ofsupports teachers and coaches need to ensure thatthe models are implemented in a way that providesmaximum benefit.Advancements in early childhood professionaldevelopment are still needed. Using these well-defined,evidence-based professional development models,some statistically significant findings emerged. Theimprovements, however, were small and instructionalsupport in all three groups remained in the low-tomiddle range. Thus, additional work is needed, including refinement of existing models and creation ofnew approaches to professional development, to bestsupport all pre-k teachers in engaging in high-qualityinteractions withtheir students.
Georgia’s Pre-K Professional Development Evaluation: Final ReportGeorgia’s Pre-K ProfessionalDevelopment EvaluationIntroductionGeorgia has been at the forefront of the pre-kindergartenmovement since implementing its pre-k program in 1992and creating the nation’s first state-funded universal pre-kprogram in 1995. Georgia’s Pre-K, administered by Brightfrom the Start: Georgia Department of Early Care andLearning (DECAL), aims to provide high-quality preschoolexperiences to four-year-olds to help prepare them forkindergarten. Past research indicates that participationin state-funded pre-k is linked to higher academic andsocial skills in children when they enter school (Gormley,Gayer, Phillips, & Dawson, 2005), with higher qualityprograms linked to greater gains (Howes et al., 2008).Thus, the quality of classroom practices and teacher-childinteractions is critical to ensuring that pre-k providesmaximum benefits to children.Georgia’s Pre-K is offered in all 159 counties acrossthe state and served over 81,000 four-year-olds inthe 2013-14 school year. The program is offered in avariety of settings, including private childcare, localschools, Head Start centers, military bases, technicalcolleges, and not-for-profit programs. All lead teachers are required to hold a minimum of a four-yeardegree in early education or a related field, and in2013-14 over 75% of the teachers were certified toteach early childhood education. Each classroom alsoemploys an assistant teacher who is required to haveat least a Child Development Associate (CDA) credential. A strength of Georgia’s Pre-K is its monitoring andtechnical assistance system. Each program is assigneda pre-k consultant, who ensures compliance with theprogram’s standards while also providing trainingand technical assistance. A recent evaluation concluded that participation in Georgia’s Pre-K programsignificantly improved children’s school readinessskills across a wide range of language, literacy, math,and general knowledge measures (Peisner-Feinberg,Schaaf, LaForett, Hildebrandt, & Sideris, 2014).For the past few years, DECAL has used theClassroom Assessment Scoring SystemTM (CLASS;Pianta, LaParo, & Hamre, 2008) to understand3better the instructional practices and teacher-childinteractions in its pre-k classrooms and to providea framework for its pre-k teachers’ professionaldevelopment. The CLASS is an observational toolfocused on the aspects of teacher-child interactionsthat are most closely aligned with children’s social,emotional, and academic outcomes. DECAL’s effortsregarding professional development for pre-k teacherswere greatly expanded in 2010, when Georgia wasawarded a 400 million federal Race to the Top (RT3)grant. The purpose of the RT3 grant was “to equip allGeorgia students, through effective teachers and leadersand through creating the right conditions in Georgia’sschools and classrooms, with the knowledge and skillsto empower them to (1) graduate from high school, (2)be successful in college and/or professional careers,and (3) be competitive with their peers throughout theUnited States and the world” (Georgia Department ofEducation, n.d.). To meet these goals, Georgia undertookseven initiatives. As part of the Improving Early LearningOutcomes initiative, DECAL received RT3 funds toprovide professional development based on the CLASSto a sample of pre-k teachers in selected counties inGeorgia. Existing Georgia’s Pre-K development funds alsosupported this work. The current project was designedto evaluate the effectiveness of two different professionaldevelopment models—both based on the CLASS—onimproving the quality of teacher-child interactions.Professional Development ModelsThe two professional development models evaluatedin this study were designed to improve teacher-childinteractions as measured by the CLASS. The two modelsand the CLASS observation tool were developed byresearchers at the University of Virginia. Those sameresearchers founded an organization called Teachstone totrain individuals on the use of the CLASS and to supportimplementation of the professional development models.For the current study, the two professional developmentmodels were delivered by pre-k consultants in Georgiawho were trained and supported by Teachstone.Making the Most of Classroom Interactions (MMCI).MMCI is a face-to-face professional developmentmodel, in which a group of teachers meets regularlywith trained instructors to learn to identify and analyze effective interactions in classrooms and discussways to interact intentionally to increase children’slearning. Enrolled teachers have access to print andweb-based resources aligned with the CLASS measure. Between in-person sessions, teachers completehomework assignments that involve watching specificvideos and practicing interactions in the classroom.MMCI consists of 10 two-and-a-half-hour workshops.Hamre and colleagues (2012) found that a similarcourse based on the CLASS was effective in improving teacher knowledge, Emotional Support, and Instructional Support as measured by the CLASS. In thisstudy, Georgia’s Pre-K consultants served as MMCI
Georgia’s Pre-K Professional Development Evaluation: Final Reportinstructors, with each MMCI cohort being team-taughtby a pair of Georgia’s Pre-K consultants. For the current project, the 10 sessions were delivered over fivetraining days, spread across five months.MyTeachingPartnerTM(MTP). MyTeachingPartner is aone-to-one, remote1 coaching model that providesspecific feedback to teachers about emotional climate, organizational structure, and instructionalsupport using a standardized coaching cycle format.During each cycle, the participating pre-k teachermakes a video recording of her or himself interacting with children in the classroom and sends it tothe coach, who then reviews the video and postsfeedback and questions about the interactions withchildren to Teachstone’s secure website for the teacher to review. The coach’s prompts provide detailedfeedback and help teachers observe their classroominteractions more closely. After the teacher respondsto the prompts, the teacher and coach have a oneto-one conference call to further discuss the teacher’s practice. The feedback and discussions focus onwhat the teacher is doing well and how the teachercould continue to develop in specific areas, using theCLASS as the framework for understanding elementsof interactions that support children’s developmentand learning. Shortly after the one-to-one conferencecall, the coach sends the teacher a brief summary ofthe main topics covered during the conference andthe action plan, detailing the mutually agreed uponplan for the next cycle. Additionally, teachers haveaccess to an online library of video clips demonstrating best practice in various aspects of teacher-childinteractions. Pianta and colleagues (2008) found thatteachers who took part in MTP showed more growthin teacher-child interactions than teachers whohad access to web-based materials only. Mashburn,Downer, Hamre, Justice, and Pianta (2010) found thatchildren in MTP classrooms made greater languageand literacy gains compared to children in comparisongroup classrooms. For this project, Georgia’s Pre-Kconsultants served as MTP coaches. A cycle requiresa minimum of two weeks to complete. Coaches andteachers were instructed to complete as many cyclesas possible during the year, and when possible thedata collection team waited until at least eight cycleshad been co
Georgia’s Pre-K Professional with trained instructors to learn to identify and ana Development Evaluation Executive Summary Georgia has been at the forefront of the pre-kindergarten move-ment since implementing its pre-k program in 1992 and creating the nation’s first state-funded univer-sal pre-k program in 1995.
3 www.understandquran.com ‡m wQwb‡q †bq, †K‡o †bq (ف ط خ) rُ sَ _ْ یَ hLbB َ 9 آُ Zviv P‡j, nv‡U (ي ش م) اْ \َ َ hLb .:اذَإِ AÜKvi nq (م ل ظ) َ9َmْ أَ Zviv uvovj اْ ُ Kَ hw ْ َ Pvb (ء ي ش) ءَ Cﺵَ mewKQy ءٍ ْdﺵَ bِّ آُ kw³kvjx, ¶gZvevb ٌ یْ"ِKَ i“Kz- 3
Pre-AP English 1. 8. About Pre-AP. Pre-AP Professional Learning. The summer before their first year teaching a Pre-AP course, teachers are required to . engage in professional learning offered by College Board. There are two options to meet this requirement: the Pre-AP Summer Institute (Pre-APSI) and the Online Foundational Module
POINT METHOD OF JOB EVALUATION -- 2 6 3 Bergmann, T. J., and Scarpello, V. G. (2001). Point schedule to method of job evaluation. In Compensation decision '. This is one making. New York, NY: Harcourt. f dollar . ' POINT METHOD OF JOB EVALUATION In the point method (also called point factor) of job evaluation, the organizationFile Size: 575KBPage Count: 12Explore further4 Different Types of Job Evaluation Methods - Workologyworkology.comPoint Method Job Evaluation Example Work - Chron.comwork.chron.comSAMPLE APPLICATION SCORING MATRIXwww.talent.wisc.eduSix Steps to Conducting a Job Analysis - OPM.govwww.opm.govJob Evaluation: Point Method - HR-Guidewww.hr-guide.comRecommended to you b
Section 2 Evaluation Essentials covers the nuts and bolts of 'how to do' evaluation including evaluation stages, evaluation questions, and a range of evaluation methods. Section 3 Evaluation Frameworks and Logic Models introduces logic models and how these form an integral part of the approach to planning and evaluation. It also
Change in Spherical Aberration - Flap then LASIK Pre-0D N 17 Pre-1D 16 Pre-1W 17 Pre-1M 17 Pre-2M 15 Pre-1DLSK 16 Pre-1WLSK 15 Pre-1MLSK 15 Z4 Microns of Aberration, or Z40 (µm) 0 6 mm pupil Condition 20min. PO 1D 1W 1M 2M 1DLSK 1WLSK 1MLSK-0.3-0.2-0.1 0 0.1 0.2 Ablation Flap Only 2 months "Positive" S. Aberration"
7. Effective professional development is strongly enhanced through collaborative learning and joint practice development. 8. Effective professional development is enhanced by creating professional learning communities within and between schools. 9. Effective professional development
Elements of a High-quality Professional Learning System The three interdependent elements of Connecticut's high-quality professional learning system are: 1) the Connecticut Standards for Professional Learning, 2) an effective Professional Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC), and 3) a comprehensive professional learning plan (Figure 1).
answer choices you are marking on your answer sheet.-4-GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE Language Arts – Reading Time — 25 minutes 19 Questions GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE -5-GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE A violent storm has threatened the first voyage of the ship Nan-Shan. This excerpt from a work of fiction portrays several crew members, including the first mate, Jukes, as they confront the storm. Jukes was as .
