Transcript Wisconsin Departments of Health and Family Services Public Instruction OSEP Child Outcomes

OSEP Child Outcomes
Wisconsin Departments of
Health and Family Services
Public Instruction
Albuquerque, New Mexico
April, 2006
Wisconsin Contacts
Department of
Public Instruction
Mary Peters
[email protected]
Department of
Health and Family Services
Susan Abbey
[email protected]
The full presentation (slides, speaker notes, and hand-outs) is available at:
www.collaboratingpartners.com
Long-term performance
OSEP
objective in OSEP’s plan … national
Part CAll infants and toddlers with disabilities receiving special
education and related services will improve their early
language/communication, social-emotional skills and use
of appropriate behaviors to meet their needs.
Part B/Section 619 All preschoolers with disabilities receiving special education
and related services will improve their early
language/communication, pre-reading, social-emotional
skills and use of appropriate behaviors to meet their
needs.
Other benefits
Wisconsin’s state system for children
•
•
•
•
•
Builds on existing practices
Emphasizes the same child outcome areas
Uses the same reporting worksheet
Uses a team process to share information
Emphasizes on-going assessment
Assessment Principles
for Wisconsin
1. Involve parent and primary care givers
2. Use reliable and valid methods that are strength
based and include observation in multiple
environments
3. Use developmental expectations that are culturally
and linguistically appropriate
Assessment Principles
for Wisconsin
4. Design assessment as an on-going
process that uses multiple sources
5. Add value for children, programs and
families through assessment
6. Develop consistent accountability
measures in local communities
Assessment Principles
for Wisconsin
7. Provide continual staff development and educational
experiences for staff
8. Enable all children to participate equally in a range of
services to meet their unique needs in this global
climate through adequate and equitable resources
DRAFT Wisconsin Early Childhood Collaborating
Partners, 2005
Considerations for Wisconsin …
What we need to address
Information relevant to
making decisions in each
of 3 outcome areas
Ability to compare child’s
functioning to age level
expectations
Emphasis on “child in
context” - authentic,
culturally valid
What we value
Wide variation in
assessments
Wide variation in where
and how information is
collected and used
Local variation based on
community needs and
resources
Options in developing the system for Wisconsin
Which assessments?
• Same assessment used
across state?
• Variety of assessments
possible, with summary
on common rubric?
• Link to other current
outcome and
assessment systems?
Decisions
• Build on current data systems
 Recognize wide variation in
assessments of different types, for
multiple purposes
 Add fewest additional layers
possible
• Base determinations about each child
on high quality information
• Base system in principles of good early
childhood assessment
Wisconsin Model Early Learning
Standards:
• Provide guidance for selecting/determining
appropriate curriculum and assessment
• Promote the use of the “Teaching Cycle” which
includes initial assessment, planning,
implementation and ongoing assessment
• Are aligned with the three OSEP Child
Outcomes
http//www.collaboratingpartners.com
The Teaching Cycle
Ongoing Assessment
Implementation
Planning &
Curriculum Goals
The Teaching Cycle
Considerations & Discussion Questions
Assessment
•How will I include ongoing observation
in the assessment process?
•How can I record data on children’s
progress?
•What are the multiple sources of
evidence that will inform me on
children’s development (i.e. family
report of progress)?
Planning
•How does the curriculum support the
developmental level and goals of the child?
•How does the environment support the
developmental level and goals of the child?
Implementation
•How are learning opportunities and activities
guided by supportive interactions and
relationships?
•How are the learning opportunities and
activities age appropriate, individually
appropriate, and culturally appropriate
Comparison
of OSEP
Child
Outcomes
and WMELS
Outcome 1: Positive social
relationships
II A. Emotional Development
A.EL.1 Expressing a wide range of
emotions in a variety of
settings
A.EL.2 Seeking adult interaction as
needed for emotional
support, physical assistance,
social interaction, and
approval
A.EL.3 Self-control
A.EL.4 Use of words to
communicate emotions
A.EL.5 Understanding and
responding to others
emotions
II B. Self-Concept
B.EL.1 Self esteem
B.EL.2 Self-direction in choices
and actions
B.EL.3 Self-awareness, including
abilities, characteristics, and
preferences
B.EL.4 Creative self-expression
B.EL.5 Willingness to make needs
known and to trust in others
B.EL.6 Views self as a
teacher/learner
Outcome 2: Knowledge and
skills
Outcome 3: Action to meet
needs
III. A. Listening and
Understanding
I A. Physical Health and Well
Being
A.EL.1 Deriving meaning from verbal
and nonverbal cues
A.EL.2 Listening with understanding
to stories, books, directions, and
conversations
A.EL.3 Following directions of
increasing complexity
A.EL.4 Listening and responding to
music and rhythm
A.EL.1 Self-care routines
A. EL. 2 Safety rules and directions
A.EL.3 Components of a healthy
lifestyle, including nutrition,
exercise, rest, and the role of
health-care providers
A. EL. 4 Use of multi-sensory
abilities to process information
II B. Speaking and
Communicating
B.EL.2 Using increasingly
complex and varied
vocabulary and language
structure
B.EL.3 Using speech
understandable to familiar
and unfamiliar listeners
I B. Motor Development
B.EL.1 Strength, control, balance,
coordination, locomotion and
endurance
B.EL.2 Hand-eye coordination,
strength, control, and object
manipulation
B.EL.3 Use of their senses to take in,
experience, integrate, and
regulate responses to their
environment
Critical challenge
To assess functioning in each of the
three outcome areas using
information from multiple sources and
strategies
What are Wisconsin’s tools and strategies?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
AEPS
High Scope Infant/Toddler and Preschool
Carolina
Creative Curriculum
New Portage Guide
Work Sampling System
Brigance (IED-II)
Battelle II
Early LAP
Hawaii Early Learning Profile (HELP)
Ounce Scale
(Wisconsin Model Early Learning Standards and ECO)
How do these assessments fit with
the three Child Outcome Areas?
ECO Center crosswalks……
• Assist states and programs in making decisions
about what instruments might be useful
• Indicate how well assessment data from a given
instrument provides information on achievement
for each child outcome
• Allow comparisons across instruments to see
their various strengths and weaknesses with
regard to the three child outcomes
Comparison
of OSEP
Child
Outcomes,
WMELS,
and Tools
EOC Outcome 1: Positive Social Relationships
WMELS
II A. Emotional
Development
Partial
A.EL.1 Expressing a
wide range of
emotions in a
variety of
settings
A.EL.2 Seeking adult
interaction as
needed for
emotional
support, physical
assistance, social
interaction, and
approval
A.EL.3 Self-control
A.EL.4 Use of words
to communicate
emotions
A.EL.5 Understanding
and responding
to others
emotions
text
Creative Curriculum
High Scope COR
New Portage Guide
Work Sampling
(from alignment)
*indicates in
ECO crosswalk
(from alignment on
WECCP)
*indicates in
ECO crosswalk
(Items from the 5-6
year age
range)
*indicates in ECO
crosswalk
Social/Emotional
Development Sense of Self:
II Social Relations
Social Emotional
Development
Relationships
I Personal &
Social
Development
E. Social problemsolving
2. Demonstrates
appropriate trust
in adults
*3. Recognizes
feelings and
manages
appropriately
4. Stands up for rights
Social/Emotional
Development –
Prosocial
Behavior
*11. Recognizes the
feelings of others
and responds
appropriately
*13. Uses thinking
skills to resolve
conflicts
Cognitive
E. Relating to adults
F. Relating to other
children
G. Resolving
interpersonal
conflict
H. Understanding and
expressing feelings
V Language and
Literacy
Q. Listening to and
understanding
speech
10. Negotiates
situations with
other children
with minimal
adult support
Sensory
Organization
Self Regulation
38. Changes activity
level to match
situation
Exploration/Appr
oaches to
Learning
Science
27. Solves problems
through active
exploration,
including trial
*Seeks adult help
when needed to
resolve
conflicts
I. Personal &
Social
Development
Interaction with
others
*Shows empathy and
caring for
others
ECO Child Summary
A way to “roll up” data for each of the 3 outcome areas
portfolio
assessment 1
parent report
assessment 2
ECO
rating
single
score
ECO Child Outcome Summary…
• IS a decision-making process
• IS way to reduce complex
information to a common scale,
using a rating process based on
available information
Use Multiple Measures/Sources
• Screening information
• Curriculum-based and norm-referenced
tools
• Parent/caregiver conversations and
interviews
• Recorded observations
• Anecdotal records, work samples, videos
Wisconsin - why we chose the ECO process…
• Compatible with recommended practices in early
childhood assessment (NAEYC, DEC)
– Focus on curriculum based assessment
– Uses multiple data sources, including observations or ratings by
parents and teachers, emphasizing functioning in everyday
routines and contexts - authentic assessment
– Existing data sources can be used as long as they include
technically adequate assessments and support the decisions to
be made
• Designed to meet state and federal requirements
for Annual Performance Report (APR)
Responsibilities of counties & districts…
 Set up a framework
• Establish structured team process - who, what, when
• Review available assessment information
• match to each of the required outcome areas
• enhance available information if needed
• Develop plan for reviewing information using Child Outcome
Summary, using team process, and entering information into
state system in accord with the established timeline
 Complete team rating that uses all information
on each child, to derive a rating (roll up the data)
 Report data to DHFS (Birth to 3) or DPI (3 to 5)
Summary ratings are based on…
Types of Evidence
• Curriculum-based
• Norm-referenced
• Developmental
screenings
• Observation and report
• Progress and issues
identified at IFSP/IEP
meetings
• Anecdotal notes about
performance in a variety
of settings
Sources of Evidence
• Parents and family
members
• Service providers
• Therapists
• Physicians
• Child care providers
• Teachers
• People familiar with the
child in all settings and
situations
What process will we use in Wisconsin?
TEAM PROCESS
The team …
represents information from those familiar
with the child in a variety of contexts
is comprised of parents and two or more of
the above who meet to complete the rating
scale
uses a systematic process for making
decisions
What supports the team process?
• knowledge of typical child development
• regular monitoring of child progress (e.g.,
curriculum-based assessments, portfolios)
• multiple sources of information
• a structure for coming to team consensus
– a clear team process
– a matrix of sources of information related
to required child outcome areas
To make it work for Wisconsin …
 Provide guidance for gathering assessment
information
 Provide guidance for summarizing child outcome
areas and indicators
 Set state timelines and guidance for local timelines
 Provide technical assistance to districts and counties
 Continue to refine the reporting system
 Collect, summarize and report all summary data to
OSEP
 Analyze data
 Make data available to the public