• No results found

Measuring School Readiness:

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Measuring School Readiness:"

Copied!
36
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Measuring School Readiness

:

The Early Development

Instrument

Washington, DC, 17 February 2005

Magdalena Janus, Ph.D.

(2)

Early years matter:

(3)

Continuation of differences

Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15 Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15

Hypothetical growth trajectories

(4)

Target for interventions

Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15 Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15

Hypothetical growth trajectories

(5)

Target for interventions

Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15 Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15

Hypothetical growth trajectories

(6)

Target for interventions

Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15 Kindergarten Age 10 Age 15

Hypothetical growth trajectories

(7)

Readiness to learn concept

Children are born ready to learn:

the neurosystem is

pre-programmed to

develop various skills

and neuropathways,

depending on the

(8)

All children are born ready to

learn

‹

Early development: speed, plasticity,

non-linearity, vulnerability

‹

Children are active participants

‹

Interplay between genes and environment

‹

Importance of early interaction and

(9)

Readiness for school

Refers to the child’s ability to meet the task demands of school, such as:

 being comfortable exploring and asking questions,  listening to the teacher,

 playing and working with other children,  remembering and following rules.

In short, it is the ability to benefit from the

educational activities that are provided by the school.

(10)

Domains of school readiness

‹ Physical health and well-being ‹ Social competence

‹ Emotional maturity

‹ Language and cognitive development ‹ Communication skills and general

(11)

Early Development Instrument (EDI)

‹ Teacher-completed

‹ 104 questions grouped into the five

domains

‹ Indicators of special problems and special

skills

‹ Up to 10 questions about the child’s

(12)

Purposes of the EDI

‹

Report on populations of children in

different communities

‹

Monitor populations of children over

time

‹

Predict how children will do in

(13)

Physical Health and Well-being

SUBSCALES

‹

Physical readiness for school day

‹

Physical independence

(14)

Social Competence

SUBSCALES

‹

Overall social competence

‹

Responsibility and respect

‹

Approaches to learning

(15)

Emotional Maturity

SUBSCALES

‹

Pro-social behaviour and helping

behaviour

‹

Anxious and fearful behaviour

‹

Aggressive behaviour

(16)

Language and Cognitive Development

SUBSCALES

‹

Basic literacy

‹

Interest in literacy/numeracy and

memory

‹

Advanced literacy

(17)

Communication Skills and General

Knowledge

(No subscales)

Ability to clearly communicate one’s own

needs and understand others

‹

Clear articulation

‹

Active participation in story-telling (not

necessarily with good grammar and syntax)

‹

Interest in general knowledge about the

(18)

‹

Concept of health

‹

Population level indicator

‹

Usefulness

Can school readiness serve as an

indicator of children’s health in a

(19)

Population-level indicator

‹ Data collected from the whole

population, or a representative sample

‹ Method relevant to the

issue(s) in question

‹ Feasibility and ease of use

(timing, respondents)

‹ Suitable for policy

recommendations

‹ YES

‹ YES

‹ YES

(20)

Some Canadian data on the EDI

‹

Children who score low in

one or more

of the five domains of the EDI

‹

“Low” - in the lowest 10 percent of the

population within their site

‹

Specific for domain

‹

Specific for site

(21)

Readiness to Learn at School by

Family Income (N=1799)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

very poor poor not poor well-off % not ready

Source: NLSCY/UEY 1999/2000; EDI 1999/2000

32.8

28.9

23.3

17.3

(22)

Number of children “Not ready”

0 50 100 150 200

very poor poor not poor well-off N of children

Source: NLSCY/UEY 1999/2000; EDI 1999/2000

104

59

45

(23)

School readiness and Grade 3 by

neighbourhood affluence

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Lowest 20% 21-40% 41-60% 61-80% Above 80% Neighbourhood Affluence Mean % vulnerable in kgtn Reading Writing Math
(24)

School readiness and

neighbourhood affluence

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Lowest 25% 25-50% 51-75% Over75% Neighbourhood Affluence Community 1 Community 2 % % vulnerable in kindergarten
(25)

Contribution of EDI and SES to Grade 3 scores

Neighbourhood level

EDI SES variables

Reading 8%* 10%*

Writing 7%* 8%*

Math 5% 12%*

(26)

EDI and breastfeeding: neighbourhood

‹ 21 Neighbourhoods in a Southern Ontario

community

‹ Data: % Low Birth Weights; % mothers

breastfeeding at discharge from hospital; % Low on the EDI

‹ Correlations:

% Low EDI with % breastfeeding: -0.60 % Low BW with % breastfeeding: -0.54

(27)

EDI and birth weights - individual

‹ Birth weight: Low and Normal

‹ Timing of birth: Early and Normal

‹ Normal BW, Normal TB least likely to

have low EDI scores

‹ Low BW, Early TB and Low BW, Normal

(28)

Can the EDI be adapted?

‹ Used in three other countries with minimal

changes

‹ Subscale identification allows for valid

shortening

‹ Some room for adjusting items to ensure

(29)

Steps leading to the brief EDI

‹ Selection of 3 items per subscales: 3 with

highest loadings in the normative sample

‹ Reliability of thus shortened scales in

comparison with original EDI

‹ Used the same 3 items for checking

“short/long” reliability with Australian and US samples

(30)

Tasks required

‹ Testing short form (can be done as a pilot

work)

‹ Local expert validation of the items selected

for short EDI - local educators, academics

(31)
(32)

Reliability results - 1

‹ Operational definition of “not ready”:

within lowest 10th percentile on 1 or more scales

‹ Overlap of populations scoring as ready or

not ready:

‹ Ready: 92.9% (89.4% if 2 items) ‹ Not ready: 92.3% (93.7% if 2 items)

(33)

Reliability results - 2

‹ More stringent operational definition of

“not ready”: within lowest 10th percentile on 2 or more scales

‹ Overlap of populations scoring as ready or

not ready:

‹ Ready: 88.6% (89.0% if 2 items) ‹ Not ready: 97.3% (96.0% if 2 items)

(34)

Reliability results - 3

‹ Multiple Challenge Index: a child scoring

below a specified level on at least 9 of 16 subscales (based on the original EDI)

‹ 100% of children with MCI fall in the

lowest 10th percentile on 1 or more scales

‹ 98.9% of children with MCI fall in the

(35)

Validity results - 4

‹ Association with other tests

Correlations with PPVT:

EDI short EDI Lang-Cognitive .344 .311

(36)

Validity results - 5

‹ Physical Health and Well-being 0.54 0.53

with FS Motor score

‹ Social Competence 0.65 0.62 ‹ Emotional Maturity 0.73 0.70

with FS Socio-emotional score

‹ Language and Cognitive Development 0.58 0.56 ‹ Communication Skills and General 0.52 0.53

Knowledge

with FS Cognitive score

EDI Short EDI

N=68-94, all p<0.001

References

Related documents

Analysis of Micro-Morphology, Thermal Conductivity, Thermal Diffusivity and Specific Heat Capacity of Coconut Fibre Reinforced Foamed

Measured contact forces from the robot force sensor and from the external force sensor, the computed command force for the translational motor, and the instrument position during

• Master Patient Index (MPI) • Hospital EMR • Medical Group EHR • Health Information Exchange • MEDai • Data Warehouse • mySharp Evidence-Based Care Operational

Payment from the Health Plans to the Exchange – As Health Plans can in special circumstances process premiums directly (for APTC subsidized enrollees or enrollees who wish to

77 The Agency employs the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) to determine market concen- tration, calculated by determining the sum of the squares of the indi- vidual market shares

adhesion complex and the superficial epithelial cells maintain this barrier function by their cell membranes and intercellular tight junctions. To understand the epithelial

Using technology in inventory management will improve customer service and vendor partnerships, increase data integrity, and produce detailed performance

In the present study, ABC, VED and ABC-VED matrix analysis of the pharmacy store of PGIMER, Chandigarh (a 1,500 bed tertiary care teaching, research and referral health