Comparison of Young Children’s Development by Child and Family Characteristics

transcript

slide 1

Tulsa County ResultsFebruary 2014

slide 2

BackgroundRisk to Ready encompasses the:

◦ Collection of data on Kindergarteners’ school readiness

◦ Sharing information in aggregate and by neighborhood with local leaders

Purpose:◦ To serve as a catalyst to mobilize and engage

local leaders around a data-driven and action-oriented process

◦ To help early childhood stakeholders assess how to better support school readiness

slide 3

BackgroundThis Risk to Ready initiative part of a

national initiative currently in its 4th year of implementation

slide 4

BackgroundData collected on all Kindergarteners in each

elementary school in Tulsa, Union and Sand Springs school districts◦ Occurred from Winter 2011 to Winter 2013

Summaries of findings focused on details by neighborhood at www.risktoready.org ◦ Also available for Kay County and SE Oklahoma This presentation – unlike the others - shows details by child and family characteristics and early childhood education dosage

slide 5

Measuring School ReadinessKindergartener school readiness is

measured using the Early Development Instrument (EDI)

The EDI was developed by researchers at McMaster University in Canada◦ Observational checklist with 103 core items◦ Completed by teachers between 3rd and 8th

month of school based on recall; takes about 10-15 minutes/student

Research supports that the EDI is a powerful predictor of later school success

slide 6

Overall Results

Category Definitions for Each Domain “At Risk”: scoring <=10th percentile of national 2009-10 sample “Very Ready”: scoring >=75th percentile

Communication

Language

Emotional

Social

Physical

0% 20%

At RiskSomewhat ReadyVery Ready

slide 7

Overall Results

Commun

icatio

20% 18%

14%16%

13%10%11% 11%

10%12% 11%

Tulsa County (5,250 children)National 2011-13 (75,310)

At Risk By Domain

slide 8

Domain Subdomains % Not

Nation

Physical health and well-being (13 items)

Gross and fine motor abilities (holding pencil, climbing stairs, manipulating objects, energy throughout day)

31% 30%

Physical independence (bathroom, hand preference) 17% 13%Readiness for day (dressed appropriately, on time, fed, not sick/tired)

12% 6%

Social competence (26 items)

Social competence (gets along/plays with other children, confidence)

15% 11%

Approaches to learning (listens, works independently, follows instruc.)

17% 13%

Respect and responsibility (follows rules, self control, tolerance)

14% 9%

Readiness to explore new things (curious about world) 3% 4%

Emotional maturity (30 items)

Helps others 32% 29%Not hyperactive or inattentive 24% 18%Not aggressive 18% 11%Not anxious or fearful 4% 3%

Language and cognitive development (26 items)

Basic literacy 9% 9%Advanced literacy 16% 14%Basic numeracy 13% 13%Interest in books, reading, math and able to remember things

19% 16%

Communication skills and general knowledge (8 items)

No subdomains. Domain covers ability to listen to a story in English, tell a story, play imaginatively, articulate words, understand on first try

slide 9

Overall ResultsWhen looking across domains for each

child◦ Two-thirds are not At Risk in any domain

0 1 2 3 4 50%

20%40%60%80% 66%

15% 9% 5% 3% 2%

At Risk

Number of Domains0 1 2 3 4 5

0%20%40%60%80%

42%20% 13% 11% 9% 5%

Very Ready

Number of Domains

slide 10

Overall ResultsPutting all the domains together, Tulsa

children are less school ready than children in other areas

Southeast OK (198)

Kay County (496)

National (75,310)

Tulsa County (5,250 Kinders)

0% 20%

Category Definitions Over All Domains◦ “At Risk”: Scoring “At Risk” on 2 or more domains◦ “Very Ready”: Scoring “Very Ready” on 4 or more domains

slide 11

By District

Sand Springs Public Schools (348)

Union Public Schools (1,082)

Tulsa Public Schools (3,820)

0% 50% 100%

Results vary by district within Tulsa County

slide 12

By National School Lunch Status

Paid (603 children)

Reduced (301 children)

Free (2,846 children)

0% 20%

Differences by income can be examined within Tulsa Public Schools only using data on children’s National School Lunch Program status

slide 13

By Race

American Indian (192)

Multiracial (350 children)

African American(1,122 children)

Hispanic (1,361 children)

White (2,013 children)

0% 50% 100%

slide 14

By Race and National School Lunch Status

Multiracial (39)

African American (61)

Hispanic (51)

Paid: White (417)

Multiracial (213)

Hispanic (927)

Free lunch: White (719)

0% 20%

The White-African American gap is narrowed when controlling for income (TPS data only)

Multiracial (278)

Hispanic (1,077)

White (1,278)

0% 50% 100%

slide 15

By Gender

Male (2,802 children)

Female (2,446 children)

0% 20%

slide 16

By Special Education

Child has IEP (398 children)

Child does not have IEP (4,811 children)

0% 50% 100%

slide 17

Teacher Believes Child has Special Need

Yes (898 children)

No (4,350 children)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%

slide 18

Parent Attended Conference

Yes (4,414 children)

No (832 children)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%

slide 19

Parent Volunteered

Yes (1,855 children)

No (3,392 children)

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100%

slide 20

4-Year Old Pre-K Enrollment

No Pre-K (2,113 children)

4-year old Pre-K (3,137)

0% 20%

4-year old Pre-K includes enrollment in the same district as Kindergarten enrollment and CAP Tulsa Pre-K

slide 21

Sand Springs: No Pre-K (148)

Sand Springs: Pre-K (200)

Union: No Pre-K (404)

Union: Pre-K (678)

Tulsa: No Pre-K (1,561)

Tulsa: Pre-K (2,259)

0% 50% 100%

slide 22

Pre-K by National School Lunch StatusTPS Only

Paid: No Pre-K (233)

Reduced: Pre-K (175)

Free lunch: No Pre-K (1,151)

0% 20%

21%17%

28%18%

20%23%

16%12%

slide 23

No Pre-KCommunication: Pre-K

No Pre-KLanguage: Pre-K

No Pre-KEmotional: Pre-K

No Pre-KSocial: Pre-K

No Pre-KPhysical: Pre-K

0% 20%

17%15%

16%12%

22%15%

30%35%

23%33%

24%28%

22%26%

23%29%

slide 24

By 3- and 4-Year Old Pre-K Enrollment

None known (2,018)

Pre-K as 4 only (2,590)

Pre-K as 3 and 4 (547)

0% 20%

3-year old Pre-K includes enrollment at CAP Tulsa and Rosa Parks ECEC

Children enrolled in 3-year old Pre-K are likely of lower income; this is offsetting the impact of Pre-K 3

slide 25

Pre-K by National School Lunch StatusTPS Only

Free: None known (1,080)

Free: Pre-K 4 only (1,339)

Free lunch: Pre-K 3 & 4 (356)

0% 50% 100%

slide 26

By Who Provided 4-Year Old Pre-K

Public School Pre-K 4 only (2,424)

CAP Pre-K 3 & school district Pre-K 4 (328)

CAP Pre-K 4 only (166)

CAP Pre-K 3 & 4 (219)

0% 50% 100%

CAP Tulsa attendees would have been enrolled as late as 2011-12

slide 27

CAP Pre-K 3; district Pre-K 4Communication: CAP Pre-K 3 & 4

CAP Pre-K 3; district Pre-K 4Language: CAP Pre-K 3 & 4

CAP Pre-K 3; district Pre-K 4Emotional: CAP Pre-K 3 & 4

CAP Pre-K 3; district Pre-K 4Social: CAP Pre-K 3 & 4

CAP Pre-K 3; district Pre-K 4Physical: CAP Pre-K 3 & 4

0% 50% 100%7%5%

22%14%

15%11%

15%15%

34%36%

35%26%

27%27%

25%25%

27%26%

slide 28

By CAP Tulsa Enrollment

CAP as 1, 2, 3, and 4 (17)

CAP as 2, 3, and 4 Only (38)

CAP Pre-K 3 & 4 Only (163)

CAP Pre-K 3 Only (423)

CAP Pre-K 4 Only (166)

0% 50% 100%

slide 29

By 4-Year Old Bracken Score

Bracken <=85 (42)

Bracken >85 & <100 (49)

Bracken >=100 (50 children)

0% 50% 100%

Bracken scores (available for children who attended CAP Tulsa as 4-year olds) are related to EDI scores

slide 31

Comparison of Young Children’s Development by Child and Family Characteristics

Documents