Policies and National Regulations and Standards for Early Childhood Education
- karengoulandris
- Dec 10, 2020
- 5 min read
Updated: Sep 13, 2022
Ohio’s early childhood education system (before kindergarten age) is overseen by two entities, the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) and the Ohio Department of Jobs and Families and Services (ODJFS) (http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Early-Learning). For years, the two entities have strived to work together to combine to create one overarching agency, but this has been a slow process with each organization holding onto policies and procedures to remain independent of one another. This means that some preschools are licensed by ODE and others are licensed by ODJFS.
Any preschool that receives subsidy or funding from public dollars must participate in the state’s tiered quality rating system, which is called Step Up to Quality (SUTQ). Preschools located in public schools licensed by ODE receive public funds; therefore, they are mandated to participate in the quality rating systems. Preschools licensed by ODJFS and that serve families that participate in the state’s Publicly Funded Child Care (PFCC) program are also mandated to participate in the quality rating system. Families that participate in PFCC qualify if their income is 130 percent below the poverty level. Quality child care settings are needed for children from lower poverty levels but are less available in impoverished areas (Yazejian & Iruka, 2015). Centers that participate in quality rating systems with specific assurance procedures and technical support tend to continue their improvement over time or increase their rating level (Yazejian & Iruka, 2015). There are also privately run preschools that operate on tuition and fees only and do not utilize public dollars. These schools are not mandated to participate in Step Up to Quality but may choose to if they want. A study done by Jenkins et al., (2021) found that schools that are funded by multiple sources are more likely to participate in quality rating systems since one of the funding sources most likely will require participation. In order for schools to receive public dollars for operation, they must maintain a star rating of a three or higher. Schools rated with a two and below may not accept families that use subsidy to assist with child care options.
All schools licensed by the Ohio Department of Education must use the Early Learning Assessment (ELA) screening tool to determine where a child is in terms of kindergarten readiness and schools that participate in Step Up to Quality can fulfil the assessment requirements mandated by SUTQ by using the ELA. The assessment is available to all early childhood centers and schools in Ohio regardless of the licensing entity or participating in SUTQ. The basis for the ELA screening tool is the Ohio Early Learning and Development standards and covers academic and developmental areas including social and emotional development, physical development, math, science, language & literacy development as well as social studies and fine arts. The state offers professional development for individuals to learn how to administer and record data using the Early Learning Assessment screening tool. There are also resources for families to aid in understanding the purpose of the assessment tool.
The Early Learning Assessment tool is a screening to help educators understand a child’s level of understanding in the different academic and developmental domains. It is not meant to determine whether a child is ready or not for kindergarten but will guide teachers in understanding how to best support a child once the child enters the kindergarten classroom. For this assessment, children are observed in their natural classroom setting. Teachers use anecdotal notes to convey information to families and other professionals so that there is a joint investment in the child’s growth and development. The ELA does not require children to receive or answer questions. The data on the child’s abilities is gathered through the course of the child’s day and through purposefully planned play experiences.
Ohio’s plans for early childhood education in theory, align with NAEYC’s Principles of Child Development and Implications that Inform Practices (NAEYC, 2020). In the second principle, NAEYC describes the developmental domains that early childhood educators are responsible for nurturing, which include physical, cognitive, social, emotional, and language development. Ohio breaks down cognitive development into the academic disciplines of math, science, social studies, and language and literacy but they all involve cognition. NAEYC also supports the idea of children learning through play experiences from birth through age 8. Ohio’s Early Learning Assessment states that children’s abilities should be observed through everyday activities and on an on-going basis. The observations should be used to plan additional experiences to support the children’s ongoing growth and development. NAEYC describes in its third principle that a balance of child-directed play experiences along with direct instruction are beneficial to the child’s growth and development. NAEYC’s seventh principle describes learning in an integrated fashion but the way the Ohio Department of Education separates cognitive learning into academic areas such as math, science, social studies, and language and literacy seems to promote teaching these concepts in silos rather than an integrated curriculum. NAEYC highlighted in its position statement on assessment (NAEYC, 2003) that there are not enough early childhood educators that are trained to implement effective curriculum to appropriate assess young children. This is an area that I would suggest improving. Pre-service teachers should learn more about how to implement a constructivist curriculum or the project approach, which incorporates a variety of academic areas and supports development in multiple domains.
The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS, 2012), addresses children’s learning and assessment in Standard V. Standard V explains that teachers understand that children’s assessment should be ongoing and occur throughout the day. One difference between the NBPTS and NAEYC information is that the NBPTS also mentions summative assessments and that teachers should know the difference between summative and formative assessment and encourages teachers to use both. NAEYC focuses more on formative assessment to plan and embed challenges in play experiences. This is a second area that I would suggest for improvement. Early childhood educators should focus on formative assessments rather than summative assessments. Formative assessments indicate that learning is ongoing and continuous whereas a summative assessment indicates a final result.
Questions to continue discussion:
1. Why don’t more schools use a constructivist approach or project approach to learning?
2. Do you think administrators and principals should accept documentation in the form of photos, children’s dictation, and samples of children’s work as formative assessments?
3. How would you respond to a parent that asks if their child will be ready for kindergarten if all they do is play all day?
-Karen Goulandris
References
"Children playing puzzle" by MRiallant is licensed under CC BY 2.0
Jenkins, J. M., Duer, J. K., & Connors, M. (2021). Who participates in quality rating and
improvement systems? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 54, 219–227. https://doi-
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2020).
Developmentally appropriate practice. Retrieved from
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2003). Early childhood
curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation. Retrieved from
National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). (2012). Early childhood
generalist standards (3rd ed.). Retrieved from
Ohio Department of Education (ODE) (n.d.). Early Learning-Preschool. Retrieved from
Yazejian, N., & Iruka, I. U. (2015). Associations among tiered quality rating and
improvement system supports and quality improvement. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 30(Part B), 255–265. https://doi-
Comments