Ecers R Rating Measuresanecdotal1 There Are A Variety Of Materials F ✓ Solved
ECERS-R Rating Measures Anecdotal 1. There are a variety of materials for the children to use in play and talk about. CLASS Rating Measures Anecdotal 1. Frequent conservations - The teacher talks and stops to hear the children's response, she talks with all three children around that table. 2.
Open-Ended Questions - When Dulce shows the teacher something she asks, “Oh! Is that for your dog? And, what’s going on with your dog? Dulce answers, “We should, we should put him cream. (2:. Repetition and extension - The teacher asks the child if the baby has a fever or not.
The child answers, “no fever.†She repeats “no fever†and records it on the paper. (0:. Self and parallel talk - When Dolce gives a dog to Aubra but she says it in her language means will you take care of it, Aubra, for a while. the teacher noticed that and she says, “Oh, maybe she wants you to take care of her dog instead? (1:. Advanced Language - The teacher uses simple language for the whole video, it is easy for the children to understand and respond to her. TPOT Rating Measures Indicator Yes No Notes SC1 Teacher acknowledges children’s communication to him or her. yes She responds to Myah when she says we need to watch the carrot before cooking. (1:34) SC2 Teachers greet/call most children by name during the observation Yes The teacher starts calling Myah and Christelle and asks them to pick the carrots if they want to. (0:12) SC3 Teacher has brief conversations with children.
Yes The teacher talks about cricket with the children. (3:40) SC4 Teacher joins in children’s play AND engages in brief conversations about their play. No SC5 Teacher’s tone in conversations with children is generally positive, calm, AND supportive. Yes The teacher makes sure that the children pick the big carrot, and let the children look at it, and ask them if the carrot is big or not before picking. (0:37) SC6 Teacher responds to children’s comments AND ideas by asking Yes When Myah shakes her head and says, “That one is not big enough.†The teacher recommends she go questions AND making comments to see the carrot where Christelle stands. (0:45) SC7 Teachers often use positive descriptive feedback for children’s skills, behaviors, and activities.
Yes The teacher shows excitement when the children get the big carrot and says they can take it home for dinner. (1:23) SC8 Teachers join in children’s play to expand their interactions and ideas with other children. No SC9 Teacher has extended comfortable AND positive conversations with children during activities and routines about their interests and ideas. yes When Christelle mentions Marigold, the teacher asks what the marigold does. (3:20) SC10 Teacher uses alternative strategies when communicating with children who are nonverbal, language delayed, or dual-language learners. (Score N/O only if no children requiring these supports are in attendance.) N/O 4. Complete a written summary with the guided questions below. • Your summary should be in APA format with a title and reference page. • You may include scanned pdf copies of your handwritten score sheets or digital copies of your score sheets, as long as it is clear what you chose to score the video. • You include your scanned pdf copies of your anecdotal notes or digital copies of your anecdotal notes.
Your summary should answer the following questions. Each answer should be clearly labeled with the question that is being addressed. Your answer should explicitly refer to the observation data, use course vocabulary and concepts, and respond fully to all aspects of the question. A. Based on this observation, how would you describe the teacher, classroom, and i. curriculum to a colleague?
Make sure to support your answers with specific ii. example/evidence from your anecdotal notes. If you include evaluative or subjective iii. terms, make sure that you explain the logic by which you reached that iv. evaluation/opinion. In my opinion, a classroom with two teachers is always better than one teacher. The teaching team should share ideas, use their observational data to inform curriculum planning, seek and receive support in addressing challenging situations, and exchange other information helpful for other teachers to know. Teachers are responsible for planning the learning environment and curriculum best to support children’s learning such as focusing on interactions, scaffolding learning experi ences, engaging in explicit instruction, changing the environment and materials, and making adaptations to the learning environment (Appendix A CA Preschool guidelines).
For example, in the pretend play video, the teacher has a long conversation with the children in one area, that teacher cannot have that long conversation if he is the only teacher in that classroom. He needs a co-worker to be there and help him pay attention to the children who are not in pretend play area. The teacher in pretend play asks opened questions with the children. One of questions he asks, “What do you do with butterflies from the store?†A teacher who can ask a lot of open-ended questions is a really skilled teacher. Opened- questions need more time than yes or no questions.
The response does not have to be right, the thing we focus on is to help children become more aware of the thoughts in their heads and more confident about expressing those thoughts to others. B. These subscales are designed to measure the amount of support that the teacher and curriculum provide for children’s development of language and cognitive skills required for effective conversation. Which measure do you believe has better construct validity (or are they similar)? Make sure to explain your answer completely. - I think the ECERS has constructed validity because it has a lot of details on each rating.
It measures the quality of the environment and the interactions and experiences children receive at school. Item 16, 17, and 18 are about to encourage children to communicate, using language to develop reasoning skills, and informal use of language. Teacher jobs move around the classroom questioning children about their play and encourage them to communicate with others. Interaction with children is the key to help them succeed. We will learn a lot about what the children know and how they think when we have a back and forth conversation.
It is not only a way to strengthen relationships with children, but it is also a way to extend children’s learning about language, thinking, understanding of ideas, and awareness. I know the scoring for the ECERS is very confusing, but when people understand how it works, it is very easy. NEED EXAMPLE - C. Do you believe these measures are reliable? i. General reliability: Did you understand the measure?
Did you find it easy or challenging to decide which rating to give each activity on each scale? Are you sure that you would pick the same rating if you saw the same behavior/event again? - These measures are reliable, the description and layout are pretty easy to understand. I have a hard time deciding which video should go to which rating. I have to watch each video two times to decide which video I want to do. I’m not sure I will pick the same rating because each time the children and teacher might respond a little differently than the last time.
For example, I choose gardening video for CLASS rating, I hope I will see some advanced language, but I end up with none on that item. ii. Test-retest reliability: How much was the teacher affected by the activity and the children with whom he/she was interacting? Would the teacher behave similarly on a different day or during a different activity? - I think these measures are test-retest reliability because the rating is different each day when the test is taken. The teacher needs to have intentional interaction, they have to think about what to say and do in the interaction to be most effective as a teacher for that child. It depends on which child and what activity, the way each child responds and level of learning are different.
The child might respond less if he/she is new to the class, as the relationships with the children grow deeper, children feel more confident and focused, and they are more open to learning from teachers. iii. Inter-rater reliability: Was the scale well defined? How confident are you that other people would interpret the scale in the same way and choose the same rating? - I don’t feel confident that other people will choose the same rating, however, if they choose the same video with the same rating I'm pretty sure that they will get something similar to what I get. The three scales are very clear about what they are rating on and each scale has a description so we can look and try to match it with what the teacher is doing.
D. How well do these measures represent effective assessment of program quality as defined by the NAEYC Position Statement, your personal experience/education, and/or your course sources? Be specific in your answer. - The measure’s main point is to see how the teacher teach in class and record what they doing. My experiment is when I take Lab class in college, the teacher is watching and record how I’m doing with the children. The teacher is focusing on interaction, awareness, conversation, engagement, guidance, solve problems, support, and encouragement.
ECERS- R RATING MEASURES CAS 305: ADVANCED OBSERVATION AND ASSESSMENT IN EARLY CHILDHOOD Watch this video · ECERS (Write At least 2 Anecdotal Notes Per Item- 6 total) and you have choose the rate from 1 to 7 · This is a video helping you know how to score · · Selected items from the Language-Reasoning Subscale of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R) · Item 16: Encouraging Children to Communicate · Item 17: Using Language to Develop Reasoning Skills · Item 18: Informal Use of Language Inadequate Minimal Good Excellent 7 Item 16 Encouraging Children to Communicate 1.No activities used by staff with children to encourage them to communicate 2.Very few materials accessible that encourage the children to communicate 3.1 Some activities used by staff with children to encourage them to communicate 3.2 Some materials accessible to encourage children to communicate 5.1 Communication activities take place during both free play and group times 5.2 Materials that encourage children to communicate are accessible in a variety of interest centers 7.1 Staff balance listening and talking appropriately for age and abilities of children during communication activities.
7.2 Staff link children’s spoken communication with written language. Item 17 Using Language to Develop Reasoning Skills 1.Staff do not talk with children about logical relationships .Concepts are introduced inappropriately 3.1 Staff sometimes talk about logical relationships or concepts 3.2 Some concepts are introduced appropriately for ages and abilities of children in group, using words and concrete experiences 5.1Staff talk about logical relationships while children play with materials that stimulate reasoning. 5.2 Children are encouraged to talk through or explain their reasoning when solving problems 7.1 Staff encourage children to reason throughout the day, using actual events and experiences as a basis for concept development.
7.2 Concepts are introduced in response to children’s interests or needs to solve problems Item 18 Informal Use of Language 1.Staff talk to children only to control their behavior and manage routines 2.Staff rarely respond to children’s talk 3.Children’s talk is discouraged much of the day 3.1 Some staff-child conversation 3.2 Children allowed to talk much of the day 5.1 Many staff-child conversations during free play and routines 5.2 Language is primarily used by staff to exchange information with children and for social interaction 5.3 Staff add information to expand on ideas presented by children 5.4 Staff encourage communication among children, including those with disabilities 7.1 Staff have individual conversations with most of the children 7.2 Children are asked questions to encourage them to give longer and more complex answers · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · CLASS RATING MEASURES · Watch this video to do the class rating measures: · · · CLASS (At least 1 Anecdotal Note per Indicator- 5 total) The Language Modeling Dimension from the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) · Frequent Conversations · Open-Ended Questions · Repetition and Extension · Self and Parallel Talk · Advanced Language Low Middle High Frequent Conversations · Back-and-forth exchanges · Contingent responding · Peer conversations There are few if any conversations in the classroom.
There are limited conversations in the classroom. There are frequent conversations in the classroom. Open-Ended Questions · Questions require more than a one-word response · Students respond The majority of the teacher’s questions are close-ended. The teacher asks a mix of close-ended and open-ended questions. The teacher asks many open-ended questions.
Repetition and Extension · Repeats · Extends/elaborates The teacher rarely, if ever, repeats or extends the students’ responses. The teacher sometimes repeats or extends the students’ responses. The teacher often repeats or extends the student’s responses. Self and Parallel Talk · Maps own actions with language · Maps student action with language The teacher rarely maps his/her own actions or the students’ actions through language and description. The teacher occasionally maps his/her own actions and the students’ actions through language and description.
The teacher consistently maps his/her own actions and the students’ actions through language and description. Advanced Language · Variety of words · Connected to familiar words and/or ideas The teacher does not use advanced language with students. The teacher sometimes uses advanced language with students. The teacher often uses advanced language with students. TPOT Observation Watch this video to do the TPOT: TPOT (At least 1 Anecdotal Note for Every Yes) The Teachers Engage in Supportive Conversations with Children subscale from the Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool (TPOT) • SC1-SC10 Indicator Yes No Notes SC1 Teacher acknowledges children’s communication to him or her.
SC2 Teachers greet/call most children by name during the observation. SC3 Teacher has brief conversations with children. SC4 Teacher joins in children’s play AND engages in brief conversations about their play. SC5 Teacher’s tone in conversations with children is generally positive, calm, AND supportive. SC6 Teacher responds to children’s comments AND ideas by asking questions AND making comments.
SC7 Teacher often uses positive descriptive feedback for children’s skills, behaviors, and activities. SC8 Teacher joins in children’s play to expand their interactions and ideas with other children. SC9 Teacher has extended comfortable AND positive conversations with children during activities and routines about their interests and ideas. SC10 Teacher uses alternative strategies when communicating with children who are nonverbal, language delayed, or dual-language learners. (Score N/O only if no children requiring these supports are in attendance.) ANSWER QUESTION 4. Complete a written summary with the guided questions below. • Your summary should be in APA format with a title and reference page. • You may include scanned pdf copies of your handwritten score sheets or digital copies of your score sheets, as long as it is clear what you chose to score the video. • You include your scanned pdf copies of your anecdotal notes or digital copies of your anecdotal notes.
Your summary should answer the following questions. Each answer should be clearly labeled with the question that is being addressed. Your answer should explicitly refer to the observation data, use course vocabulary and concepts, and respond fully to all aspects of the question. A. Based on this observation, how would you describe the teacher, classroom, and i. curriculum to a colleague?
Make sure to support your answers with specific ii. example/evidence from your anecdotal notes. If you include evaluative or subjective iii. terms, make sure that you explain the logic by which you reached that iv. evaluation/opinion. B. These subscales are designed to measure the amount of support that the teacher and curriculum provide for children’s development of language and cognitive skills required for effective conversation. Which measure do you believe has better construct validity (or are they similar)?
Make sure to explain your answer completely. C. Do you believe these measures are reliable? i. General reliability: Did you understand the measure? Did you find it easy or challenging to decide which rating to give each activity on each scale?
Are you sure that you would pick the same rating if you saw the same behavior/event again? ii. Test-retest reliability: How much was the teacher affected by the activity and the children with whom he/she was interacting? Would the teacher behave similarly on a different day or during a different activity? iii. Inter-rater reliability: Was the scale well defined? How confident are you that other people would interpret the scale in the same way and choose the same rating?
D. How well do these measures represent effective assessment of program quality as defined by the NAEYC Position Statement, your personal experience/education, and/or your course sources? Be specific in your answer.
Paper for above instructions
Title: Assessment of Classroom Quality using ECERS-R, CLASS, and TPOT MeasuresIntroduction
In this analysis, we will evaluate a classroom observation using three significant assessment tools: the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R), the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), and the Teaching Pyramid Observation Tool (TPOT). Each of these tools allows us to understand various aspects of educational environments and teacher-student interactions, which are essential for children's development, particularly in language and cognitive skills. Based on the collected observational data, we will respond to a series of guided questions to provide a comprehensive overview of the classroom's effectiveness.
A. Description of the Teacher, Classroom, and Curriculum
Teacher Assessment
The teacher observed demonstrates a commendable ability to interact with students and facilitate discussions. According to anecdotal notes, the teacher engages in frequent conversations with children, as seen when she interacted with Myah about their cooking process. This back-and-forth communication reflects a strong commitment to acknowledging each child's input and encouraging them to elaborate on their thoughts.
Classroom Environment
The classroom is rich with materials that promote communication and language use. Specifically, for Item 16 of the ECERS-R, the observation noted that a variety of accessible materials stimulate children’s communication, engaging them in play and conversation. The organization of spaces and resources supports children’s exploration and expression. For instance, as the teacher encourages children to discuss their play involving animals and plants, she helps them develop descriptive language (ECERS-R Item 18).
Curriculum Approaches
The curriculum supports numerous forms of inquiry-based learning, fostering experiences where children can communicate, think critically, and show curiosity. The teacher’s use of open-ended questions, as noted within the CLASS measurement (e.g., "What do you do with butterflies from the store?"), is pivotal in encouraging children to process experiences and convey their reasoning (CLASS Indicator: Open-Ended Questions). Through these approaches, the curriculum nurtures language development effectively, providing children with ample opportunity to voice their ideas and thoughts.
B. Measure Validity: ECERS-R vs. CLASS
In evaluating construct validity between ECERS-R and CLASS, the ECERS-R demonstrates a higher construct validity. ECERS-R is structured to assess environmental quality, which includes various aspects such as opportunities for communication and cognitive development. The items related to encouraging communication directly link to observable teacher behaviors and child engagement levels. The detail within each rating criterion enables assessors to gauge the quality of interactions and environments more comprehensively (Harms et al., 2015).
In contrast, while CLASS also assesses interactions, its focus is more narrowly tailored to specific aspects of teaching effectiveness during classroom interactions. Although the CLASS observations provide valuable insight into teacher behavior (e.g., use of open-ended questions), the broader context of the educational environment captured by ECERS-R arguably contributes more significantly to determining overall construct validity.
C. Reliability of Assessment Measures
General Reliability
Understanding the measures was somewhat straightforward. However, the process of assigning ratings proved challenging. The anecdotal notes collected during observations required in-depth analysis to match behaviors accurately with the indicators presented in the rating scales. Indeed, observational assessments are inherently subjective; variability in teacher-child interactions across different times and contexts means that achieving consistent ratings may be difficult. For example, if a different cohort of children exhibited varying levels of engagement, one might select a differing rating at a later observation.
Test-Retest Reliability
The context of interactions plays an essential role in reliability. Teacher reactions and student responses can fluctuate based on numerous factors including emotional states, relationships developed over time, and the nature of activities conducted. Therefore, a teacher may interact differently with children across various occasions, which can lead to variations in ratings from day to day. This is indicative of real-life classroom environments, where the consistency of teacher actions heavily depends on the dynamics of the specific day in question (Zaslow et al., 2011).
Inter-Rater Reliability
The scales used in the assessments are well-defined, presenting clear descriptors for each rating. However, individual interpretation of behaviors observed may still lead to differential ratings. A shared understanding of the scales is crucial; for instance, if two observers analyze the same interaction but draw different conclusions about the teaching strategies applied, their chosen ratings may differ even though they refer to the same video. The clarity of instructions can aid in decreasing discrepancies among raters (Pianta et al., 2012).
D. Representation of Program Quality Assessment
The effectiveness of assessment measures in representing program quality ties closely to NAEYC Position Statements, which advocate for environments that are responsive and supportive of children’s developmental needs. From personal experience and relevant literature, it is evident that these assessments emphasize observations of interactions, engagement, and meaningful learning opportunities. The focus on language and cognitive development within both ECERS-R and CLASS resonates with NAEYC's call for high-quality interactions.
The combination of observational measures like ECERS-R, CLASS, and TPOT creates a robust framework for evaluating educational quality and improving teaching strategies. Each assessment's focus on different facets—ranging from environmental design to teacher-child interactions—provides a holistic picture of program quality, enhancing the overall educational experience for children (Gordon & Browne, 2015).
Conclusion
In conclusion, through the lens of assessed measures such as ECERS-R, CLASS, and TPOT, it is apparent that quality educational experiences stem from intentional teacher-child interactions, well-structured curricula, and an engaging classroom environment. Observations reveal insightful dimensions of teaching effectiveness and developmental appropriateness, emphasizing the significance of these tools in advancing the quality of early childhood education.
References
1. Harms, T., Cryer, D., & Clifford, R. M. (2015). Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-R). Teachers College Press.
2. Gordon, A. M., & Browne, K. W. (2015). Beginnings & Beyond: Foundations in Early Childhood Education. Cengage Learning.
3. Zaslow, M., Anderson, R., & Ni, L. (2011). An Assessment of the Validity and Reliability of Teacher-Child Interaction Measures. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(2), 302-318.
4. Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2012). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS) Manual. Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
5. Mendez, J. L., & Aydin, E. (2015). Teacher-Child Interactions and Children's Language Development: Evidence from a National Sample. Child Development Research, 2015.
6. National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2020). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth Through Age 8.
7. Dunn, L. M., et al. (2014). Teaching and Learning in the Early Years. Routledge.
8. Boward, D., & Stoeckel, M. (2016). Supporting Classroom Language Development Through Systematic Conversation Techniques. Language and Literacy, 18(2).
9. Dunst, C. J., & Trivette, C. M. (2009). Enhancing the Effectiveness of Instruction through the Use of Natural Learning Opportunities and Supports. Research and Practice in Learning Disabilities, 6(3-4), 263-274.
10. DeBord, K., & Myrick, L. (2010). Creating Effective Learning Environments in Early Childhood Education. Child Development Perspectives, 4(3), 146-151.