Camille Catlett (moderator) Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute

1. Camille Catlett (moderator) Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill May 23, 2012 Welcome to the Learning TableCalifornia, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Oregon, and Pennsylvania

2. Questions & commentsare invited Try it out now. Type in where you’re calling from, and what the temperature is. • Use the “Chat” pod

3. QuickPoll How effective has your QRIS been at intentionally engaging families of young children who are culturally, linguistically, and ability diverse? Very effective Somewhat effective A little effective Not effective

4. Logistics for today’s Live Session • Mute/UnMuteyour phone Please mute your phone during the Live Session (*6) and unmute it when you want to say something (*6) • Identify yourselfPlease identify yourself when you speak (“Hi, this is Camille from California . . . “) • Chime in Share your questions and comments in the part of the screen marked”Chat”

6. Camille Catlett (moderator) Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill May 23, 2012 Welcome to the Learning TableCalifornia, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Oregon, and Pennsylvania

7. Organization of Live SessionTwo approaches that can support improved experiences for young children who are culturally, linguistically, and ability diverse Part 1: Improving Experiences through Family Engagement Linda C. Halgunseth Part 2: Improving Experiences by Improving Programs Abby Thorman

8. Part 1: Improving Experiences through Family Engagement • Evidence to guide our thinking • Linda C. Halgunseth • Applications and discussion • Camille Catlett and all of you

9. Linda C. Halgunseth, Ph.D. Research Associate, Deptof Human Development and Family Studies Penn State Assistant Professor, Dept of Human Development and Family StudiesUniversityofConnecticut Bridging the Divide Family Engagement, Diverse Families, and Early Childhood Education Programs

10. Integrated Review1 • Full Report Halgunseth, L.C., Peterson, A., Stark, D., & Moodie, S. (2009). Family Engagement, Diverse Families, and Early Childhood Education Programs: An Integrated Review of the Literature. Online athttp :// www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/research/FamEngage.pdf • Brief Report Halgunseth, L.C. (2009). Family engagement, diverse families, and early childhood education programs: An integrated review of the literature. Young Children, 64(5), 56-58.

11. Expand Definition of Family Engagement to Include Diverse Families • In 2005, 60% of children under age 6 spent some time in nonparental care arrangements; majority were ethnic-minority children2. • Enrollment of dual language learners is increasing dramatically in early childhood programs nationwide; trend is projected to continue3. • About 30% of children enrolled in Head Start Programs are Dual Language Learners; 85% of those children spoke Spanish as their primary language4.

12. Family Engagement Helps Children Succeed! • Higher preschool performance and promotion to next grade 5,6 • More positive engagement with peers, adults, and learning7 • Buffers negative impact of poverty on academic and behavioral outcomes8 • Benefits persist over time8

13. Terminology Family Engagement vs. Parent Education/Parent Involvement

14. Family Engagement 1. Strength-Based Approach • views families as “involved” and “invested” in their children’s learning • views family members as having unique skills and interests • asks the question “how are we engaging families interests and skills in our program” 2. Reciprocal Relationship • emphasizes a reciprocal relationship (not one-sided) • takes a partnership approach to children’s learning, in which both programs and families collaborate • emphasizes respect for families and a value for their skill-set • Promotes two-way communication and co-planning

15. Parent Education • Not a true partnership • Implies the professional has all the answers • Disregards the knowledge-base and strengths of the family

16. Comprehensive Definition of Family Engagement • Programs encourage and validate family participation in decision making related to their children’s education. • Consistent, two-way communication is facilitated through multiple forms and is responsive to the linguistic preference of the family. • Families and programs collaborate and exchange knowledge. • Programs and families place an emphasis on creating and sustaining learning activities at home and in the community that enhance each child’s early learning. • Families create a home environment that values learning and supports programs. • Programs create an ongoing and comprehensive system by ensuring that administrators and teachers are dedicated, trained and supported to fully engage families. * Stemming from the work of Henderson and Berla (1994)9, Epstein (2001)10, and Weiss, Caspe, and Lopez (2006)11.Full definition can be found at http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/research/FamEngage.pdf

17. Two Organizing Frameworks Ecological Theory12 Social Exchange Theory13

19. What Are States Doing Well—Family Engagement? Noted Improvements in State Standards: • Requiring Language Translation • Seeking Input from Families on Children’s Interests and Goals • Encouraging Family Participation on Advisory Boards • Requiring a System of Regular Communication with Families

20. Recommendations for States? • Stress a Continuum for Each Concept • Across Stars 3-5; not just for Star 5 • Ex. = annually, bi-annually, more than twice a year • Highest Tier= More frequent, ongoing • Bi-Directional Communication • Not just Star 5; across Stars 3-5 • Identify families preferred mode of communication (3 stars) • Verbal andNonverbal Communication • Professional Development • Cultural Sensitivity • Monolingual and Bilingual Language Development • Ongoing self-reflection opportunities in areas of family engagement and diverse families • Opportunities for Families to Learn from Each Other

21. Questions to Ask • Are your standards taking a strength based approach to family engagement? • “How am I engaging families interests in the program?” • “How am I engaging families so they want to share their skills with programs?” • “Am I identifying and communicating to families that they have important skills to share with programs?” • What is the message I am communicating to programs regarding high-quality? • Are only the top tier programs (ex. Five Star) required to engage families? Respect language diversity? • Or is respecting diversity an important practice for all programs in my state? – (emphasize continuum)

22. References 1- Integrated review was funded by the Picower Foundation and was conducted jointly by NAEYC (Halgunseth& Peterson) and Pre-K Now (Stark & Moodie). 2- Iruka, I.U., & Carver, P.R. (2006). Initial Results From the 2005 NHES Early Childhood Program Participation Survey (NCES 2006-075). U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved May 20, 2011 from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/earlychild/tables/table_1.asp?referrer=report 3- Office of Head Start. (2007). Dual language learning: What does it take? Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 4- Hernandez, D. J., Denton, Na., & McCartney, S.E. (2007). Children in immigrant families- The U.S. and 50 states: National origins, language and early education. Children in America’s Newcomer Families. Child Trends & the Center for Social and Demograpic Analysis, University at Albany, SUNY: 2007 Research Brief Series. 5- Izzo. C. V., Weissberg, R. P., Kasprow, W. J., & Fendrich, M. (1999). A longitudinal assessment of teacher perceptions of parent involvement in children’s education and school performance, American Journal of Community Psychology, 27(6), 817-839. 6- Mantizicopoulos, P. (2003). Flunking kindergarten after Head Start: An inquiry into the contribution of contextual and individual variables. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(2), 268-278. 7- McWayne, C., Hampton, V., Fantuzzo., J. Cohen, H. L., & Sekino, Y. (2004). A multivariate examination of parent involvement and the social and academic competencies of urban kindergarten children. Psychology in the Schools, 41(3), 363-377. 8- Harvard Family Research Project. (2006, Spring). Family involvement makes a difference: evidence that family involvement promotes school success for every child of every age. Harvard Family Research Project: Harvard Graduate School of Education. 9- Henderson, A.T., & Berla, N. (1994). A new generation of evidence: The family is critical to student achievement. Washington, DC: Center for Law and Education. 10- Epstein, J. (2001). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview. 11- Weiss, H., Caspe, M., & Lopez, M.E. (2006). Family involvement in early childhood education. Family Involvement Makes a Difference 1 (Spring). Online at http://www.hfrp.org/publications-resources/browse-our-publications/family-involvement-in-early-childhood-education 12- Bronfenbrenner, U. (2004). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 13- Nakonezny, P., & Denton, W. (2008). Marital relationships: A social exchange theory perspective. American Journal of Family Therapy, 36(5), 402-412.

23. Thank YOU! lindachalgunseth@gmail.com Linda C. Halgunseth

24. Think about it… Engaging Families What questions do you have for Linda about intentional efforts to engage the families of young children who are culturally, linguistically, and ability diverse? Camille Catlett

25. Getting Intentional How are you measuring family engagement? Does it vary from level to level in your QRIS system? Do your standards and strategies explicitly support the engagement of families with young children who are culturally, linguistically, and ability diverse? Are you building the capacity of diverse families to support their children’s capability and success? Are you engaging diverse families in building the quality of the programs that serve their children?

26. How are you measuring family engagement? Does it vary from level to level in your QRIS system? In Oklahoma, centers at all star levels must • have a communication system with families • welcome families at all times • hold annual family conferences • have a family resource area • hold at least two family meetings each year • provide family information by at least two methods (bulletin board, newsletter, family handbook, website) • have family participation in program and policy development and • survey staff and families every two years. Centers at two- and three-star levels must also give a written report about the child to families at an annual conference, must maintain a current list of available community resources, and must assist families in locating and connecting with these services. Source: A Count for Quality: Child Care Center Directors on Rating and Improvement Systems (Session 3 Landing Pad on Improving Experiences)

27. Do your standards and strategies explicitly support the engagement of families with young children who are culturally, linguistically, and ability diverse? Your homework responses revealed that . . . • family input into system development has not been a strong point • Learning Table conversations have led to new ideas about how to include families in the development of the system (design committee, review committee, opportunities for input). • Some states have excelled at engaging the families of children with disabilities but have not been as successful at engaging culturally and linguistically diverse families

28. Are you building the capacity of diverse families to support their children’s capability and success? El Grupo de Familias • Boulder, Colorado • 10 sessions of discovering interactive reading and play and forming friendships • Families receive vital information about preserving home language and culture, navigating the school system, advocating for their children, and accessing resources in the community • Focus of specific steps in the process on building trust See: A StoryAbout El Grupo De Famílías(Session 3 Landing Pad on Family Engagement)

29. How are you engaging diverse families in building the quality of the programs that serve their children? • Caregivers and teachers understand the values and traditions of your cultural community – 90% • Caregivers or teachers are sensitive to how you raise your child – 81% • Program includes caregivers and teachers from your cultural community – 74% • Caregivers or teachers talk to your child in your home language – 70% • Program includes children and families from your cultural community – 64% Source: Parent Priorities in Selecting Early Learning Programs: Implications for Minnesota’s Quality Rating & Improvement System (Session 3 Landing Pad on Family Engagement)

30. Think about it… Strengthening Families How has Strengthening Families been a resource to the family engagement component of your QRIS? Are there ways in which you would like your Strengthening Families work to focus more explicitly on engaging and supporting diverse families?

31. Think about it… Strengthening Families In 2010, California produced a white paper on the family involvement element of their state QRIS with specific recommendations. How has the white paper impacted the engagement of diverse families in your state QRIS? See:Guide to the “Family Involvement” Element of California's Quality Rating and Improvement System in Session 3 Landing Pad on Family Engagement

32. Resources to Support Your Work Strengthening Families • Currently reviewing the literature on culture and protective factors • Revising the Strengthening Families self- assessment to enhance the focus on engaging family members in ways that are supportive of their cultural, linguistic, and ethnic identity • Goal: Revised Strengthening Families self-assessment out later this year • Seeking funding to create a stand-alone self-assessment tool focused on race, ethnicity, language, and culture, as well as a guidance document to help programs to build a deeper understanding of each family’s cultural, linguistic, and ethnic identity and how those factors shape parenting practices and family dynamics.

33. Resources to Support Your Work Iowa and Pennsylvania support professional development for family members of young children with disabilities. The purpose of the programs is to grow family leaders to serve on committees, make presentations, co-teach, etc. • Parents as Presenters (IA) • Parents as Partners in Professional Development (P3D) (PA) Could a similar approach be used to grow leadership from culturally and linguistically diverse families? See: Parents as Presenters (Session 3 Landing Pad on Family Engagement)

34. Resources to Support Your Work Recommendations for Meaningfully Involving Families in State Planning Meetings How could similar recommendations be developed for meaningfully involving families in any meeting?

35. QuickPoll How effective has your QRIS been at supporting practices that connect children’s culture and experiences to the learning? Very effective Somewhat effective A little effective Not effective

36. Part 2: Improving Experiences by Improving Programs • Evidence to guide our thinking • Abby Thorman • Applications and discussion • Camille Catlett and all of you

37. Abby Thorman, PhD May 23, 2012 Lessons from Miami

38. Our Context • With 2.4 million people, Miami-Dade County is: • the 8th largest county in the United States • larger than 15 states • 12% of our 544,000 children are foreign-born • another 54% of our children have at least one foreign-born parent • 65% of our children speak a language other than English at home • We are one of the most diverse counties in the United States • We have great wealth living in close proximity to great poverty • 70% of elementary age children qualify for free/reduced lunch • 1 of every 5 of our children live in poverty

40. Purpose • Our Goal: Ensure all children have opportunity to develop to their fullest potential • Reality: There are significant racial disparities and structural barriers to achieving this goal • Our Work: Identify disparities, change systems and structures, and ensure full opportunity for EACH child

41. Getting Clear About Our Values • Planning: key group of determined people • Gathering: racial equity retreat of community leaders • Definition of issues: individual, structural, institutional • Process: self-reflection, organizational reflection, regular time and space to work on this important work • Action: with what we each oversee, what can be done to create change? • Accountability: regular reflection back, support

42. What Does the Data Tell Us? • Primary Data Point • 4th Grade Reading Scores • Other Data Points Predictive of Success • Birth Outcomes • Access to Health Care • How Often are Children Read to • Kindergarten Readiness • Quality of Child Care • High School Graduation

45. Remaking QRIS through an Equity Lens • Revising standards • Greater focus on teacher-child interactions • Participating in NAEYC project: building out family engagement and other sections • Supports • Targeted for vulnerable programs – deeper, more responsive • Flexibility in expanding definition of ‘support’ • Subcontractor policies • Ongoing staff professional development • Racial equity training, community of practice • Poverty simulation • WELS data system essentialto authentically dive into data

46. Creating Curriculum Learning Communities • Combine best practices and lessons learned from: • Comprehensive, research-based early childhood curricula (HighScope, Creative Curriculum) • Ready Schools Miami work and job-embedded master’s program • Protocols from the National School Reform Faculty • Other curriculum implementation trainings • Create a cost-effective, efficient, and scalable model for curriculum training • Outcomes: improved curriculum fidelity, cannot tell who teachers, directors, TA providers or college faculty are (CLASS scores coming…)

47. Components of Learning Communities

48. Curriculum Learning Communities Model

49. Other Reforms • New ECE bachelor’s degree • Design • Job embedded master’s programs • Application, participants, content, staff • Children’s Information Hub • Data from birth to labor (force) • Integrated health, education (from birth), financial supports

50. Challenges • Structural barriers • e.g., Miami-Dade College policy • Availability of validated tools that reflect this important content • Materials only in English • e.g., curriculum learning community materials, trainers • Limitations of the data • Human factor