1 / 23

The Evaluation of HighScope in Co-Mayo

The Evaluation of HighScope in Co-Mayo. Terms of Reference. Provide a comprehensive account of the initiative ‘HighScope in Mayo’ Using implementation science, examine the extent to which the HighScope model of practice is embedded in ten early years’ settings in Co. Mayo.

thane-sykes
Télécharger la présentation

The Evaluation of HighScope in Co-Mayo

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Evaluation of HighScope in Co-Mayo

  2. Terms of Reference • Provide a comprehensive account of the initiative ‘HighScope in Mayo’ • Using implementation science, examine the extent to which the HighScope model of practice is embedded in ten early years’ settings in Co. Mayo. • Identify the barriers to and supports for implementation • Document individual ‘ inspirational stories’ • Make recommendations for further development for both 0-3s and 3-5yrs

  3. Background • International data • National context • Formation of TUSLA • National Framework for Children and Young People • Local provision

  4. Implementation Science • Mixed methods design accessing primary and secondary data • Secondary data: Inspection reports, training evaluations, monitoring of HighScope training • Primary data: Online survey, focus groups, interviews, PQA assessment, filmed sessions, narrative story telling, significant change accounts

  5. Conceptual Framework for Implementation Fidelity

  6. Sample and Methods

  7. Training Analysis

  8. Online Survey

  9. Practitioners • Supports required: • More cluster group meetings, more frequent individualised support, refresher training, visits to other HighScope settings and specific support with assessment • Support received from the EYDWs had been invaluable but felt a network could be created involving HighScope practitioners who could meet to offer advice, guidance and experience. • Support linking the HighScope key developmental indicators and assessment tool with Síolta, The National Quality Framework and Aistear, The National Curriculum Framework. • General capacity building around child observation records, note taking and curriculum planning. • More parental involvement initiatives

  10. Children’s Voices “The teachers talk to us like adults, we're important too” “We know what happens next because we look at the directions on the wall” “Teacher can I do the planning with the children today” asked one child “We have a problem...how can we solve it”

  11. Engaging Parents • Open evenings, • Inviting parents into setting during sessions, • Information pack starting, • Having informal chats at pick up and drop off time, • Sharing COR with parents, • Parents notice board - display evidence of children’s work, anecdotes etc, • Hold parents courses and have formal family feedback meetings at the end of the year

  12. PreSchool Programme Quality Assessment

  13. Development Workers Observations • Working with individual groups • Peer facilitated learning • Supporting groups to support parents

  14. Parental Responsiveness • 90% of parents in focus groups could provide an explanation, description or example of the HighScope model. • The most frequently cited component of the approach offered by parents was ‘conflict resolution’. • 93% transferred practices to the home environment • 11% had direct experience of HighScope in sessions

  15. Key Stakeholders • Recognition of cross cutting impact; • Promoting health • Promoting education • Preventing problems early • Providing family support • Developing communities • Stakeholders were not denying that HighScope was one example of a quality approach and that it emerged from a rigorous evidence base. • The potential removal of support currently offered by the development workers and early years team was perceived to be completely detrimental and ultimately lead to the obliteration of the HighScope pedagogy

  16. ConclusionImplementation -Moderators-Driving Forces-Restraining Forces

  17. Recommendations

  18. 1. HighScope Ireland should allocate substantial resources to cultivate relationships with new commissioners in the Child and Family Agency to confirm the future fit of the HighScope approach within the ECCE sector in County Mayo. This should involve supporting commissioners to understand the alignment of HighScope with National objectives for Prevention and Early Intervention

  19. 2. Training should be offered to the Inspectorate to increase awareness and understanding of how the HighScope approach can support their role in raising quality provision in ECCE setting.

  20. 3. The capacity of the Early Years Services team to contribute to Local Area Pathways should be clearly communicated and demonstrated within the Agency to identify the fit between Early Years Services and the future direction of the Child and Family Agency.

  21. 4. A network for HighScope practitioners, linked to HighScope Ireland, should be established which supports their professional development while acting as a forum to promote good practice at a local, national and international level.

  22. 5. HighScope Ireland and Early Years Services in County Mayo should create a support structure through training in fidelity measurement to improve adherence to full implementation

  23. Inspirational Stories Ardnaree The Neale Curious Minds

More Related