impact of nursery school quality and pedagogy on childrens ... iram siraj.pdf · pdf file...

Click here to load reader

Post on 30-Dec-2019

1 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Impact of nursery school quality and pedagogy on children’s learning: Findings from project EPPE

    Prof. Iram Siraj Institute of Education, University of London

    In st

    it u

    te o

    f Ed

    u ca

    ti o

    n , U

    n iv

    er si

    ty o

    f Lo

    n d

    o n

    Ea

    rl y

    Ed u

    ca ti

    o n

    , N u

    rs er

    y Sc

    h o

    o ls

    S u

    m m

    it

    Lo n

    d o

    n 1

    4 M

    a rc

    h 2

    0 1

    4

  • Effective Provision of Pre-School Education E P P E

    Kathy Sylva University of Oxford Edward Melhuish Birkbeck, University of London Pam Sammons University of Nottingham Iram Siraj Institute of Education, University of London Brenda Taggart Institute of Education, University of London An ESRC TLRP (Associate) project

  • Aims of the EPPE research

    • To establish the impact of pre-school on young children’s intellectual and social/behavioural development.

    • To identify those pre-schools that are more effective than others in promoting children’s development.

    • To describe the background characteristics of effective pre-school settings.

    • To establish the impact of the home (before age 3) on children’s intellectual and behavioural development.

    • To explore whether pre-school experience can reduce social inequalities.

  • • Six local authorities

    • 141 Pre-school centres randomly selected within the authorities to include:

     nursery classes

     playgroups

     private day nurseries

     day care centres run by local authority

     nursery schools

     fully integrated centres

    • Approx 2,800 children from 141 centres and 300+ ‘home’ children

    Sample

  • 25 nursery classes

    590 children

    34 playgroups

    610 children

    31 private day nurseries

    520 children

    20 nursery schools

    520 children

    7 integrated centres

    190 children

    24 local authority day care nurseries

    430 children

    home

    310 children

    Pre-school Provision (3+yrs)

    Reception Year 1 Year 2

    (5 yrs) (6 yrs) (7 yrs)

    Plan of Study

  • • Child assessments over time

    • Family background information

    • Interviews with staff

    • ‘Quality’ rating scales

    • Case studies of effective centres

  •  

  • Home learning before 3 years – nursery schools and integrated centres had the highest levels of parent engagement

    reading to children;

    teaching children songs and nursery rhymes;

    playing with letters and numbers;

    painting and drawing;

    taking children to libraries;

    (for social outcomes) creating regular opportunities for play with friends.

  • Most Effective Settings (1)

    Children from nursery schools, integrated settings (which have fully integrated education with care) and nursery classes are better at fostering children’s social development. ’

  • Most Effective Settings (2)

    Settings with higher quality provision had children who showed a decrease in anti- social/ worried behaviours.

    Ofsted shows nursery schools are twice as likely to get outstanding rating compared to other providers

  • Most Effective Settings (3)

    There were more cognitive gains for children in centres that encouraged high levels of parental involvement, for example giving parents information on their children’s learning, and encouraging education for parents.

  • The measurement and impact of quality

    How EPPE measures quality

     Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-R total + subscales)

     ECERS-E (total + subscales)

     Caregiver Interaction Scale (4 subscales, e.g., punitiveness, detachment, responsiveness)

  • ECERS-R • Based on observation – 7 sub-

    scales  Space and furnishings  Personal care routines  Language reasoning  Activities  Interaction  Programme structure  Parents and staff

    ECERS-E

    • Based on observation – 4 sub- scales

     Literacy

    Mathematics

     Science and environment

     Diversity

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003) Rating scale:

    Harms, Clifford & Cryer (1998)

    Inadequate Minimal Good Excellent

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7

  • 5. Science Activities: Science processes : Food preparation

    3.2 Some children can choose to -YES/NO participate in food preparation

    An Example of ECERS-E Item Low scores

    1.1 No preparation of food or drink is -YES/NO undertaken in front of children

    3.1 Food preparation is undertaken -YES/NO

    by adults in front of the children

    Minimal 3

    Inadequate 1

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003)

    3.3 Staff discuss with the children routine food that has been prepared by adults, where appropriate, e.g. burnt toast or new biscuits or food brought in by children because of special events.

  • An Example of ECERS-E Item Medium scores

    5.1 Food preparation/ cooking -YES/NO activities are provided regularly

    Good 5

    5.2 Most of the children have the -YES/NO opportunity to participate in food preparation

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003)

    5.3 The staff lead the discussion -YES/NO about the food involved and use appropriate terminology (EX. Melt, dissolve).

    5.4 Children are encouraged to use -YES/NO more than one sense (feel, smell, taste) to explore raw ingredients.

    5. Science Activities: Science processes : Food preparation

  • 7.1 A variety of cooking activities -YES/NO in which all children have the opportunity to take part are provided regularly.

    Excellent 7

    7.2 The ingredients are attractive and -YES/NO the end result is reasonable and appreciated (Ex. Eaten by children, taken home).

    An Example of ECERS-E Item High scores

    7.3 The staff lead and encourage -YES/NO discussion on the process of food preparation such as what needs to be done to cause ingredients to set or melt.

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003)

    7.4 Staff draw attention to changes -YES/NO in food and question children about it (Ex. What did it look like before, what does it look like now, what has happened to it).

    5. Science Activities: Science processes : Food preparation

  • 4. Sounds in words

    3.2 Children are encouraged to speak -YES/NO and/or sing rhymes

    An Example of ECERS-E Item Low scores

    1.1 Few or no nursery rhymes or poems -YES/NO are spoken or sung

    3.1 Rhymes are often spoken or sung by -YES/NO adults to children

    Minimal 3

    Inadequate 1

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003)

  • An Example of ECERS-E Item Medium scores

    5.1 The rhyming component of songs -YES/NO and nursery rhymes are brought to the attention of children.

    Good 5

    5.2 Initial sounds of alliterative in -YES/NO words and/or alliterative sentences are brought to the attention of children (e.g. Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers).

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003)

    4. Sounds in words

  • 7.1 Attention is paid to syllabification -YES/NO of words through clapping games, jumping etc.

    Excellent 7

    7.2 Some attention is given to linking -YES/NO sounds to letters.

    An Example of ECERS-E Items High scores

    Sylva, Siraj-Blatchford & Taggart (2003)

    4. Sounds in words

  • Box plot of mean ECERS-R score by ECEC type

  • Box plot of mean ECERS-E score by ECEC type

    72024313425N =

    combined centre

    nursery school

    local authority

    private day nursery

    playgroup

    nursery class

    7

    6

    5

    4

    3

    2

    1

    30

  • • Total scores on the E