8084group2 discuss

Get perfect grades by consistently using www.assignmentgeeks.org. Place your order and get a quality paper today. Take advantage of our current 20% discount by using the coupon code GET20


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2019.1624146

Group Discussion 2: Step 1: Preparing for Group Work

The phrase, “preparation is the key to success” is one that is known across industries, age groups, and cultures. As introduced in Module 1, Head Start also identifies “prepare” as the first of four data activities to support progress toward positive family outcomes.

For this Group Discussion Board, you and your colleagues participate in the “prepare” step by reviewing the “Major Findings” document. You then divide each of the five evaluations featured in this section among group members:

1. Evaluation 1: The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, 4th Edition (PPVT-IV)

2. Evaluation 2: Teacher Rating of Oral Language and Literacy (TROLL)

3. Evaluation 3: Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS)

4. Evaluation 4: Program Administration Scale (PAS)

5. Evaluation 5: NAEYC Accreditation Decision Report


Note:

 Every group member will review and discuss Evaluation 6: NAEYC Self-Assessment Teaching Staff Survey and Evaluation 7: NAEYC Self-Assessment Family Survey.

To prepare

Use the Discussion Board to identify which evaluation(s) each group member will investigate more fully. Every group member should also take time to review evaluations 6 and 7, familiarizing themselves with NAEYC self-assessments and the data presented in each.

By Day 5 of Week 4

Each member posts the following:

· The evaluation that he or she would like to investigate further

· Any questions or clarifications needed to begin individual analysis of the major findings of this

· Evaluation

Revisit this Discussion Board throughout Week 4 to ensure that Evaluations 1–5 have each been assigned to a group member. In addition, it is highly recommended that your group takes time to review the Discussion Board requirements for Weeks 5 and 6.

https://www.naeyc.org/accreditation

http://families.naeyc.org/accredited-article/10-naeyc-program-standards#1

https://search.proquest.com/docview/197694816?account=14872

https://go.openathens.net/redirector/waldenu.edu?url=https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2019.1624146



4

JANET

RE: Group A Discussion – Module 3



COLLAPSE

Top of Form

The evaluation reviewed was the Program Administration Scale (PAS), used to inform administrators on high-value criteria associated with the administrative function of an early childhood education (ECE) program. This is a valid component of effective reflective practice. Quality classrooms can only be sustained through effective management and leadership. The validated documentation includes staff development, supervision, evaluations, compensation, and benefits. Additionally, student assessment, family engagement, and pubic relations are covered in this in-depth evaluation.

Yaya-Bryson et al. (2020) compared ECE programs between Turkey and North Carolina within the context of a global study. Turkey is new to ECE program standards, and North Carolina has an established system. The Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale (ECERS) was the tool used to evaluate classrooms, and the PAS was utilized to gauge the quality of administrative functions in the two countries. Turkey’s total PAS score was 85 percent, and North Carolina scored 87 percent. The authors suggested that both scores were too low and that administrative processes should be improved on staff professional development.

I reviewed the significant findings related to the NAEYC self-assessment teaching and family surveys. The teaching staff noted a lack of knowledge of the NAEYC program standards. Also, they shared some inconsistencies in staff development based on the lack of using assessments to produce data to drive instruction. The NAEYC (2003a) states that high-quality programs use data gained to support learning and teaching and identify children that are at risk. There is no way to differentiate instruction without rigorous assessment procedures. The families also validated this when asked if teachers and the program work to meet the student’s needs with supportive practice. However, the NAEYC (2003) stated that the self-study cycle helped programs determine strengths and weaknesses and build capacity through continuous improvement on the ten program standards.

References

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (NAEYC, 2003). Accreditation tips and tools. 
https://www.naeyc.org/accreditation/early-learning/tools

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (NAEYC, 2003a). Early childhood curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation: Building an effective, accountable system in programs for children birth through age 8. 
https://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/CAPEexpand.pdf

 

Yaya-Bryson, D., Scott-Little, C., Akman, B., & Cassidy, D. J. (2020). A comparison of early childhood classroom environments and program administrative quality in turkey and north carolina. International Journal of Early Childhood, 52(2), 233–248. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-020-00268-2

Bottom of Form

RESPONSE 2

Yokita Byrd 

RE: Group A Discussion – Module 3 Part 1



COLLAPSE

Top of Form

The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test was initially developed to test the verbal intelligence of school-aged children (Dunn, 1959 as cited by Kush & Shaw, 2010). The updated version has two forms both with 228 test items consisting of four colored pictures on each page. According to Kush and Shaw (2010) The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition (PPVT-4) is untimed and administered to each child separately. The test provides both basal and ceiling sets and can be scored manually or using the computerized ASSIST Scoring and Reporting System. The last standardization of the PPVT-4 took place in the fall of 2005 and spring of 2006 and yields normative scores including standard scores, percentile ranks, normal curve equivalents, age equivalents, grade equivalents, stanines, and a new score value called the growth value scale. The sample represented different age groups, genders, races/ethnicities, educational levels, geographic regions, and special education status of school-aged children. The authors noted that although there was underrepresentation of the Western geographic region, all other variables appeared to be closely aligned with U.S. Census figures. Split-half reliabilities ranged from .90 to .97 with an average of .94. Alpha coefficients ranged from .93 to .98 with an average of .97 and a standard error of measurement of 3.6. Alternative form reliability ranged from .87 to .93 with an average of .89. This according to the authors is evidence that the PPVT-4 is reliable because of the different types of reliability.

 

The following website shows administration of The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-6aBk6AzjM

 

Reference

Kush, J., & Shaw, S. (2010). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Fourth Edition. The Eighteenth Mental Measurements Yearbook.

Bottom of Form

Writerbay.net

Do you need help with this or a different assignment? We offer CONFIDENTIAL, ORIGINAL (Turnitin/LopesWrite/SafeAssign checks), and PRIVATE services using latest (within 5 years) peer-reviewed articles. Kindly click on ORDER NOW to receive an A++ paper from our masters- and PhD writers.

Get a 15% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE15


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper