1 / 21

QRIS National Learning Network Learning Table Welcome!

QRIS National Learning Network Learning Table Welcome!. “Strengthening Inquiry”. Faculty. Instructors. Technical Support. Kasey Langley. Garrison Kurtz. Jane Reisman. Diana Schaack. 2. Learning Table Overview. October 7 (completed) October 27 (today!) December 1 Proposed Dates:

brinly
Download Presentation

QRIS National Learning Network Learning Table Welcome!

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. QRIS National Learning Network Learning TableWelcome! “Strengthening Inquiry”

  2. Faculty Instructors Technical Support Kasey Langley Garrison Kurtz Jane Reisman Diana Schaack 2

  3. Learning Table Overview • October 7 (completed) • October 27 (today!) • December 1 Proposed Dates: • January 26 • February 23 • March 23 3

  4. GoToMeetingParticipant Tools Expands to... Clicking here...

  5. Ground Rules Manage background noise through use of the mute buttons *6 switch between mute and talk Listen to understand Indicate your state and first name when speaking See each other as resources Realistic expectations of busy professionals

  6. Forum Topics Moving from our current situation to our desired - How do we manage the move from our current state (including whatever “plans or theory” we have articulated), to the new state? How must/should we engage the different players who want/need input and buy-in?

  7. Critical Questioning What are your initial reactions to the Disarray QRIS Plans? 7

  8. Case Study – Raising Critical Questions Assumptions What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited? Accountability What outcomes are the team designing/implementing accountable for achieving? Do the strategies match the outcomes? 8

  9. Levels of PlanningStrategies State of Disarray QRIS Pilot Expansion Strategies Long-term Financial Strategies Communications Outreach and Education 50,000 Standards Accountability Program/ Practitioner Support Incentives Outreach & Communications 30,000 Set Quality Standards Accountability 10,000 9

  10. State of Disarray30,000 Foot Outcome Map • Standards • Set and promote quality standards • Accountability • Conduct ratings • Gather and manage data • Program/Practitioner Support • Onsite consultation and coaching • Small grants • Incentives • Increased subsidy based on star rating • Outreach & Communications • Statewide parent education campaign A. Increased sustainability of high quality child care businesses participating E. Increased understanding among parents of elements of high quality child care F.Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans 1 D. Improved quality among programs/practitioners receiving support 2 3 B. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care H. Increased number/percentage of children care slots are with high quality programs/practitioners G. Increased number and percentage of parents who choose to enroll kids in high quality care 5 4 A. Increased sustainability of high quality child care businesses participating 6 C. More children participating in child care experience high quality D. Improved quality among parents/practitioners receiving support G. Increased number and percentage of parents who choose to enroll kinds in high quality care C. More children participating in child care experience high quality 7 E. Increased understanding among parents of elements of high quality child care H. Increased number/percentage of children care slots are with high quality programs/practitioners B. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care 8 F.Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans All children are ready for kindergarten

  11. 30,000 Foot Assumptions Assumptions - What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited? Accountability -What outcomes are the team designing/implementing accountable for achieving? Do the strategies match the outcomes? 11

  12. State of Disarray10,000 Foot Outcome Map SET QUALITY STANDARDS ACCOUNTABILITY: CONDUCT RATINGS GATHER AND MANAGE DATA • Select/ design assessment tools and processes • Assign SODS rating • Align quality standards with professional standards and early learning guidelines • Review and revise quality standards periodically • Align quality standards with professional standards and early learning guidelines • Create data collection, analysis and reporting process/system and practices • Assess and periodically monitor learning environment and interactions • Analyze trends • Align standards with assessments and ratings tools A. Increased understanding of current level of quality among existing providers D. Increased common understanding of definition of quality among state’s child care stakeholders 3 4 A. Increased understanding of current level of quality among existing providers B. Increased identification of opportunities to improve quality of existing programs B. Increased identification of opportunities to improve quality of existing programs 2 C. Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans 1 C. Increased use of data to drive individual improvement plans D. Increased common understanding of definition of quality among state’s child care stakeholders All children are ready for kindergarten

  13. 10,000 Foot Assumptions • What outcomes are the team designing/implementing accountable for achieving? Do the strategies match the outcomes? Are there other outcomes that would you suggest adding in order to describe the theory and show short-term accountabilities? • Any thoughts about Assumptions? What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited?

  14. State of Disarray50,000 Foot Outcome Map • State of Disarray QRIS Pilot • Standards • Accountability • Program/Practitioner support • Financial incentives • Outreach and education Expansion Strategies Long-term Financial Strategies • Communications Outreach and Education • Standards, ratings of programs • Parents, policymakers, public C. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care QRIS pilot providers G. Increased understanding among parents and public of quality care and role of QRIS 1 2 3 4 I. Increased number/ percentage of participants participating in QRIS D. Increased support of funding for QRIS among policymakers A. More children participating in child care that exercises high quality B. Increased school readiness among all children A. More children participating in child care that exercises high quality 5 E. Changed state norm related to quality expectations for child care 6 C. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care QRIS pilot providers G. Increased understanding among parents and public of quality care and role of QRIS H. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care 7 D. Increased support of funding for QRIS among policymakers H. Increased school readiness among children participating in child care B. Increased school readiness among all children 8 E. Changed state norm related to quality expectations for child care I. Increased number/ percentage of participants participating in QRIS All children are ready for kindergarten 14

  15. 50,000 Foot Assumptions What are some of the assumptions that are explicit or implicit in the Disarray QRIS plan? What is the basis for those assumptions? Are they valid or should they be revisited? How about those outcomes? Do they resonate with you? Would you suggest additional or different system-level outcomes?

  16. Discussion and Initial Thoughts For what outcomes IS it reasonable to hold QRIS accountable? We’d like to hear back from each state, if we could, with your initial reactions to today’s material. Share an “Aha”, an idea that you’d like to pursue, or do differently

  17. FeedbackWebinar Polling POLL 1 How prepared do you feel for creating Theories of Action, Logic Models and Outcome Maps for your state QRIS?

  18. FeedbackWebinar Polling POLL 2 Are you familiar with the recently published NCCIC Compendium on QRIS Systems and Evaluations?

  19. FeedbackWebinar Polling POLL 3 Are you familiar with the RAND Report on  QRIS Systems in Five Pioneer States?

  20. Homework Assignment • By Noon Pacific Time 11/16/10, please send your state’s response to the following questions to Heidi Brown at ORS hbrown@organizationalresearch.com so that we can use it as the basis for conversation during the December 1st Learning Table: • In thinking of the three levels of QRIS Outcome Maps for the State of Disarray we discussed today, what level of outcome map is most useful for what your state is in planning?  Please share some reasons why this is helpful. • When comparing the strategies and outcomes in the State of Disarray’s Outcome Maps to your own state’s efforts, which additional strategies and outcomes do your plans include and which are missing?  If you are not thinking about changing your plans to accommodate these differences, what are the assumptions that underlie your decision?

  21. Wrap Up Next session: December 1, 2010 10:30 AM Pacific 12:30 PM Central 1:30 PM Eastern Additional feedback, send to hbrown@organizationalresearch.com Thank you for your participation!

More Related