Home

Governor's task force on pupil readiness report

Reference URL

To link to this object, paste this link in email, IM or document
To embed this object, paste this HTML in website

Governor's task force on pupil readiness report

View Description

Page Flip View

View PDF & Text

Download

Small

Medium

Large

Extra Large

Full-size

Full-size archival image

PDF
Text

search this item

Text Search...

GOUERNOR'S TASK FORCE
PUPIL READINESS
REPORT
Presented to
The Honorable Fife Symington, Gouernor
State of Arizona
The Honorable Peter Rios, President
Arizona State Senate
The Honorable Jane Dee Hull, Speaker
Arizona State House of Representatiues
December 31, 1992
Marti I. Lavis, Director
The Governor's Office for Children
1700 West Washington, Suite 404
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
(602) 542-31 96
TASK FORCE ON PUPIL READINESS
REPORT
Table of Contents
Task Force Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
First National Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I
Readiness Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
A Philosophy for Arizona Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Recommendations for Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
Appendix
Governor's Task Force Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix A
NAEYC Position Statement on School Readiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix B
Arizona Preschool Survey Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix C
Arizona Preschool Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix D
k l l t SYMINGTON
C;ovel nor
December 30, 1992
The Honorable Jane Dee Hull
Speaker of the House
House of Representatives
1700 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dear Representative Hull: \ i . A
The Governor's Task Force on Pupil Readiness was mandated by Senate Bill 1079.
The Task Force has dedicated this past year to examining the methods that will ensure
all of Arizona's children will be appropriately prepared for school.
Enclosed please find the Task Force's report and recommendations.
Sincerely,
Marti I. Lavis
Director
Enclosure
1700 Wrsr WASHINC~TOPIN-I,O ENIAXR, IZONA85 007 - (602) 542-431 1
THE GOVERNOR'S TASK FORCE ON PUPIL READINESS
Repor! to the Governor, President of the Senate,
and Speaker of the House sf Representatives.
The State of Arizona, under the leadership of Governor Fife Symington, has
established the Governor's Task Force on Pupil Readiness. Senate Bill 1079.
The Task Force shall:
1. Examine and determine methods that will assist in ensuring that all
children are appropriately prepared to enter and succeed in a
school environment.
2. Develop a written report containing its findings and
recommendations, including recommendations for possible
legislative action.
3. Submit a final report to the Governor, President of the Senate and
Speaker of the House of Representatives by December 31, 1992.
The Task Force for Pupil Readiness focused on the first national goal which was
established by the President of the United States and the Nation's governors.
The first goal is as follows:
By the year 2000, all children in America will start school
ready to learn.
All disadvantaged and disabled children will have access to high
quality and developmentally appropriate preschool programs that
help prepare children for school.
Every parent in America will be a child's first teacher and devote
time each day helping his or her preschool child learn; parents will
have access to the training and support they need.
Children will receive the nutrition and health care needed to arrive
at school with healthy minds and bodies, and the number of low
birthweight babies will be significantly reduced through enhanced
prenatal health systems.
READINESS DEFINED:
"School readiness is far more than academic knowledge and skills.
Readiness is based on children's physical health, self-confidence and
social competence."
"School readiness is not determined solely by the innate abilities and
capacities of young children. Readiness is shaped and developed by
people and environments." (Caring Communities: Supporting Young
Children and Families)
A PHILOSOPHY FOR ARIZONA CHILDREN
We Believe That:
1. Arizona must attend to the needs of its youngest citizens. "We cannot
afford to ignore our children and their families. Their start in life depends
on us; our future depends on them." (Hogg Foundation for Mental Health)
2. Parents are the first and primary teachers and caregivers of their children.
They should be encouraged and supported in this role.
3. Cultural diversity should be recognized and respected in policy planning,
program design, development and implementation.
4. Adequate training should be provided to those who educate and provide
services to young children and their families.
5. Comprehensive, more effective, and less costly services should be
provided through further coordination of services to children and families.
6. State funded programs, i.e. Healthy Start, and comprehensive preschool-at-
risk programs, should continue to be funded and expanded to serve
eligible children and families.
7. Adequate maternal and child health, and nutrition services should be
provided with minimal bureaucratic costs and requirements.
8. Children must live in nurturing, stable and safe environments.
9. We must preserve, sustain and support the language (s) and cultural
diversity of children and their families.
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION
The Task force on Pupil Readiness recommends:
Affordable, accessible health care for all families.
This care must include prevention and treatment. This system must
provide high-quality, coordinated services.
Support and training for parents.
This training must be comprehensive and culturally sensitive so that
parents will gain knowledge and skills necessary to be nurturing people.
Developmentally appropriate early childhood care and education for
all children.
The funding of preschool-at-risk sites should be continued and expanded to
meet the needs of rural and urban areas. In addition, utilization of and
coordination with other developmentally appropriate early childhood
programs, both public and private, is recommended in order to ensure
readiness for all children entering kindergarten.
Educators work cooperatively to establish linkages and ease
transitions between educational settings for young children and their
families.
In order for preschools and elementary schools to establish effective linkages
and ease transitions for young children and families, it is important there be a
continuation of comprehensive services, developmentally appropriate
program curricula, communication and cooperation between educators,
parent involvement, and planned transition activities for children and families.
Intensive and sustained staff development opportunities for all who
work with young children and their families.
A comprehensive statewide training plan and system should be established to
provide staff development for all levels of staff working in programs for
children and families.
Involvement and coordination of business, volunteer and local
government organizations in effort to meet the needs of families and
children.
A priority for these agencies should be the development of media and public
education campaigns to heighten awareness and place child and family
issues high on the public agenda.
Create coherent and flexible systems through which the needs of
families and children are served without undue bureaucratic
entanglements.
Coordination of state government agency leadership should continue in order
to provide family friendly systems and services.
To accomplish the above recommendations for children and families, everyone
must care that our children are doing well in their homes, in their schools, and in
their communities. Investing in children early through health care, family-friendly
systems and communities, high-quality early childhood programs, and other
strategies planned to support children will give them a head start in life and a
readiness to learn. These methods will ensure that all children are prepared to
succeed in a school environment.
GOVERNOR'S TASK FORCE ON PUPIL READINFSS
The Honorable Lela Alston
Arizona State Senate
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-4485
The Honorable Frank Celaya
AZ House of Representatives
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-5829
Georgia Alvarez Kathy Evans
Department of Economic Security Dayspring Preschool
81 5 N. 18th Street 1365 E. Elliot
Phoenix, AZ 85006 Tempe, AZ 85284
255-3722 838-9097
Robin Berry
Maricopa Unified School
Post Office Box 630
Maricopa, AZ 85239
258-4960 Ext. 101
Mary Brock
Yuma District #1
450 W. 6th Street
Yuma, AZ 85364
782-6581
The Honorable Bob Burns
AZ House of Representatives
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-5872
Tillie Byler
3922 W. Tierra Buena
Phoenix, AZ 85023
435-31 97
Norma Castillo
302 E. Riley Drive
Avondale, AZ 85323
932-1 467
Margaret Finley
2422 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85009
542-4643
The Honorable Lisa Graham
AZ House of Representatives
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-0745
The Honorable James Henderson
Arizona State Senate
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-4323
Janece Kline
Kachina County Day School
6602 E. Malcomb
Scottsdale, AZ 85253
951 -0745
Paul Koehler, Ph. D.
Department of Education
Associate Superintendent
1535 W. Jefferson
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-5754
Pupil Readiness
Page 2
Marti Lavis
Governor's Office for Children
1700 West Washington, Suite 404
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
542-31 91
Arnold Ramirez
234 N. Central, #850
Phoenix, AZ 85004
262-4042
Mark Roman
1830 S. Alma School
Mesa, Arizona 8521 0
838-0458
The Honorable Matt Salmon
Arizona State Senate
1700 W. Washington
Phoenix, AZ 85007
542-5288
Marlene I. Zappia-Hall, Ph. D.
322 E. Pierson
Phoenix, AZ 85009
381 -61 00
277-7484
NAEYC Position Statement on
School Readiness
Adopted July 1990
Preamble
State and local efforts for educational reform and rm-proved
accountability have prompted considerable
concern regarding children's "readiness" to enter kin-dergarten
and first grade. The issue gained national
prominence when the President and the nation's gov-ernors
adopted it as a national education goal, vowing
that "by the year 2000, all children will start school
ready to learn." The construct of school readiness is
based on the assumption that there is a predetermined
set of capabilities that all children need before entering
school. Therefore, any discussions of school readiness
must consider at least three critical factors:
1) the diversity and inequity of children's early life
experiences;
2) the wide range of variation in young children's de-velopment
and learning; and
3) the degree to which school expectations of children
entering kindergarten are reasonable, appropriate,
and supportive of individual differences.
Position
The National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC) believes that those who are com-mitted
to promoting universal school readiness must
also be committed to
1) addressing the inequities in early life experience
so that all children have access to the opportunities
which promote school success;
2) recognizing and supporting individual differences
among children; and
3) establishing reasonable and appropriate expec-tations
of children's capabilities upon school entry.
The current construct of readiness unduly places
the burden of proof on the child. Until the inequities of
life experience are addressed, the use of readiness cri-teria
for determining school entry or placement
blames children for their lack of opportunity. Fur-thermore,
many of the criteria now used as readiness
measures are based on inappropriate expectations of
children's abilities and fail to recognize normal indi-vidual
variation in the rate and nature of development
and learning. NAEYC believes it is the responsibility of
schools to meet the needs of children as they enter and
to provide whatever services are needed in the least
restrictive environment to help each child reach his or
her fullest potential.
Every child, except in the most severe instances of
abuse, neglect, or disability, enters school ready to
learn. However, all children do not succeed in school.
A lack of basic health care and economic security
places many children at risk for academic failure be-fore
they enter school. Families who lack emotional
resources and support are likewise not always capable
of p r e p a r i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n to meet school
expectations.
It is a public responsibility to ensure that all fam-ilies
have access to the services and support needed
to provide the strong relationships and rich experi-ences
that prepare children to succeed in school. At a
minimum such services include basic health care, in-cluding
prenatal care and childhood immunizations;
economic security; basic nutrition; adequate housing;
family support services; and high-quality early child-hood
programs.
Supporting families' childrearing efforts is critically
important for ensuring that more young children enter
school ready to succeed. But, such efforts address
only half of the problem. Attention must also be given
to ensuring that the expectations used to determine
readiness are legitimate and reasonable.
Expectations of the skills and abilities that young
children will bring to school must be based on knowl-edge
of child development and how children learn. A
basic principle of child development is that there is
tremendous normal variability both among children
of the same chronological age and within an individual
child. Children's social skills, physical development,
intellectual abilities, and emotional adjustment are
equally important areas of development, and each
contributes to how well a child does in school. Within
any group of children, it is likely that one child will
possess exceptional language and social skills, but be
average in physical development and emotionally less
mature than is typical of the age group. Another child
may have excellent skills in large and small muscle
control but be less advanced in language abilities.
Other children will present still different configura-tions
of development. When readiness expectations
are based on a narrow checklist focusing on only one
Young Children . November 1990 2 1
or two dimensions of development, the complexity of
growth is ignored and completely normal children
may be judged inadequate.
Wide variability also exists in the rate of children's
growth. The precise timing of when a child will
achieve a certain level of development or acquire a
specific skill cannot be predicted, nor does develop-ment
and learning occur in a uniform, incremental
fashion. Raising the legal entry age or holding an indi-vidual
child out of school a year are misdirected ef-forts
to impose a rigid schedule on children's growth
in spite of normal differences.
A prevalent, fundamental misconception is that
children's learning occurs in a sequential, hierarchical
process and that certain basic skills must exist before
later learning can occur. This misconception is the
basis for requiring acquisition of such isolated skills
as recognizing upper and lower case letters, counting
to 20, or coloring within the lines prior to school en-try.
In fact, children's acquisition of higher order think-ing
processes and problem-solving abilities occurs in
tandem with and may outpace acquisition of basic
skills. For example, children are able to comprehend
and compose far more complex stories than they can
read or write. To focus only on sounding out letters or
forming letters properly on the lines ignores children's
complex language capabilities and often squelches
their burgeoning interest in reading and writing. This
does not mean that the acquisition of basic skills is
unimportant; rather, focusing solely on isolated skills
deprives children of the meaningful context that pro-motes
effective learning.
Because learning does not occur in a rigid sequence
of skill acquisition and because wide variability is per-fectly
normal, it is inappropriate to determine school
entry on the basis of the acquisition of certain skills
and abilities. Schools may reasonably expect that
children entering kindergarten will be active, curious,
and eager to learn. They will know about themselves,
and will be interested in making new friends and shar-ing
experiences with them. Although gaining in self-control,
kindergarten children's enthusiasm will
sometimes overwhelm them, as, for example, they call
out an answer before the teacher calls on them. First
graders, unless they have had extremely negative ex-periences
in kindergarten, will also bring enthusiasm
and curiosity to their work. Typical six-year-olds are
gaining fine motor control, but for many, writing
within narrow lines can still be difficult. Likewise, six-year-
olds are gaining in their ability to move beyond
their firsthand experiences to more abstract thought,
but the here and now remains the most meaningful.
It is often assumed that tests exist to reliably de-termine
which children are "ready" to enter school.
Because of the nature of child development and how
children learn, ~t is extremely difficult to develop reli-
22
able and valid measures of young children's abilities.
When tests are used to make decisions which have
such considerable impact on children's lives as denial
of entry or assignment to a special class, they must
offer the highest assurance of reliability and validity.
No existing readiness measure meets these criteria.
Therefore, the only legally and ethically defensible cri-terion
for determining school entry is whether the child
has reached the legal chronological age of school en-try.
While arbitrary, this criterion is also fair.
The nature of children's development and learning
also dictates two important school responsibilities.
Schools must be able to respond to a diverse range of
abilities within any group of children, and the cur-riculum
in the early grades must provide meaningful
contexts for children's learning rather than focusing
primarily on isolated skill acquisition.
Today not only do many kindergartens and primary
grades focus on skill acquisition in the absence of
meaningful context, but the expectations that are
placed on children are often not age-appropriate.
Whether the result of parental pressures or the push
to improve student performance on standardized
tests, the curriculum has shifted. Children entering
kindergarten are now typically expected to be ready
for what previously constituted the first grade cur-riculum.
As a result, more children are struggling and
failing.
Even those children who have received every ad-vantage
prior to school entry find the inappropriate
demands difficult to meet, often experiencing great
stress and having their confidence as successful
learners undermined. The potentially greatest danger
lies in the lowered expectations of parents who see
their children struggle or fail, since parental expec-tations
are the most powerful predictor of children's
later school success.
Strategies for Schools to Succeed with
Every Child
Providing a Foundation for Later Learning
Children who come to school with a history of rich
experiences-being read to frequently, going to the
store with their own grocery list, dictating or writing
letters to grandma, t h n g trips to the park or the zoo,
and so on-have a rich background of firsthand experi-ence
upon which later learning can be based. These ex-periences
depend on families having the time, energy,
financial, and emotional resources. Given the growing
numbers of young children who spend major portions of
their day outside their home in early care and education
settings, it is equally critical that all early childhood
programs offer these types of rich experiences as well.
Young Children . November 1990
Early intervention services have been successfully de-vised
to provide families with an array of comprehensive
support services to help them provide the rich environ-ment
so critical for early learning. The federally funded
Head Start program is the best known example of this
type of program; a number of states and communities
offer variations on the theme with considerable success.
Successful intervention efforts have several key
elements:
1) they provide comprehensive services to ensure that
a wide range of individual needs are met;
2) they strengthen parents' roles as first teachers;
3) they provide a wide array of firsthand experiences
and learning activities either directly to children or
through parent education.
Intervention efforts which include these critical ele-ments
are most likely to result in lasting improvements
in children's achievement. Less successful are the too
frequent remedial efforts in which children are drilled on
isolated skills. Often, emphasis on drill and practice only
causes these children to lag further behind their count-erparts,
because learning devoid of context is much
more difficult to attain and to apply to new situations.
Decontextualized learning activities lack any real mean-ing
or challenge for the learner. Moreover, children
whose background and experiences are not congruent
with school expectations cannot call upon their own ex-periences
to provide the needed context.
Making Schools Responsive to Individual
Needs
Providing comprehensive services and family support
to children prior to school entry will better prepare
many children to succeed in school. Because of indi-vidual
differences in development, however, there will
always be variation in the skills and abilities of any
group of children entering school. Schools and teachers
must be able to respond to such variation by indi-vidualizing
their curriculum and teaching practices.
Malung schools more responsive to the needs of indi-vidual
learners will require ensuring that teachers and
administrators understand child development and how
children learn. They must know how to plan and irn-plement
a developmentally appropriate curriculum that
emphasizes child-initiated learning experiences as op-posed
to teacher lectures, small group as opposed to
whole-group activities, integrated lessons as opposed to
strict demarcations between subject areas, and active
hands-on learning with a variety of materials and activi-ties
as opposed to drill and practice of repetitive seat-work.
Rather than imposing rigid, lock-step distinctions
between grades, schools must be able to offer con-tinuous
progress for children through the primary
grades, recognizing that children's developmental time-tables
do not conform to the yearly calendar.
Young Children November 1990
Mak~ng the necessary changes will reclulre new re-sources
and understanding. In additlon to ensuring that
teachers of young children have specialized training in
child development and early education, class size
should t>e reduced and additional adults available to en-sure
individualized instruction. Investments in class-room
equipment and materials are also needed so that
children have access to a wide array of materials and
activities for hands-on learning.
The investment and commitment needed to ensure
that every child enters school ready to succeed and that
schools are ready to ensure their success will not be
small. But, it is necessary. As we enter the 2lst century,
our human resources are our most precious commodity.
For too long we have reserved educational achievement
for the very few. We have used labeling and sorting
mechanisms as a sieve and allowed too many children
to fail. This nation can no longer afford such costly er-rors
of omission. We must provide every child with the
firm foundation so critical to school success and we
must ensure that schools are prepared to meet the
needs of individual children as they arrive at the school
door. Only then will our nation be ready to enter the
21st century.
Sources for Additional Information
Bredekamp, S. & Shepard. L ( 1989) How best to pro-tect
children from inappropriate school expec-tations,
practices, and policies. Young Children, 44.
(3), 14-24.
Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentully appro-priate
practice in early childhood programs serving
young children from birth through age 8 (expanded
ed.). Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Kamii, C. (Ed.). (1990). Achievement testing in the
early grades: The games grown-ups play Washing-ton,
DC: NAEYC.
National Association of Elementary School Principals.
(1990). Early childhood education and the elernen-tary
school principal. Standards for yuuliry pro-grams
for young children Alexandria. V.4: Author.
National Association of State Boards of Education
(1988). Right from the start. The report of the NASBE
Task Force on Early Chrldhood Education Alex-andria,
VA: Author.
Shepard, LA. & Smith, M. E (1989). Flunkrrlg grades:
Research and policies on retentrc~n Lewes. England:
Falmer Press.
Wilier, B. & Bredekamp, S. (1990). Public Policy report.
Redefining readiness: An essential requisite for edu-cational
reform. Young Children. 4.5. (5). 22-24.
Copyright r 1990 bv the NatlonaI Assoc~at~ofnor the Education of
Young Ch~ldren See cover 2 lor rcZprlnt inlorrnat~ocl /Volume 46.
Number I ]
Arizona Preschool Survey
lsl
d l e a s e use this area (column A) to indicate the status of your school-> -> -> .> prnii3rnrnrnrnaci7~
d n t e r (shade) 0 for private, or 1 for state. ~ ~ D c Q ~ , ~ B I z ~ c ~ ~ C D t 3 e D m ~ ~ @ a G E ~ INSTRUCTIONS: @m~33@5)@@0@~;~
"Evaluate the early childhood program that you administer by ratin Q am m c3 a n r;-
v a c h following statement describes your program. Please use the EX IB EI EI CF) CE! m ci
Irl) NOT MET (There is little evidence that this statement accurately m m ia a, cs c@ E c!
-2) PARTIALLY MET (There is some evidence that this statement accurately a ED GD m m CE: a E
Iprogram.)
3) FULLY MET (There is a great deal of evidence that this statement
accurately describes the program.)
I 1 A long rangeTwntten curriculum plan that reflects the
available
I2 For each group of-ihlldren a wntten dally schedu1e;i plaGdidich~eGa TEiGGo zbv~beson t h y -
following $menyon_s a) Indoor/outdoor - - - -- -- - - -
m 3 - b) QuleUactlve
- -- - - ---
---_ _
I I - - - -i-- ,a -2 OI''
- - - - - - I
- - - - - - - -- - - --_ - -_I ---
111
8 A process exists for onentlng children and parents to the center that may include a pre-enrollment VISI~, , I - t---T_.
parent on-e-n ta-tlo n meeting, or gradual ln-tro d-uc tlon of chlld-re-n to the center ------ ; 0 ~ 3 0 ~C, c ,
m 9 Staff and parents c&%unlc8G;bout home andcenter childreanng practices in order to mlnlmlze potentla1 +-7-1-A- - -
/ 0 / O i O i 1: ~
- I - - - - - A
iapq 1 -, 7 I r (
volunteer to help In the classroom ) L -, i .. -,
- - - -- I -
m?l i 1 Parents and other famrly members are encouraged to be lnvolved In the I
'0 3 1 a i c ' ':
- -- -- - - -- - L --L- - -
s 12 A verbal andlor wntten system IS esfabllshed for shanngday-today happenings that affect chlldren
- - - - - -. - - -- - - - - - - - --
.I
13 Parents are Informed about the center's program through regular newsletters, bullehn boards, frequent
notes, telep-ho ne calls, and oth-e-r s~mllarm easures - ---
14 Early Chlldhood Teacher Assistants (staff who implement program achvrtles under dlrect supervlsron) are
1111 h~ghs chool g-r-a d-ua-t e-s o-r- t-h e equivalent and participate In- p r-of-es s~ona-dl ev e-lop-m en-ta l -pr-o-gr ams - - - ---A- -
15 Early Childhood Assoc~ate Teachers andEgrly Childhood Teachers (staff respnslble for the care and I
rn educat~on of a group of chlldren) have at least a CDA or an A A In Early Ch~ldhood Development c 3 , o ' c ~ i-,
sl
16 Staff working w~ths chool-age chlldren have tralnlng In chdd-dGelopment,b%reahon 6<~~aledledfi~d
- - - - - -- - - - ---- - - -
I
17 The center provldes regular tralnlng opportunjiesfor sfiff to Improve skllls In working wlth chlldren and
fam~iiesa nd staff a-r-e -e xpected to take p-a -rt - r -eg -u la-dy - -(W -o-rk sho~s,s emmars. resource materials. ln-sernce) -- ---
I
18 The center has wntten pollcles and procedures for operahng, including hours, fees, ~llnessh, olidays and
refund information - --- -- --- - - --
I
19 In cases where thecenter 1s governed by a board of directors, the center has wntten policies defining
roles and responslbllltles of board members and staff - - - -- -- - -
20 Accldent protection and l~ab~l~ty~ksurcaonvceera gels malntalnd-for chlldreiiard adults
1111
21 The dlrector (or appropnate pe
lncludlng social semces, menta
rn 22 Staff and admrn~stratorsc ommu
m
23. Staff plan and c
- - - - - - - - - - 4-4 ---- &--- --
-- 24 Regular staff meetlngs are held for staff to cons for indlvrdual ch~ldren,a nd i - ~ - l , - - , l - l - dlscuss working conditions (may meetlngs of small gr-o -up or full staff) --
U I U
I
25 Enough staff with pnr&yrespons~b~l~tfoyr Grklng wlth chlldren are available to provlde frequent personal
te- -ca-r e -as - -n-e eded. -- - - --- 1 -1 --,-
Arizona Preschool Survey,
Continued
- ---..- -- .F- U-LLY-MET-
1 PARTIALLY MET I
/- 2- -.. _ N 1 1 T r n __ _ - -- --
29. child health records include
center. Current cettiicate&~ ~-
I effectiv_eness in rneetlng the needs of chl
35 lnd~viduadl escnpt~onso f chlld devel
I leamlng acklties, facllltatrng optrmal
APPENDIX
Arizona Preschool Survey
Number and Percentage of Survey Respondents
by Type of Preschool
Private
Not Identified
Prepared by Research and Development. Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 1
A long range, written cumculum plan that reflects
the program's philosophy and goals for children is available.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Type of
S~KKJ~
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 2
For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve
a balance of activities on the following dimensions:
a) indoor / outdoor.
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
Private S&ool
Count
5
8
67
213
Rivate School
Cmt
1
1
25
266
%of
Private
1.7
2.7
22.9
72.7
State Smool AU Schools
State sdwol
%of
Total
1.2
1.9
15.8
50.4
Count
0
2
7
26
Not Identified
Cwnt
9
13
89
312
%of
Private
0.3
0.3
8.5
90.8
Colrnt
0
0
2
33
Count
4
3
15
73
% of
Total
2.1
3.1
21.0
73.8
%of
Total
0.2
0.2
5.9
62.9
Not 1M1e.d
%of
State
0.0
5.7
20.0
74.3
%of
State
0.0
0.0
5.7
94.3
Count
4
1
7
83
All Schools
%of
Unidentified
4.2
3.2
15.8
76.8
%of
Total
0.0
05
1.7
6.1
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
05
7.8
Count
5
2
34
382
%of
Total
0.9
0.7
35
17.3
% of
Unidentif~ed
4.2
1.1
7.4
87.4
% of
Total
1.2
0.5
8.0
90.3
% of
Total
0.9
0.2
1.7
19.6
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 3
For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve
a balance of activities on the following dimensions:
b) Quiet I active.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Type of
school
Response
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 4
For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve
a balance of activities on the following dimensions:
c) Individual 1 small group 1 large group.
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
Rivate school
count
0
0
16
277
Private School
State school
Count
0
0
27
266
%of
Private
0.0
0.0
5.5
94.5
Count
0
0
3
32
State School
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
3.8
65.5
Not Identified
%of
Private
0.0
0.0
9.2
90.8
Count
0
0
5
30
%of
State
0.0
0.0
8.6
91.4
Count
2
1
4
88
All schools
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
6.4
62.9
Not Identified
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
0.7
7.6
Count
2
1
23
397
%of
State
0.0
0.0
14.3
85.7
Count
2
1
8
84
AU schools
% of
Unidentified
2.1
1.1
4.2
92.6
% of
Total ,
0.5
0.2
5.4
93.9
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
1.2
7.1
Count
2
1
40
380
% of
Total
0.5
0.2
0.9
20.8
% of
Unidentified
2.1
1.1
8.4
88.4
% of
Total
0.5
0.2
9.5
89.8
% of
Total
05
0.2
1.9
19.9
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 5
For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve
a balance of activities on the following dimensions:
d) Large muscle 1 small muscle.
Private School Not 1M1ed
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 6
For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve
a balance of activities on the following dimensions:
e) Child initiated 1 staff initiated.
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
Private Sdmol
Count
4
2
34
253
State School
%of
Private
1.4
0.7
11.6
86.3
Count
0
0
5
30
%of
Total
0.9-
0.5
8.0
59.8
Not Identified
%of
State
0.0
0.0
14.3
85.7
Count
2
1
6
86
All Sdroola
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
1.2
7.1
Count
6
3
45
369
% of
Unidentified
2.1
1.1
6.3
90.5
% of
Total
1.4
0.7
10.6
87.2
% of
Total
05
0.2
1.4
20.3
-
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 7
A written description of the program's philosophy is available to the parents.
Type of
school Private School State School Not Identified All Schools
%of %of %of %of % of % of % of
Response Count Private Total Count State Total Cwnt Unidentified Total Count Total
Did Not
1 0.3 0.2 0 0.0 0.0 3 3.2 0.7 4 0.9
Not Met 2 0.7 0.5 1 2.9 0.2 3 3.2 0.7 6 1.4
Partially Met 19 6.5 4.5 2 5.7 0.5 6 6.3 1.4 27 6.4
Fully Met 271 . 925 . 64.1 . 32 . 91.4 . 7.6 . 83 . 87.4 . 19.6 . 386 . 91.3 A
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 8
A process exits for orienting children and parents to the center that may include a
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Arszona Preschool Survey:
Statement 9
Staff and parents communicate about home and center childrearing practices
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 10
Parents are welcome visitors in the center at all times (for example,
to observe, eat lunch with a child. or volmtea to help in the classroom.)
Type of
School Private School State School Not Identified AU Schools
%of %of %of %of % of % of 46 of
hunt Private Total Count State Total Count Unidentified Total Count Total
Did Not
R f s p d 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 3 3.2 0.7 3 0.7
Not Met 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 .O 0.0 1 1 .1 02 1 0.2
Partially Met 8 2.7 1.9 1 2.9 0.2 1 1.1 0.2 10 2.4
Fully Met 285 97.3 67.4 34 97.1 8.0 90 94.7 21.3 409 96.7
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix. Arizona.
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 12
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 11
Parents and other family members are encouraged to
be involved in the program in various ways.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Mu
Fully Met
Private School All Schools
Count
1
9
40
243
Count
3
10
50
360
% of
Total
0.7
2.4
11.8
85.1 -
State School Not l&ntified
Count
0
1
1
33
%of
Private
0.3
3.1
13.7
82.9
Count
2
0
9
84
%of
Total
0.2
2.1
9.5
57.4
%of
State
0.0
2.9
2.9
94.3
9 of
Unidentified
2.1
0.0
9.5
88.4
%of
Total
0.0
0.2
0.2
7.8
% of
Total
05
0.0
2.1
19.9
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 13
Statement 14
Not I-ed
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix. Arizona.
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES 1
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 15
Early Childhood Associate Teachers and Early Childhood Teachers
(staff responsible for the care and education of a group of children)
have at least a CDA or an A.A. in Early Childhood Development.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 16
Staff Working with school-age children have training
in child development, recreation or a related field.
Type of
school
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met ,
Trpe of
School
bqxmse
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
All Schools
Count
6
55
200
162
% of
Total
1.4
13.0
47.3
. 38.3
Private School
Rivate School
Count
2
40
143
108 ,
Count
36
15
82
160
State school
Count
1
4
12
18 ,
Not Identified
%of
Private
0.7
13.7
48.8
36.9 ,
%of
Private
12.3
5.1
28.0
54.6
StateSchoot All schools
%of
Total
0.5
9.5
33.8
25.5 ,
%of
Total
8.5
3.5
19.4
37.8
Not Identified
Count
3
2
9
21
Count
55
21
106
241
% of
Total
0.7
2.6
10.6
8.5 ,
Count
3
11
45
36
%of
State
2.9
11.4
34.3
51.4
Cwnt
16
4
15
60
% of
Total
13.0
5.0
25.1
57.0
% of
Unidentified
3.2
11.6
47.4
, 37.9 ,
%of
Total
0.2
0.9
2.8
, 4.3 ,
%of
State
8.6
5.7
25.7
60.0
%of
Total
0.7
0.5
2.1
5.0
% of
Unidentified
16.8
4.2
15.8
63.2
% of
Total
3.8
0.9
3.5
14.2
Statement 18
The center has written policies and procedures for operating,
including hours, fees, illness, holidays and refund information.
Private School Not Identified
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 17
The center provides regular training opportunities for staff to improve skills in
working with children and families and staff are expected to take part regularly.
(Workshops, seminars, resource materials, in-service)
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
rn of
School
Did Not
Not Met
Partidly Met
Fully Met
Rivltc School Not Identified All Schools
Count
3
12
68
340
Count
1
10
48
234
Cwnt
2
2
15
76
% of
Total
0.7
2.8
16.1
80.4
Statc School
Count
0
0
5
30
% of
Unidentified
2.1
2. I
15.8
80.0
%of
Private
0.3
3.4
16.4
79.9
% of
Total
0.5
0.5
3.5
18.0
%of
Total
0.2
2.4
11.3
55.3
%of
State
0.0
0.0
14.3
85.7
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
1 2
7.1
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 19
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 20
Accident protection and liability insurance coverage is maintained for children and adults.
Typeof
Sd1oo1
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
FullyMet
Ptivate School
Count
3
0
3
. 287
State School
%of
Private
1 .O
0.0
1 .O
. 98.0
Count
0
0
2
, 33
%of
Total
0.7
0.0
0.7
. 67.8
Not IdfdKed
%of
State
0.0
0.0
5.7
. 94.3
Count
4
2
1
, 88
AH Schools
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
05
, 7.8
Gnmt
7
2
6
, 408
%of
Unidentified
4.2
2.1
1.1
, 92.6
% of
Total
1.7
0.5
1.4
, 96.5
% of
Total
0.9
05
0.2
, 20.8
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 21
The director (or appropriate person) is familiar with and makes
appropriate use of community resources including social services,
mental & physical health agencies, educational programs & neighborhood centers.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education. Phoenix, Arizona.
Bpe of
School
Rtsponsc
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 22
Staff and administrators communicate frequently.
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met .
Private School
Count
1
4
44
244
Private School
Stste School
Count
2
3
8
280 .
%of
Private
0.3
1.4
15.0
83.3
Count
0
2
5
28
State School
%of
Total
0.2
0.9
10.4
57.7
Not Identilied
%of
Private
0.7
1 .O
2.7
95.6 .
Count
0
0
3
32 ,
%of
!hare
0.0
5.7
14.3
80.0
Count
2
1
14
78
All Schools
%of
Total
0.5
0.7
1.9
66.2 .
Not Identified
%of
Total
0.0
05
1.2
6.6
Count
3
7
63
350
%of
State
0.0
0.0
8.6
91.4
Count
4
1
2
88
AU Scboolrr
% of
Unidentified
2.1
1.1
14.7
82.1
% of
Total
0.7 - --
1.7
14.9
82.7
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
0.7
7.6
Count
6
4
13
400
% of
Total
0.5
0.2
3.3
18.4
%of
Unidentified
4.2
1.1
2.1
92.6
% of
Total
1.4
0.9
3.1
94.6
% of
Total
0.9
0.2
05
20.8
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 23
Staff plan and consult together.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Type of
school
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 24
Regular staff meetings are held for staff to consult on program
planning, plan for individual children, and discuss working conditions
(may be meetings of small group or full staff.)
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
Private School
k t
0
2
31
260
Private School
State school
Count
1
3
44
245
%of
Private
0.0
0.7
10.6
88.7
Count
0
0 .
4
3 1
State School
%of
Total
0.0
0.5
7.3
61.5
Not Identified
%of
Private
0.3
1 .O
15.0
83.6
Count
0
1
3
31
Count
2
1
5
87
%of
State
0.0
0.0
11.4
88.6
All schools
%of
Total
0.2
0.7
10.4
57.9
Not Ida~Xed
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
0.9
7.3
Count
2
3
40
378
%of
State
0.0
29
8.6
88.6
Count
3
2
6
84
AUScbools
% of
Unidentified
2.1
1.1
5.3
91.6
% of
Total
0.5
0.7
9.5
89.4
%of
Total
0.0
0.2
0.7
7.3
Count
4
6
53
360
% of
Total
0.5
0.2
1.2
20.6
% of
Unidentified
3.2
2.1
6.3
88.4
% of
Total
0.9
1.4
12.5
85.1 ,
%of
Total
0.7
0.5
1.4
19.9
Statement 26
Substitutes are provided to maintain
staff-child ratios when regular staff are absent.
Private School Not Identified
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 25
Enough staff with primary responsibility for working with children
are available to provide frequent personal contact, meaningful learning
activities, and to offer immediate care as needed
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
TVpc of
School
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
- Fully Met
All Schools
Count
2
2
10
409
% of
Total
0.5
0.5
2.4
96.7
Private School Not Identified
Count
2
0
1
92
State School
CMmt
0
1
7
285
Count
0
1
2
32
% of
Unidenrified
2.1
0.0
1.1
96.8
%of
Private
0.0
0.3
2.4
97.3
% of
Total
05
0.0
0.2
21.7
%of
State
0.0
2.9
5.7
91.4
%of
Total
0.0
0.2
1.7
67.4
%of
Total
0.0
0.2
0.5
7.6
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 27
The center is licensed or accredited by the appropriate
state / local agencies. If exempt from licensing. the center demonstrates
compliance with it's own state regulations for child care centers subject to licensing.
Private School Not Identified
Statement 28
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 29
Child health records include results of recent health examination,
up-to-date record of immunizations, emergency contact info., names
of all people authorized to call for the child, and important health history.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Type of
School
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 30
Staff are alert to the health of each child. Individual
medical problems and accidents are recorded and reported
to staff and parents, and a written record is kept of such incidents.
Type of
school
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
. Fully Met
Private School All Schools
Rivate school
Count
5
0
23
265
Cwnt
8
0
30
385
Cwnt
6
0
5
282
State school
% of
Total
1.9
0.0
7.1
91.0
State SFbool
%of
Private
1.7
0.0
7.8
90.4
Count
0
0
2
33
Not Identitied
%of
Private
2.0
0.0
1.7
96.2
Count
0
0
2
33
%of
Total
1.2
0.0
5.4
62.6
Count
3
0
5
87
%of
Total
1.4
0.0
1.2
67.5
Not 1 M 1 e d
%of
State
0.0
0.0
5.7
94.3
%of
State
0.0
0.0
5.7
94.3
Count
3
0
1
9 1
All Schools
% of
Unidentified
3.2
0.0
5.3
91.6
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
0.5
7.8
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
0.5
7.8
Count
9
0
8
392
% of
Total
0.7
0.0
1.2
20.6
% of
Unidentif~ed
3 2
0.0
1.1
95.8
% of
Total
2.1
0.0
1.9
96.0
% of
Total
0.7
0.0
0.2
21.5
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 33
Staff evaluations include classroom observation.
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
Type of
School
Response
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
- Fully Met _
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 34
At least once a year staff, other professionals, and
parents are involves (sic) in evaluating the program's
effectiveness in meeting the needs of children and parents.
Type of
Scboo1
Did Not
Respond
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
Private School
Count
5
10
27
251
Private School
State School
Count
4
%of
Private
1.7
3.4
9.2
85.7
Count
0
0
5
30 .
Statr: school
%of
Total
1.2
2.4
6.4
59.3 .
Not Identified
%of
Private
1.4
Count
0
21
89
179
%of
State
0.0
0.0
14.3
85.7 .
Count
4
0
4
87 .
All Schools
%of
Total
0.9
Not Identified
%of
Total
0.0
0.0
1.2
7.1 .
Count
9
10
36
368 ,
%of
State
0.0
Count
--3
3
27
62
All Schools
7.2
30.4
61.1
% of
Unidentified
4.2
0.0
4.2
91.6 .
% of
Total
2.1
2.4
8.5
87.0
%of
Total
0.0
Count
7
27
125
264
% of
Total
0.9
0.0
0.9
20.6 ,
% of
Unidentified
3 . 2
3.2
28.4
65.3
% of
Total
1.7
6.4
29.6
62.4
5.0
21.0
42.3
% of
Total
0.7 ~~~~~-~~----
0.7
6.4
14.7
3
9
23
8.6
25.7
65.7
0.7
2.1
5.4
Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona.
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES
Arizona Preschool Survey:
Statement 35
Individual descriptions of child development are written and compiled
as a basis for planning appropriate learning activities, facilitating
optimal development of each child, and use in communication with parents.
Type of
school
Response
Did Not
Not Met
Partially Met
Fully Met
All Schools
Count
7
26.
115
275
Private School
5% of
Total
1.7
6.1
27.2 -
65.0
Count
4
16
87
186
Stare School
%of
Private
1.4
5.5
29.7
63.5
Not Identifled
%of
Total
0.9
3.8
20.6
44.0
%of
Total
0.0
0.7
1.9
5.7
Count
0
3
8
24
Count
3
7
20
65
%of
State
0.0
8.6
22.9
68.6
% of
Unidentified
3.2
7.4
21.1
68.4
%of
Toul
0.7
1.7
4.4
15.4

Description

TITLE	Governor's task force on pupil readiness report
CREATOR	Arizona. (Governor's Task Force on Computers in Education).
SUBJECT	Education--Arizona--Curricula; Academic Achievement--Arizona;
Browse Topic	Education
DESCRIPTION	37 pages (PDF version). File size: 1763060 Bytes.
Language	English
Publisher	Arizona. (Governor's Task Force on Computers in Education).
TYPE	Text
Material Collection	State Documents House Received Reports
Acquisition Note	Publication or link to publication sent to reports@lib.az.us
RIGHTS MANAGEMENT	Copyright to this resource is held by the creating agency and is provided here for educational purposes only. It may not be downloaded, reproduced or distributed in any format without written permission of the creating agency. Any attempt to circumvent the access controls placed on this file is a violation of United States and international copyright laws, and is subject to criminal prosecution.
DATE ORIGINAL	1992-12-31
Time Period	1990s (1990-1999)
ORIGINAL FORMAT	Paper
Source Identifier	GV 134.2:P 86
Location	ocn276955658
DIGITAL IDENTIFIER	PRR_DEC_31_1992.pdf
DIGITAL FORMAT	PDF (Portable Document Format)
REPOSITORY	Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records--Law and Research Library.
File Size	1763060 Bytes
Full Text	GOUERNOR'S TASK FORCE PUPIL READINESS REPORT Presented to The Honorable Fife Symington, Gouernor State of Arizona The Honorable Peter Rios, President Arizona State Senate The Honorable Jane Dee Hull, Speaker Arizona State House of Representatiues December 31, 1992 Marti I. Lavis, Director The Governor's Office for Children 1700 West Washington, Suite 404 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-31 96 TASK FORCE ON PUPIL READINESS REPORT Table of Contents Task Force Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 First National Goal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Readiness Defined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 A Philosophy for Arizona Children . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Recommendations for Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4 Appendix Governor's Task Force Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix A NAEYC Position Statement on School Readiness . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix B Arizona Preschool Survey Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix C Arizona Preschool Survey Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix D k l l t SYMINGTON C;ovel nor December 30, 1992 The Honorable Jane Dee Hull Speaker of the House House of Representatives 1700 West Washington Phoenix, Arizona 85007 Dear Representative Hull: \ i . A The Governor's Task Force on Pupil Readiness was mandated by Senate Bill 1079. The Task Force has dedicated this past year to examining the methods that will ensure all of Arizona's children will be appropriately prepared for school. Enclosed please find the Task Force's report and recommendations. Sincerely, Marti I. Lavis Director Enclosure 1700 Wrsr WASHINC~TOPIN-I,O ENIAXR, IZONA85 007 - (602) 542-431 1 THE GOVERNOR'S TASK FORCE ON PUPIL READINESS Repor! to the Governor, President of the Senate, and Speaker of the House sf Representatives. The State of Arizona, under the leadership of Governor Fife Symington, has established the Governor's Task Force on Pupil Readiness. Senate Bill 1079. The Task Force shall: 1. Examine and determine methods that will assist in ensuring that all children are appropriately prepared to enter and succeed in a school environment. 2. Develop a written report containing its findings and recommendations, including recommendations for possible legislative action. 3. Submit a final report to the Governor, President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives by December 31, 1992. The Task Force for Pupil Readiness focused on the first national goal which was established by the President of the United States and the Nation's governors. The first goal is as follows: By the year 2000, all children in America will start school ready to learn. All disadvantaged and disabled children will have access to high quality and developmentally appropriate preschool programs that help prepare children for school. Every parent in America will be a child's first teacher and devote time each day helping his or her preschool child learn; parents will have access to the training and support they need. Children will receive the nutrition and health care needed to arrive at school with healthy minds and bodies, and the number of low birthweight babies will be significantly reduced through enhanced prenatal health systems. READINESS DEFINED: "School readiness is far more than academic knowledge and skills. Readiness is based on children's physical health, self-confidence and social competence." "School readiness is not determined solely by the innate abilities and capacities of young children. Readiness is shaped and developed by people and environments." (Caring Communities: Supporting Young Children and Families) A PHILOSOPHY FOR ARIZONA CHILDREN We Believe That: 1. Arizona must attend to the needs of its youngest citizens. "We cannot afford to ignore our children and their families. Their start in life depends on us; our future depends on them." (Hogg Foundation for Mental Health) 2. Parents are the first and primary teachers and caregivers of their children. They should be encouraged and supported in this role. 3. Cultural diversity should be recognized and respected in policy planning, program design, development and implementation. 4. Adequate training should be provided to those who educate and provide services to young children and their families. 5. Comprehensive, more effective, and less costly services should be provided through further coordination of services to children and families. 6. State funded programs, i.e. Healthy Start, and comprehensive preschool-at- risk programs, should continue to be funded and expanded to serve eligible children and families. 7. Adequate maternal and child health, and nutrition services should be provided with minimal bureaucratic costs and requirements. 8. Children must live in nurturing, stable and safe environments. 9. We must preserve, sustain and support the language (s) and cultural diversity of children and their families. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTION The Task force on Pupil Readiness recommends: Affordable, accessible health care for all families. This care must include prevention and treatment. This system must provide high-quality, coordinated services. Support and training for parents. This training must be comprehensive and culturally sensitive so that parents will gain knowledge and skills necessary to be nurturing people. Developmentally appropriate early childhood care and education for all children. The funding of preschool-at-risk sites should be continued and expanded to meet the needs of rural and urban areas. In addition, utilization of and coordination with other developmentally appropriate early childhood programs, both public and private, is recommended in order to ensure readiness for all children entering kindergarten. Educators work cooperatively to establish linkages and ease transitions between educational settings for young children and their families. In order for preschools and elementary schools to establish effective linkages and ease transitions for young children and families, it is important there be a continuation of comprehensive services, developmentally appropriate program curricula, communication and cooperation between educators, parent involvement, and planned transition activities for children and families. Intensive and sustained staff development opportunities for all who work with young children and their families. A comprehensive statewide training plan and system should be established to provide staff development for all levels of staff working in programs for children and families. Involvement and coordination of business, volunteer and local government organizations in effort to meet the needs of families and children. A priority for these agencies should be the development of media and public education campaigns to heighten awareness and place child and family issues high on the public agenda. Create coherent and flexible systems through which the needs of families and children are served without undue bureaucratic entanglements. Coordination of state government agency leadership should continue in order to provide family friendly systems and services. To accomplish the above recommendations for children and families, everyone must care that our children are doing well in their homes, in their schools, and in their communities. Investing in children early through health care, family-friendly systems and communities, high-quality early childhood programs, and other strategies planned to support children will give them a head start in life and a readiness to learn. These methods will ensure that all children are prepared to succeed in a school environment. GOVERNOR'S TASK FORCE ON PUPIL READINFSS The Honorable Lela Alston Arizona State Senate 1700 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-4485 The Honorable Frank Celaya AZ House of Representatives 1700 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-5829 Georgia Alvarez Kathy Evans Department of Economic Security Dayspring Preschool 81 5 N. 18th Street 1365 E. Elliot Phoenix, AZ 85006 Tempe, AZ 85284 255-3722 838-9097 Robin Berry Maricopa Unified School Post Office Box 630 Maricopa, AZ 85239 258-4960 Ext. 101 Mary Brock Yuma District #1 450 W. 6th Street Yuma, AZ 85364 782-6581 The Honorable Bob Burns AZ House of Representatives 1700 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-5872 Tillie Byler 3922 W. Tierra Buena Phoenix, AZ 85023 435-31 97 Norma Castillo 302 E. Riley Drive Avondale, AZ 85323 932-1 467 Margaret Finley 2422 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85009 542-4643 The Honorable Lisa Graham AZ House of Representatives 1700 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-0745 The Honorable James Henderson Arizona State Senate 1700 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-4323 Janece Kline Kachina County Day School 6602 E. Malcomb Scottsdale, AZ 85253 951 -0745 Paul Koehler, Ph. D. Department of Education Associate Superintendent 1535 W. Jefferson Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-5754 Pupil Readiness Page 2 Marti Lavis Governor's Office for Children 1700 West Washington, Suite 404 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 542-31 91 Arnold Ramirez 234 N. Central, #850 Phoenix, AZ 85004 262-4042 Mark Roman 1830 S. Alma School Mesa, Arizona 8521 0 838-0458 The Honorable Matt Salmon Arizona State Senate 1700 W. Washington Phoenix, AZ 85007 542-5288 Marlene I. Zappia-Hall, Ph. D. 322 E. Pierson Phoenix, AZ 85009 381 -61 00 277-7484 NAEYC Position Statement on School Readiness Adopted July 1990 Preamble State and local efforts for educational reform and rm-proved accountability have prompted considerable concern regarding children's "readiness" to enter kin-dergarten and first grade. The issue gained national prominence when the President and the nation's gov-ernors adopted it as a national education goal, vowing that "by the year 2000, all children will start school ready to learn." The construct of school readiness is based on the assumption that there is a predetermined set of capabilities that all children need before entering school. Therefore, any discussions of school readiness must consider at least three critical factors: 1) the diversity and inequity of children's early life experiences; 2) the wide range of variation in young children's de-velopment and learning; and 3) the degree to which school expectations of children entering kindergarten are reasonable, appropriate, and supportive of individual differences. Position The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) believes that those who are com-mitted to promoting universal school readiness must also be committed to 1) addressing the inequities in early life experience so that all children have access to the opportunities which promote school success; 2) recognizing and supporting individual differences among children; and 3) establishing reasonable and appropriate expec-tations of children's capabilities upon school entry. The current construct of readiness unduly places the burden of proof on the child. Until the inequities of life experience are addressed, the use of readiness cri-teria for determining school entry or placement blames children for their lack of opportunity. Fur-thermore, many of the criteria now used as readiness measures are based on inappropriate expectations of children's abilities and fail to recognize normal indi-vidual variation in the rate and nature of development and learning. NAEYC believes it is the responsibility of schools to meet the needs of children as they enter and to provide whatever services are needed in the least restrictive environment to help each child reach his or her fullest potential. Every child, except in the most severe instances of abuse, neglect, or disability, enters school ready to learn. However, all children do not succeed in school. A lack of basic health care and economic security places many children at risk for academic failure be-fore they enter school. Families who lack emotional resources and support are likewise not always capable of p r e p a r i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n to meet school expectations. It is a public responsibility to ensure that all fam-ilies have access to the services and support needed to provide the strong relationships and rich experi-ences that prepare children to succeed in school. At a minimum such services include basic health care, in-cluding prenatal care and childhood immunizations; economic security; basic nutrition; adequate housing; family support services; and high-quality early child-hood programs. Supporting families' childrearing efforts is critically important for ensuring that more young children enter school ready to succeed. But, such efforts address only half of the problem. Attention must also be given to ensuring that the expectations used to determine readiness are legitimate and reasonable. Expectations of the skills and abilities that young children will bring to school must be based on knowl-edge of child development and how children learn. A basic principle of child development is that there is tremendous normal variability both among children of the same chronological age and within an individual child. Children's social skills, physical development, intellectual abilities, and emotional adjustment are equally important areas of development, and each contributes to how well a child does in school. Within any group of children, it is likely that one child will possess exceptional language and social skills, but be average in physical development and emotionally less mature than is typical of the age group. Another child may have excellent skills in large and small muscle control but be less advanced in language abilities. Other children will present still different configura-tions of development. When readiness expectations are based on a narrow checklist focusing on only one Young Children . November 1990 2 1 or two dimensions of development, the complexity of growth is ignored and completely normal children may be judged inadequate. Wide variability also exists in the rate of children's growth. The precise timing of when a child will achieve a certain level of development or acquire a specific skill cannot be predicted, nor does develop-ment and learning occur in a uniform, incremental fashion. Raising the legal entry age or holding an indi-vidual child out of school a year are misdirected ef-forts to impose a rigid schedule on children's growth in spite of normal differences. A prevalent, fundamental misconception is that children's learning occurs in a sequential, hierarchical process and that certain basic skills must exist before later learning can occur. This misconception is the basis for requiring acquisition of such isolated skills as recognizing upper and lower case letters, counting to 20, or coloring within the lines prior to school en-try. In fact, children's acquisition of higher order think-ing processes and problem-solving abilities occurs in tandem with and may outpace acquisition of basic skills. For example, children are able to comprehend and compose far more complex stories than they can read or write. To focus only on sounding out letters or forming letters properly on the lines ignores children's complex language capabilities and often squelches their burgeoning interest in reading and writing. This does not mean that the acquisition of basic skills is unimportant; rather, focusing solely on isolated skills deprives children of the meaningful context that pro-motes effective learning. Because learning does not occur in a rigid sequence of skill acquisition and because wide variability is per-fectly normal, it is inappropriate to determine school entry on the basis of the acquisition of certain skills and abilities. Schools may reasonably expect that children entering kindergarten will be active, curious, and eager to learn. They will know about themselves, and will be interested in making new friends and shar-ing experiences with them. Although gaining in self-control, kindergarten children's enthusiasm will sometimes overwhelm them, as, for example, they call out an answer before the teacher calls on them. First graders, unless they have had extremely negative ex-periences in kindergarten, will also bring enthusiasm and curiosity to their work. Typical six-year-olds are gaining fine motor control, but for many, writing within narrow lines can still be difficult. Likewise, six-year- olds are gaining in their ability to move beyond their firsthand experiences to more abstract thought, but the here and now remains the most meaningful. It is often assumed that tests exist to reliably de-termine which children are "ready" to enter school. Because of the nature of child development and how children learn, ~t is extremely difficult to develop reli- 22 able and valid measures of young children's abilities. When tests are used to make decisions which have such considerable impact on children's lives as denial of entry or assignment to a special class, they must offer the highest assurance of reliability and validity. No existing readiness measure meets these criteria. Therefore, the only legally and ethically defensible cri-terion for determining school entry is whether the child has reached the legal chronological age of school en-try. While arbitrary, this criterion is also fair. The nature of children's development and learning also dictates two important school responsibilities. Schools must be able to respond to a diverse range of abilities within any group of children, and the cur-riculum in the early grades must provide meaningful contexts for children's learning rather than focusing primarily on isolated skill acquisition. Today not only do many kindergartens and primary grades focus on skill acquisition in the absence of meaningful context, but the expectations that are placed on children are often not age-appropriate. Whether the result of parental pressures or the push to improve student performance on standardized tests, the curriculum has shifted. Children entering kindergarten are now typically expected to be ready for what previously constituted the first grade cur-riculum. As a result, more children are struggling and failing. Even those children who have received every ad-vantage prior to school entry find the inappropriate demands difficult to meet, often experiencing great stress and having their confidence as successful learners undermined. The potentially greatest danger lies in the lowered expectations of parents who see their children struggle or fail, since parental expec-tations are the most powerful predictor of children's later school success. Strategies for Schools to Succeed with Every Child Providing a Foundation for Later Learning Children who come to school with a history of rich experiences-being read to frequently, going to the store with their own grocery list, dictating or writing letters to grandma, t h n g trips to the park or the zoo, and so on-have a rich background of firsthand experi-ence upon which later learning can be based. These ex-periences depend on families having the time, energy, financial, and emotional resources. Given the growing numbers of young children who spend major portions of their day outside their home in early care and education settings, it is equally critical that all early childhood programs offer these types of rich experiences as well. Young Children . November 1990 Early intervention services have been successfully de-vised to provide families with an array of comprehensive support services to help them provide the rich environ-ment so critical for early learning. The federally funded Head Start program is the best known example of this type of program; a number of states and communities offer variations on the theme with considerable success. Successful intervention efforts have several key elements: 1) they provide comprehensive services to ensure that a wide range of individual needs are met; 2) they strengthen parents' roles as first teachers; 3) they provide a wide array of firsthand experiences and learning activities either directly to children or through parent education. Intervention efforts which include these critical ele-ments are most likely to result in lasting improvements in children's achievement. Less successful are the too frequent remedial efforts in which children are drilled on isolated skills. Often, emphasis on drill and practice only causes these children to lag further behind their count-erparts, because learning devoid of context is much more difficult to attain and to apply to new situations. Decontextualized learning activities lack any real mean-ing or challenge for the learner. Moreover, children whose background and experiences are not congruent with school expectations cannot call upon their own ex-periences to provide the needed context. Making Schools Responsive to Individual Needs Providing comprehensive services and family support to children prior to school entry will better prepare many children to succeed in school. Because of indi-vidual differences in development, however, there will always be variation in the skills and abilities of any group of children entering school. Schools and teachers must be able to respond to such variation by indi-vidualizing their curriculum and teaching practices. Malung schools more responsive to the needs of indi-vidual learners will require ensuring that teachers and administrators understand child development and how children learn. They must know how to plan and irn-plement a developmentally appropriate curriculum that emphasizes child-initiated learning experiences as op-posed to teacher lectures, small group as opposed to whole-group activities, integrated lessons as opposed to strict demarcations between subject areas, and active hands-on learning with a variety of materials and activi-ties as opposed to drill and practice of repetitive seat-work. Rather than imposing rigid, lock-step distinctions between grades, schools must be able to offer con-tinuous progress for children through the primary grades, recognizing that children's developmental time-tables do not conform to the yearly calendar. Young Children November 1990 Mak~ng the necessary changes will reclulre new re-sources and understanding. In additlon to ensuring that teachers of young children have specialized training in child development and early education, class size should t>e reduced and additional adults available to en-sure individualized instruction. Investments in class-room equipment and materials are also needed so that children have access to a wide array of materials and activities for hands-on learning. The investment and commitment needed to ensure that every child enters school ready to succeed and that schools are ready to ensure their success will not be small. But, it is necessary. As we enter the 2lst century, our human resources are our most precious commodity. For too long we have reserved educational achievement for the very few. We have used labeling and sorting mechanisms as a sieve and allowed too many children to fail. This nation can no longer afford such costly er-rors of omission. We must provide every child with the firm foundation so critical to school success and we must ensure that schools are prepared to meet the needs of individual children as they arrive at the school door. Only then will our nation be ready to enter the 21st century. Sources for Additional Information Bredekamp, S. & Shepard. L ( 1989) How best to pro-tect children from inappropriate school expec-tations, practices, and policies. Young Children, 44. (3), 14-24. Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentully appro-priate practice in early childhood programs serving young children from birth through age 8 (expanded ed.). Washington, DC: NAEYC. Kamii, C. (Ed.). (1990). Achievement testing in the early grades: The games grown-ups play Washing-ton, DC: NAEYC. National Association of Elementary School Principals. (1990). Early childhood education and the elernen-tary school principal. Standards for yuuliry pro-grams for young children Alexandria. V.4: Author. National Association of State Boards of Education (1988). Right from the start. The report of the NASBE Task Force on Early Chrldhood Education Alex-andria, VA: Author. Shepard, LA. & Smith, M. E (1989). Flunkrrlg grades: Research and policies on retentrc~n Lewes. England: Falmer Press. Wilier, B. & Bredekamp, S. (1990). Public Policy report. Redefining readiness: An essential requisite for edu-cational reform. Young Children. 4.5. (5). 22-24. Copyright r 1990 bv the NatlonaI Assoc~at~ofnor the Education of Young Ch~ldren See cover 2 lor rcZprlnt inlorrnat~ocl /Volume 46. Number I ] Arizona Preschool Survey lsl d l e a s e use this area (column A) to indicate the status of your school-> -> -> .> prnii3rnrnrnrnaci7~ d n t e r (shade) 0 for private, or 1 for state. ~ ~ D c Q ~ , ~ B I z ~ c ~ ~ C D t 3 e D m ~ ~ @ a G E ~ INSTRUCTIONS: @m~33@5)@@0@~;~ "Evaluate the early childhood program that you administer by ratin Q am m c3 a n r;- v a c h following statement describes your program. Please use the EX IB EI EI CF) CE! m ci Irl) NOT MET (There is little evidence that this statement accurately m m ia a, cs c@ E c! -2) PARTIALLY MET (There is some evidence that this statement accurately a ED GD m m CE: a E Iprogram.) 3) FULLY MET (There is a great deal of evidence that this statement accurately describes the program.) I 1 A long rangeTwntten curriculum plan that reflects the available I2 For each group of-ihlldren a wntten dally schedu1e;i plaGdidich~eGa TEiGGo zbv~beson t h y - following $menyon_s a) Indoor/outdoor - - - -- -- - - - m 3 - b) QuleUactlve - -- - - --- ---_ _ I I - - - -i-- ,a -2 OI'' - - - - - - I - - - - - - - -- - - --_ - -_I --- 111 8 A process exists for onentlng children and parents to the center that may include a pre-enrollment VISI~, , I - t---T_. parent on-e-n ta-tlo n meeting, or gradual ln-tro d-uc tlon of chlld-re-n to the center ------ ; 0 ~ 3 0 ~C, c , m 9 Staff and parents c&%unlc8G;bout home andcenter childreanng practices in order to mlnlmlze potentla1 +-7-1-A- - - / 0 / O i O i 1: ~ - I - - - - - A iapq 1 -, 7 I r ( volunteer to help In the classroom ) L -, i .. -, - - - -- I - m?l i 1 Parents and other famrly members are encouraged to be lnvolved In the I '0 3 1 a i c ' ': - -- -- - - -- - L --L- - - s 12 A verbal andlor wntten system IS esfabllshed for shanngday-today happenings that affect chlldren - - - - - -. - - -- - - - - - - - -- .I 13 Parents are Informed about the center's program through regular newsletters, bullehn boards, frequent notes, telep-ho ne calls, and oth-e-r s~mllarm easures - --- 14 Early Chlldhood Teacher Assistants (staff who implement program achvrtles under dlrect supervlsron) are 1111 h~ghs chool g-r-a d-ua-t e-s o-r- t-h e equivalent and participate In- p r-of-es s~ona-dl ev e-lop-m en-ta l -pr-o-gr ams - - - ---A- - 15 Early Childhood Assoc~ate Teachers andEgrly Childhood Teachers (staff respnslble for the care and I rn educat~on of a group of chlldren) have at least a CDA or an A A In Early Ch~ldhood Development c 3 , o ' c ~ i-, sl 16 Staff working w~ths chool-age chlldren have tralnlng In chdd-dGelopment,b%reahon 6<~~aledledfi~d - - - - - -- - - - ---- - - - I 17 The center provldes regular tralnlng opportunjiesfor sfiff to Improve skllls In working wlth chlldren and fam~iiesa nd staff a-r-e -e xpected to take p-a -rt - r -eg -u la-dy - -(W -o-rk sho~s,s emmars. resource materials. ln-sernce) -- --- I 18 The center has wntten pollcles and procedures for operahng, including hours, fees, ~llnessh, olidays and refund information - --- -- --- - - -- I 19 In cases where thecenter 1s governed by a board of directors, the center has wntten policies defining roles and responslbllltles of board members and staff - - - -- -- - - 20 Accldent protection and l~ab~l~ty~ksurcaonvceera gels malntalnd-for chlldreiiard adults 1111 21 The dlrector (or appropnate pe lncludlng social semces, menta rn 22 Staff and admrn~stratorsc ommu m 23. Staff plan and c - - - - - - - - - - 4-4 ---- &--- -- -- 24 Regular staff meetlngs are held for staff to cons for indlvrdual ch~ldren,a nd i - ~ - l , - - , l - l - dlscuss working conditions (may meetlngs of small gr-o -up or full staff) -- U I U I 25 Enough staff with pnr&yrespons~b~l~tfoyr Grklng wlth chlldren are available to provlde frequent personal te- -ca-r e -as - -n-e eded. -- - - --- 1 -1 --,- Arizona Preschool Survey, Continued - ---..- -- .F- U-LLY-MET- 1 PARTIALLY MET I /- 2- -.. _ N 1 1 T r n __ _ - -- -- 29. child health records include center. Current cettiicate&~ ~- I effectiv_eness in rneetlng the needs of chl 35 lnd~viduadl escnpt~onso f chlld devel I leamlng acklties, facllltatrng optrmal APPENDIX Arizona Preschool Survey Number and Percentage of Survey Respondents by Type of Preschool Private Not Identified Prepared by Research and Development. Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 1 A long range, written cumculum plan that reflects the program's philosophy and goals for children is available. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Type of S~KKJ~ Response Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 2 For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve a balance of activities on the following dimensions: a) indoor / outdoor. Type of School Response Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met Private S&ool Count 5 8 67 213 Rivate School Cmt 1 1 25 266 %of Private 1.7 2.7 22.9 72.7 State Smool AU Schools State sdwol %of Total 1.2 1.9 15.8 50.4 Count 0 2 7 26 Not Identified Cwnt 9 13 89 312 %of Private 0.3 0.3 8.5 90.8 Colrnt 0 0 2 33 Count 4 3 15 73 % of Total 2.1 3.1 21.0 73.8 %of Total 0.2 0.2 5.9 62.9 Not 1M1e.d %of State 0.0 5.7 20.0 74.3 %of State 0.0 0.0 5.7 94.3 Count 4 1 7 83 All Schools %of Unidentified 4.2 3.2 15.8 76.8 %of Total 0.0 05 1.7 6.1 %of Total 0.0 0.0 05 7.8 Count 5 2 34 382 %of Total 0.9 0.7 35 17.3 % of Unidentif~ed 4.2 1.1 7.4 87.4 % of Total 1.2 0.5 8.0 90.3 % of Total 0.9 0.2 1.7 19.6 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 3 For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve a balance of activities on the following dimensions: b) Quiet I active. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Type of school Response Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met Fully Met SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 4 For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve a balance of activities on the following dimensions: c) Individual 1 small group 1 large group. Type of School Response Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met Fully Met Rivate school count 0 0 16 277 Private School State school Count 0 0 27 266 %of Private 0.0 0.0 5.5 94.5 Count 0 0 3 32 State School %of Total 0.0 0.0 3.8 65.5 Not Identified %of Private 0.0 0.0 9.2 90.8 Count 0 0 5 30 %of State 0.0 0.0 8.6 91.4 Count 2 1 4 88 All schools %of Total 0.0 0.0 6.4 62.9 Not Identified %of Total 0.0 0.0 0.7 7.6 Count 2 1 23 397 %of State 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 Count 2 1 8 84 AU schools % of Unidentified 2.1 1.1 4.2 92.6 % of Total , 0.5 0.2 5.4 93.9 %of Total 0.0 0.0 1.2 7.1 Count 2 1 40 380 % of Total 0.5 0.2 0.9 20.8 % of Unidentified 2.1 1.1 8.4 88.4 % of Total 0.5 0.2 9.5 89.8 % of Total 05 0.2 1.9 19.9 Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 5 For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve a balance of activities on the following dimensions: d) Large muscle 1 small muscle. Private School Not 1M1ed Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 6 For each group of children a written daily schedule is planned to achieve a balance of activities on the following dimensions: e) Child initiated 1 staff initiated. Type of School Response Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met Fully Met Private Sdmol Count 4 2 34 253 State School %of Private 1.4 0.7 11.6 86.3 Count 0 0 5 30 %of Total 0.9- 0.5 8.0 59.8 Not Identified %of State 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 Count 2 1 6 86 All Sdroola %of Total 0.0 0.0 1.2 7.1 Count 6 3 45 369 % of Unidentified 2.1 1.1 6.3 90.5 % of Total 1.4 0.7 10.6 87.2 % of Total 05 0.2 1.4 20.3 - SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 7 A written description of the program's philosophy is available to the parents. Type of school Private School State School Not Identified All Schools %of %of %of %of % of % of % of Response Count Private Total Count State Total Cwnt Unidentified Total Count Total Did Not 1 0.3 0.2 0 0.0 0.0 3 3.2 0.7 4 0.9 Not Met 2 0.7 0.5 1 2.9 0.2 3 3.2 0.7 6 1.4 Partially Met 19 6.5 4.5 2 5.7 0.5 6 6.3 1.4 27 6.4 Fully Met 271 . 925 . 64.1 . 32 . 91.4 . 7.6 . 83 . 87.4 . 19.6 . 386 . 91.3 A Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 8 A process exits for orienting children and parents to the center that may include a Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Arszona Preschool Survey: Statement 9 Staff and parents communicate about home and center childrearing practices SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 10 Parents are welcome visitors in the center at all times (for example, to observe, eat lunch with a child. or volmtea to help in the classroom.) Type of School Private School State School Not Identified AU Schools %of %of %of %of % of % of 46 of hunt Private Total Count State Total Count Unidentified Total Count Total Did Not R f s p d 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 3 3.2 0.7 3 0.7 Not Met 0 0.0 0.0 0 0 .O 0.0 1 1 .1 02 1 0.2 Partially Met 8 2.7 1.9 1 2.9 0.2 1 1.1 0.2 10 2.4 Fully Met 285 97.3 67.4 34 97.1 8.0 90 94.7 21.3 409 96.7 Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix. Arizona. Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 12 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 11 Parents and other family members are encouraged to be involved in the program in various ways. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Type of School Response Did Not Not Met Partially Mu Fully Met Private School All Schools Count 1 9 40 243 Count 3 10 50 360 % of Total 0.7 2.4 11.8 85.1 - State School Not l&ntified Count 0 1 1 33 %of Private 0.3 3.1 13.7 82.9 Count 2 0 9 84 %of Total 0.2 2.1 9.5 57.4 %of State 0.0 2.9 2.9 94.3 9 of Unidentified 2.1 0.0 9.5 88.4 %of Total 0.0 0.2 0.2 7.8 % of Total 05 0.0 2.1 19.9 Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 13 Statement 14 Not I-ed Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix. Arizona. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES 1 Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 15 Early Childhood Associate Teachers and Early Childhood Teachers (staff responsible for the care and education of a group of children) have at least a CDA or an A.A. in Early Childhood Development. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 16 Staff Working with school-age children have training in child development, recreation or a related field. Type of school Response Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met , Trpe of School bqxmse Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met Fully Met All Schools Count 6 55 200 162 % of Total 1.4 13.0 47.3 . 38.3 Private School Rivate School Count 2 40 143 108 , Count 36 15 82 160 State school Count 1 4 12 18 , Not Identified %of Private 0.7 13.7 48.8 36.9 , %of Private 12.3 5.1 28.0 54.6 StateSchoot All schools %of Total 0.5 9.5 33.8 25.5 , %of Total 8.5 3.5 19.4 37.8 Not Identified Count 3 2 9 21 Count 55 21 106 241 % of Total 0.7 2.6 10.6 8.5 , Count 3 11 45 36 %of State 2.9 11.4 34.3 51.4 Cwnt 16 4 15 60 % of Total 13.0 5.0 25.1 57.0 % of Unidentified 3.2 11.6 47.4 , 37.9 , %of Total 0.2 0.9 2.8 , 4.3 , %of State 8.6 5.7 25.7 60.0 %of Total 0.7 0.5 2.1 5.0 % of Unidentified 16.8 4.2 15.8 63.2 % of Total 3.8 0.9 3.5 14.2 Statement 18 The center has written policies and procedures for operating, including hours, fees, illness, holidays and refund information. Private School Not Identified SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 17 The center provides regular training opportunities for staff to improve skills in working with children and families and staff are expected to take part regularly. (Workshops, seminars, resource materials, in-service) Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. rn of School Did Not Not Met Partidly Met Fully Met Rivltc School Not Identified All Schools Count 3 12 68 340 Count 1 10 48 234 Cwnt 2 2 15 76 % of Total 0.7 2.8 16.1 80.4 Statc School Count 0 0 5 30 % of Unidentified 2.1 2. I 15.8 80.0 %of Private 0.3 3.4 16.4 79.9 % of Total 0.5 0.5 3.5 18.0 %of Total 0.2 2.4 11.3 55.3 %of State 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 %of Total 0.0 0.0 1 2 7.1 Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 19 Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 20 Accident protection and liability insurance coverage is maintained for children and adults. Typeof Sd1oo1 Did Not Not Met Partially Met FullyMet Ptivate School Count 3 0 3 . 287 State School %of Private 1 .O 0.0 1 .O . 98.0 Count 0 0 2 , 33 %of Total 0.7 0.0 0.7 . 67.8 Not IdfdKed %of State 0.0 0.0 5.7 . 94.3 Count 4 2 1 , 88 AH Schools %of Total 0.0 0.0 05 , 7.8 Gnmt 7 2 6 , 408 %of Unidentified 4.2 2.1 1.1 , 92.6 % of Total 1.7 0.5 1.4 , 96.5 % of Total 0.9 05 0.2 , 20.8 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 21 The director (or appropriate person) is familiar with and makes appropriate use of community resources including social services, mental & physical health agencies, educational programs & neighborhood centers. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education. Phoenix, Arizona. Bpe of School Rtsponsc Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 22 Staff and administrators communicate frequently. Type of School Response Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met . Private School Count 1 4 44 244 Private School Stste School Count 2 3 8 280 . %of Private 0.3 1.4 15.0 83.3 Count 0 2 5 28 State School %of Total 0.2 0.9 10.4 57.7 Not Identilied %of Private 0.7 1 .O 2.7 95.6 . Count 0 0 3 32 , %of !hare 0.0 5.7 14.3 80.0 Count 2 1 14 78 All Schools %of Total 0.5 0.7 1.9 66.2 . Not Identified %of Total 0.0 05 1.2 6.6 Count 3 7 63 350 %of State 0.0 0.0 8.6 91.4 Count 4 1 2 88 AU Scboolrr % of Unidentified 2.1 1.1 14.7 82.1 % of Total 0.7 - -- 1.7 14.9 82.7 %of Total 0.0 0.0 0.7 7.6 Count 6 4 13 400 % of Total 0.5 0.2 3.3 18.4 %of Unidentified 4.2 1.1 2.1 92.6 % of Total 1.4 0.9 3.1 94.6 % of Total 0.9 0.2 05 20.8 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 23 Staff plan and consult together. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Type of school Response Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 24 Regular staff meetings are held for staff to consult on program planning, plan for individual children, and discuss working conditions (may be meetings of small group or full staff.) Type of School Response Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met Fully Met Private School k t 0 2 31 260 Private School State school Count 1 3 44 245 %of Private 0.0 0.7 10.6 88.7 Count 0 0 . 4 3 1 State School %of Total 0.0 0.5 7.3 61.5 Not Identified %of Private 0.3 1 .O 15.0 83.6 Count 0 1 3 31 Count 2 1 5 87 %of State 0.0 0.0 11.4 88.6 All schools %of Total 0.2 0.7 10.4 57.9 Not Ida~Xed %of Total 0.0 0.0 0.9 7.3 Count 2 3 40 378 %of State 0.0 29 8.6 88.6 Count 3 2 6 84 AUScbools % of Unidentified 2.1 1.1 5.3 91.6 % of Total 0.5 0.7 9.5 89.4 %of Total 0.0 0.2 0.7 7.3 Count 4 6 53 360 % of Total 0.5 0.2 1.2 20.6 % of Unidentified 3.2 2.1 6.3 88.4 % of Total 0.9 1.4 12.5 85.1 , %of Total 0.7 0.5 1.4 19.9 Statement 26 Substitutes are provided to maintain staff-child ratios when regular staff are absent. Private School Not Identified SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 25 Enough staff with primary responsibility for working with children are available to provide frequent personal contact, meaningful learning activities, and to offer immediate care as needed Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. TVpc of School Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met - Fully Met All Schools Count 2 2 10 409 % of Total 0.5 0.5 2.4 96.7 Private School Not Identified Count 2 0 1 92 State School CMmt 0 1 7 285 Count 0 1 2 32 % of Unidenrified 2.1 0.0 1.1 96.8 %of Private 0.0 0.3 2.4 97.3 % of Total 05 0.0 0.2 21.7 %of State 0.0 2.9 5.7 91.4 %of Total 0.0 0.2 1.7 67.4 %of Total 0.0 0.2 0.5 7.6 Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 27 The center is licensed or accredited by the appropriate state / local agencies. If exempt from licensing. the center demonstrates compliance with it's own state regulations for child care centers subject to licensing. Private School Not Identified Statement 28 Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 29 Child health records include results of recent health examination, up-to-date record of immunizations, emergency contact info., names of all people authorized to call for the child, and important health history. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Type of School Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 30 Staff are alert to the health of each child. Individual medical problems and accidents are recorded and reported to staff and parents, and a written record is kept of such incidents. Type of school Did Not Not Met Partially Met . Fully Met Private School All Schools Rivate school Count 5 0 23 265 Cwnt 8 0 30 385 Cwnt 6 0 5 282 State school % of Total 1.9 0.0 7.1 91.0 State SFbool %of Private 1.7 0.0 7.8 90.4 Count 0 0 2 33 Not Identitied %of Private 2.0 0.0 1.7 96.2 Count 0 0 2 33 %of Total 1.2 0.0 5.4 62.6 Count 3 0 5 87 %of Total 1.4 0.0 1.2 67.5 Not 1 M 1 e d %of State 0.0 0.0 5.7 94.3 %of State 0.0 0.0 5.7 94.3 Count 3 0 1 9 1 All Schools % of Unidentified 3.2 0.0 5.3 91.6 %of Total 0.0 0.0 0.5 7.8 %of Total 0.0 0.0 0.5 7.8 Count 9 0 8 392 % of Total 0.7 0.0 1.2 20.6 % of Unidentif~ed 3 2 0.0 1.1 95.8 % of Total 2.1 0.0 1.9 96.0 % of Total 0.7 0.0 0.2 21.5 SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 33 Staff evaluations include classroom observation. Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. Type of School Response Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met - Fully Met _ SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 34 At least once a year staff, other professionals, and parents are involves (sic) in evaluating the program's effectiveness in meeting the needs of children and parents. Type of Scboo1 Did Not Respond Not Met Partially Met Fully Met Private School Count 5 10 27 251 Private School State School Count 4 %of Private 1.7 3.4 9.2 85.7 Count 0 0 5 30 . Statr: school %of Total 1.2 2.4 6.4 59.3 . Not Identified %of Private 1.4 Count 0 21 89 179 %of State 0.0 0.0 14.3 85.7 . Count 4 0 4 87 . All Schools %of Total 0.9 Not Identified %of Total 0.0 0.0 1.2 7.1 . Count 9 10 36 368 , %of State 0.0 Count --3 3 27 62 All Schools 7.2 30.4 61.1 % of Unidentified 4.2 0.0 4.2 91.6 . % of Total 2.1 2.4 8.5 87.0 %of Total 0.0 Count 7 27 125 264 % of Total 0.9 0.0 0.9 20.6 , % of Unidentified 3 . 2 3.2 28.4 65.3 % of Total 1.7 6.4 29.6 62.4 5.0 21.0 42.3 % of Total 0.7 ~~~~~-~~---- 0.7 6.4 14.7 3 9 23 8.6 25.7 65.7 0.7 2.1 5.4 Prepared by Research and Development, Arizona Department of Education, Phoenix, Arizona. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES Arizona Preschool Survey: Statement 35 Individual descriptions of child development are written and compiled as a basis for planning appropriate learning activities, facilitating optimal development of each child, and use in communication with parents. Type of school Response Did Not Not Met Partially Met Fully Met All Schools Count 7 26. 115 275 Private School 5% of Total 1.7 6.1 27.2 - 65.0 Count 4 16 87 186 Stare School %of Private 1.4 5.5 29.7 63.5 Not Identifled %of Total 0.9 3.8 20.6 44.0 %of Total 0.0 0.7 1.9 5.7 Count 0 3 8 24 Count 3 7 20 65 %of State 0.0 8.6 22.9 68.6 % of Unidentified 3.2 7.4 21.1 68.4 %of Toul 0.7 1.7 4.4 15.4

you wish to report:

Your comment:

Your Name:

...