Benefits of Play Volume 13 Issue 1 - 4

Success in High-Need Schools Journal
Volume 13, Number 1

February, 2017
Journal Issue Theme: “Early Childhood Education”
For many years research findings have documented the crucial role the early childhood years play in
children’s long-term cognitive and physiological development. Although early childhood educational
programs have expanded, funding limitations have constricted their growth, especially in resource
scarce high-need schools. Reflecting this slow growth and the sluggish recent market for new teachers,
many colleges and universities have been slow to develop new early childhood educational programs.
This has begun to change in Illinois and other states where the federal government has awarded
millions in preschool development grants. Illinois received a $20 million four-year grant with the goal
of providing full-day, full-year preschool to 3,200 children in year one. This issue of the journal will
examine the state of early childhood education, including research findings, program development,
and anticipated outcomes with a special focus on impacts in high-need schools. The issue contains
case studies of innovative early childhood programs and college-level EC teacher preparation, as well
as research on organizational and professional development in support of early childhood educational
reform.
Table of Contents
Publisher’s Column: Introducing the Early Childhood Education Issue
Jan Fitzsimmons, Ph.D. ................................................................................................................................................... 2
Foundations for Success in Early Childhood Education
Dr. Diego Giraldo ............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Innovations in Early Childhood Instructional Leadership & Teacher Collaboration: From
Pilot Study to Statewide Implementation
Debra Pacchiano, Ph.D., Marsha Shigeyo Hawley, M.Ed., and Rebecca Klein, M.S. ................................. 6
Benefits of Play-based Learning in the Kindergarten Classroom
Erica Pang and Lisa Simoncelli_Bulak .................................................................................................................... 23
Early Childhood Developmental Enrichment Center (ECDEC/Preschool For All) and
District 15 (Palatine) find children at risk and prepare them for the rigors of
kindergarten
Elaine Moffitt, M.Ed. ...................................................................................................................................................... 29
Innovative Approaches to the Early Childhood Education Challenges in Central Illinois
Georgette Comuntzis Page, Ph.D., Claudia Quigg, M.Ed., and Joyce Bezdicek, Ph.D. ............................... 32
Preparing Early Childhood Teachers for Classrooms of Today
Dr. Linda Dauksas and Dr. Lisa Burke .................................................................................................................... 41
An Integrated Approach to Early Childhood Teacher Education at Lewis University
Rebecca Pruitt, Ph.D. ..................................................................................................................................................... 49
Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 1

Publisher’s Column: Introducing the Early Childhood Education Issue
Jan Fitzsimmons, Ph.D.
Author Bio ……..

Across the nation, states are clamoring to develop educational plans specific to the
needs of their constituents that will address the essence of the new Every Student
Succeeds Act, ESSA. ESSA signed into law by President Obama in December of 2015
is the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 that
focuses on “equal educational opportunity.” A key component of the law is Title I
funding that “gives poor children access to programs that help them attain success.”
This funding allows the continuation of support for the Preschool Development
Programs that provide preschool to students who might otherwise not have access to preschool. Why
is preschool so important to every student’s success?
Dr. Diego, in his column, Foundations for Success in Early Childhood, suggests that effective early
childhood programs have always been, and continue to be, the basis for success in school! Diego
advances systemic steps that administrators might use to establish essential skills that are the bedrock
for later learning for every student as he describes the early childhood initiative and its importance in
the Chicago Public Schools.
But what are the “high-leverage” practices and conditions that are necessary for teachers, and
especially leaders to bolster the kind of early student learning that frames all future learning?
Pacchiano, Hawley and Klein in their cutting edge work described in, Innovations in Early Childhood
Instructional Leadership and Teacher Collaboration: From Pilot Study to Statewide Implementation
delve into these waters and equate strong leadership and subsequent organizational structures to
successful early childhood programs--- noting that previous research has neglected these important
connections. This article describes the research that supports and advances an approach to
professional development for leaders, “Lead Learn Excel,” that effectively nourishes leaders, teachers
and organizations, which in turn --- and most importantly--results in student growth and development.
What provides a strong foundation for reading, writing, the study of mathematics and inquiry science?
In Benefits of Play-Based Learning in the Kindergarten Classroom, Pang and Simoncelli-Bulak make an
evidence-based case pointing to the best answer------------- play. “Play is child’s work,” Pang and
Simoncelli-Bulak reiterate! Using research from several parts of the world, these authors discuss the
important role play must be given from “identifying a clear definition” to intentionally selecting
materials and carefully planning their placement in the classroom to achieve specific learning
standards.
Moffitt’s column shares an intimate lens on the critical day-to-day work in early childhood education
in a blended support system for 3-5 year olds. Her detailed description amplifies the diverse nature of
the early childhood population today and the ever present need for greater access and opportunity.
The successful outcome of this approach prompts support for kindergarten readiness in an inclusive,
high-quality early intervention setting that has the power to decrease the achievement gap.

Innovative Approaches to the Early Childhood Education Challenges in Central Illinois, by Page, Quigg
and Bezdicek is a case study looking at how one institution developed a program to prepare effective
early childhood educators for high-need communities in central Illinois. Their approach advances the
importance of candidate knowledge and practices in advocacy, working with parents, and supporting
diverse learner needs. Finally, the authors highlight the importance of rigorous and meaningful clinical
experiences to prepare all teacher candidates.
Dauksas and Burke contribute to the conversation on preparing teacher candidates to be early
childhood teachers focusing on the need to prepare educators for “multi-dimensional learning
environments.” In their article, Preparing Early Childhood Teachers for Classrooms of Today, the
authors point to the need for teacher preparation programs to be responsive to the changing
demographics of student populations. These changes have driven further study and deeper dialogue
regarding the critical importance of both preparation redesign and ongoing support beyond licensure,
which includes e-mentoring for early career teachers.
Finally, Pruitt in her article, An Integrated Approach to Early Childhood Teacher Education at Lewis
University, calls on the work of John Baptist De La Salle, John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky, James A. Banks,
Linda Darling-Hammond, Paulo Freire, Gail C. Furman and Robert Starratt to build a framework for
early childhood teacher preparation focusing on teachers as “knowledgeable critical transformative
educators, multicultural educators and social justice advocates.” Using those standards, the author
emphasizes the importance of collaboration among two and four year institutions to build strong
programs that also address an urgent need to recruit a larger and more diverse pool of candidates for
early childhood education.
At a time when federal legislation (ESSA) spotlights the need for high-quality early childhood education
for all, we must not only have increased access to great programs, but we must have a well-prepared
cadre of early childhood teachers and knowledgeable and skilled leaders. The authors in this issue
make a compelling case for increased access to early childhood programs for a diverse student
population and for teacher preparation, professional development, and leadership to serve these most
needy and deserving early learners. Read more about the critical work of early childhood education,
the research and the practices, and the early childhood imperative for excellent teachers and leaders
in this issue of Success in High-Need Schools!

Foundations for Success in Early Childhood Education
By: Dr. Diego Giraldo
Chief Officer, Office of Early Childhood Education Chicago Public Schools
Early Childhood education years are vital as they set students up for future success. Effective early
education programs provide young children opportunities to develop socially and cognitively. To
achieve an effective early childhood program, it is essential to provide a clear direction for all
stakeholders with attainable goals. It is also imperative to engage educators, strategic partners, and
parents while implementing an ongoing progress-monitoring system.
School districts can take a proactive approach to enhance their early learning education programs by
developing and implementing a Strategic Plan. This tool serves as a guide to monitor action steps and
track early learning strategies that are aligned with student needs and community goals.
Within this process, it is imperative to establish academic objectives and learning expectations that
assess needs and are critically important for progression from PreK to second grade.
Another component is the ongoing professional learning opportunities available to teachers, school
leaders and parents. School leaders that receive opportunities to learn about early learning
education can effectively implement programs, while providing high-quality learning experiences
essential for teachers, students and families.
For example, developing cohesive grade to grade transition expectations, implementing play-learning
strategies, and identifying student needs while encouraging collaboration across grade levels from
PreK-second grade provide positive benefits to student learning.
As the Strategic Plan sets action steps along the way to reach learning outcomes, it is essential to
continuously monitor by calibrating the plan learning objectives. Children who are English Language
Learners greatly benefit from early learning programs that support second language instruction
during their developmental years.
A Collaborative Inquiry Team can effectively develop relationships between principals and teachers
supporting strategic learning integration. Historically, preschool teachers have been isolated from
their colleagues within a building. To avoid isolation and enhance collaboration, teachers in
preschool should work with learning teams from other grade levels in implementing learning
pedagogical goals such as the development of transition expectations from PreK to K, instructional
program quality, and curriculum alignment.
Teacher recruitment and development in early learning programs are key factors to maintain and
enhance student-learning opportunities. There is a high demand to hire teachers who have a
teaching certificate in Early Childhood Education and educators with endorsements in Special
Education, Bilingual and ESL. School districts can partner with universities to recruit talent and
provide opportunities for teachers to secure endorsements in these high-need areas. With our new
teachers, it is essential to provide them with systemic and intense mentoring during their early
professional years.

In conclusion, children who receive pre-kindergarten education can benefit from early learning
programs that develop essential skills, preparing them for their future academic years. Effective
group participation, collaboration, the usage of language to express a need or idea, persistence,
curiosity and motivation are essential skills that create successful and meaningful early learning
experiences.
Dr. Giraldo may be reached at [email protected].

Innovations in Early Childhood Instructional Leadership & Teacher
Collaboration: From Pilot Study to Statewide Implementation
By: Debra Pacchiano, Ph.D., Marsha Shigeyo Hawley, M.Ed., and Rebecca Klein, M.S.
Author Bios:
Debra Pacchiano is Vice President of Translational Research and Improvement for the Ounce of
Prevention Fund. She conceptualizes, designs, implements, and evaluates innovative interventions and
measurement approaches that improve leadership, teaching, learning, and family engagement in early
education. Debra holds a Ph.D. in educational psychology from Indiana University. She may be reached
at [email protected].
Marsha Shigeyo Hawley is Director of Lead Learn Excel Illinois, the Ounce of Prevention Fund’s
instructional leadership development program. She has over 35 years of classroom teaching experience
with infants, toddlers, and their families, and as an associate professor in higher education. She can be
reached at [email protected].
Rebecca Klein is Senior Program and Implementation Developer on Ounce of Prevention initiatives to
cultivate instructional leadership and collaborative job-embedded professional learning for high-quality
teaching in early education settings. Rebecca holds an M.S. in child development from the Erikson
Institute. She can be reached at [email protected].
Editor Bio:
Lucinda Fickel serves as a behalf of issues spanning from early childhood education to college access
and postsecondary success. She holds a BA in public policy studies from Duke University and a masters
in public policy from the Harris School at the University of Chicago. She can be reached at
[email protected].
Abstract
Across education sectors in the United States, the drive to close chronic achievement gaps has piqued
interest in school leadership as a cost effective lever for implementing standards-based reforms.
Similarly, the national consensus around early childhood education (ECE) as an essential component to
successful K-12 reform has focused new attention on directors and supervisors as instructional leaders
and collaborators in strengthening organizational capacities critical to continuous quality improvement
(Pacchiano, Klein, Shigeyo Hawley, 2016a & 2016b). Little research has examined the capacity of
administrators in urban, community-based ECE centers to drive organizational development and engage
their staff in multi-modal job-embedded professional learning (JEPL), an approach to instructional
improvement and professional development gaining prevalence in K-12 settings (Whalen, et al, in
press). This article describes the theory of change for a comprehensive ECE Professional Development
Intervention (PDI) implemented and externally evaluated in the city of Chicago with community-based
ECE centers to strengthen instructional leadership and teacher collaboration routines, and highlights
initial lessons learned from a statewide implementation of this intervention (now called Lead Learn
Excel) in both school- and community-based settings.

Overview: An Introduction to Lead Learn Excel
Strong leadership is essential to strong early learning program success. Equipping leaders with the
knowledge, skills, and practical tools to support ambitious classroom interactions and instruction and
practice improvement overtime yields broader impact within early childhood classrooms. Yet,
interventions designed to improve the quality of early learning programs have focused almost
exclusively on teachers and classrooms, not on strengthening instructional leadership and guidance or
helping ECE settings become organizations designed for powerful learning and improvement.
Improving young children’s learning outcomes and increasing the quality of early childhood programs
demands an evolved and shared understanding of instructional improvement that is based on the
evidence of what actually improves teaching and learning.
In 2011, the Ounce of Prevention Fund, an Illinois nonprofit with 30 years of experience in early
childhood professional development, was awarded a Department of Education Investing in Innovation
(i3) development grant to research and develop an effective professional learning approach that builds
instructional leadership and results in improved ECE teaching and learning. In 2014, the Ounce was
awarded Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge funding to adapt, test, and extend this approach –
now titled Lead Learn Excel – throughout Illinois in partnership with the McCormick Center for Early
Childhood Leadership. The Ounce refined the key organizational and professional learning supports
most proximal to changing and continuously improving instructional leadership practice, and created
additional tools and strategies to support leaders with installing and implementing systems of structured
teacher collaboration to improve the quality of early education. LLE has reached more than 300 Illinois
early childhood professionals in its launch year.
Lead Learn Excel is a professional development approach that translates research on school
improvement into an intensive professional learning and organizational development experience and
accompanying practical tools and resources. These comprehensive professional learning supports enable
leaders to deepen their instructional leadership practice and strengthen the organizational supports
essential to high-quality classroom practice and continuous improvement of teaching and learning.
Leaders learn how to shape teaching through day-to-day practices of instructional leadership and to drive
continuous improvement by facilitating routine teacher collaboration. It guides leaders as they install
and learn how to facilitate job-embedded collaborative professional learning routines to generate
ongoing teacher growth, development, and practice improvement. By transforming leadership and
empowering professional community and teacher collaboration, Lead Learn Excel builds capacity
within schools and centers to implement high-quality instruction and sustain a trajectory of continuous
improvement of teaching and learning. The mindsets, behaviors, and organizational conditions within
schools are fundamentally transformed into those of a learning organization capable of achieving
instructional excellence and better outcomes for students.
Why Instructional Leadership and Teacher Collaboration? Where the Research Led Us
Decades of implementation science and school improvement research indicate that leadership is the
critical driver of improvement in education settings (Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton,
2010; Leithwood, Anderson, Mascall, & Strauss, 2010). Strong leaders establish a pedagogically-based
vision for ECE, a culture of shared responsibility for practice excellence and children’s early
achievement, and the culture and systems of job-embedded collaborative professional learning that
together promote more effective teaching, practice improvement, and stronger early learning outcomes.
The traditional tendency in ECE is to focus primarily on improving what occurs within the classroom
itself—how the classroom is set up and the particular interactions that take place between teachers and

children to support social, emotional, and cognitive development (Ehrlich, Pacchiano, Stein, Luppescu,
2016). But this focus fails to acknowledge that classrooms do not exist in isolation from their
organization and thus fails to consider how organizational conditions either support or hinder the work
of teachers and the relationships among staff, children, and families. Indeed, what happens in classrooms
is influenced by the conditions under which teachers engage with curriculum, with each other, with their
supervisor, and with children and families (Bryk et al, 2010).
Organizational Leadership is Essential for Student Learning
Groundbreaking longitudinal research on school improvement by the University of Chicago Consortium

on School Research has distinguished features of elementary schools that improved over time from those
that stagnated and failed to show significant improvements
in student achievement (Bryk et al, 2010). These researchers
found that high-quality teaching and sustained student
engagement within the classroom depends in large measure
on whether leadership and staff engage together in a culture
of ongoing support and development. They concluded that
improving schools requires coherent, orchestrated action
across the following five components of school
organization: effective leadership, collaborative teachers,
involved families, supportive environments and ambitious
instruction.
Attending to these organization-level dimensions was

shown to enhance the day-to-day work of teachers,
improving classroom instruction in sustained ways that lead
to better student outcomes (Ehrlich, et al, 2016). Schools
strong in most of these five essentials were ten times more
likely to realize improvements in elementary students’ math and reading outcomes than were schools
weak in three or more of these essentials. And, critically, they found that a sustained weakness in any
one of the essentials undermined virtually all attempts at improving student learning; that is, it reduced
the likelihood of improvement to less than 10%.
These researchers also found a critical interplay between two types of leadership: facilitative and
instructional. Facilitative leadership provides staff with social and emotional supports that increase
relational trust and commitment to the school’s vision for excellent and impactful work. Instructional
leadership provides staff with coherent guidance about assessment, curriculum, and instruction;
assistance aligning curriculum across grade levels; and a collaborative and supportive professional work
environment with a strategic focus on ambitious teaching and learning. These researchers found that in
improving schools, leaders “encouraged the broad involvement of their staff in reform as they sought to
guide and coordinate this activity by means of a coherent vision that integrated the diverse and multiple
changes which were occurring” (Bryk, et, al, p. 199). Making sure teachers feel encouraged and
supported emotionally, all while providing consistently coherent instructional guidance, was identified
as a strategic focus of leaders in schools with improving performance. Indeed, these researchers state
they were unable to point to a single case of sustained school improvement where local leadership
remained chronically weak.

The connection between instructional leadership and children’s achievement thus hinges on a large
number of school processes (e.g., curriculum coordination, professional collaboration) and intermediate
outcomes (Grissom et al, 2013), such as a unity of purpose among staff, high teacher expectations,
family involvement, and a climate focused on effective instruction and supportive teacher-student
interactions. The health and effectiveness of those school processes is the responsibility of
administrators. Schools that improve student achievement are more likely to have principals who
strategically hire, actively support the professionally growth and development of staff, and thoughtfully
retain good teachers, in contrast to principals who spend time observing classrooms without using that
information to structure and guide professional development (Grissom et al, 2013). Instead, principals
in high-performing schools facilitate strong professional community and regular cycles of data-based
inquiry and collaboration focused on improving practice and student learning (Anrig, 2013: Datnow and
Stringfield, 2000; Leithwood and Riehl, 2003).
Alongside this emerging focus on leadership as the driver of practice improvement, a clear paradigm
shift has occurred in recognizing the essential support of teacher collaboration or JEPL as the vehicle
essential to realizing continuous improvement in the complex work of teachers (Croft et al, 2010; Fullan,
2007; Hargreaves and Fullan, 2012; McLaughlin and Talbert, 2006). Ambitious learning requires high-
quality teaching that is simultaneously “personalized and precise” (Fullan, 2007, p. 36). Personalization
involves understanding and addressing the individual needs of each student as these appear day by day,
week by week. Precision consists of meeting these learning needs in a focused, effective way, again as
they occur and evolve; “timely, on-the-spot precision, not packaged prescription” (Fullan, 2007, p. 36).
These performance expectations of teachers are demanding practice (TNTP, 2015; De Jong and
Ferguson-Hessler, 1996). Michael Fullan (2007) concludes that teachers “cannot possibly” teach
ambitiously unless they are deeply immersed in learning every day from their practice, their peers’
practice, and children’s learning in order to figure out how to improve. Highly effective teachers have
an understanding of practice that is extremely coherent, comprehensive, and accurate. They have finely
tuned instincts and decision-making abilities that come from this deep knowledge and ongoing
collaborative discussions with peers that help them apply their understandings into changed practices.
In contrast to traditional one-off modes of PD, the emerging paradigm is sustained, school-based,
collaborative, focused on students’ learning, and linked to curricula. It involves “teachers examining
student work, developing assessments … and jointly planning, teaching, and revising lessons” (Hiebert
et al, 2002).
Job-embedded approaches to professional learning are demanding. As a result, not all analyses of the
merits of JEPL approaches are equally impressive or sanguine. Even convinced advocates of investment
in JEPL acknowledge that they can be time-intensive for participants, expensive in terms of assets like
on-site coaching, and demanding in terms of scheduling and the coordination of elements and resources
(Croft, et al, 2010; Jimerson-Campoli, 2011). They expose gaps in knowledge and competence,
challenge personal dispositions, promote distribution of leadership, and disrupt expected organizational
patterns in favor of innovation (Smylie 2010). Moreover, quality of implementation remains a
fundamental challenge. They require reconfiguring the school or center master schedule in order to carve
out and protect time for teacher collaboration during the workday and week. And, while many teachers
value opportunities to collaborate around lesson planning, peer-to-peer observation, and lesson study,
many continue to associate “professional development” with externally-imposed expectations of
compliance and be sensitive to school-based professional development that is poorly organized (Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation, 2014).

Early evidence does suggest that differences in how leaders engage teachers in these efforts has
significant impacts on teachers’ openness and ability to take up new and progressive instructional and
social-emotional practices (Fitzgerald and Theilheimer, 2013; Green et al 2012). When JEPL
opportunities are integrated around protocols of improvement that are shared among teachers and
leaders, professional identity benefits and instructional improvement ensues (Heck & Hallinger, 2009;
Leithwood et al, 2010). A common denominator in schools with improving performance is this
combination of instructionally-focused leadership and the creation of a supportive instructional guidance
system that allows teachers to collaboratively build craft and knowledge together, on the school site
using consistently applied protocols and norms (Leithwood, et al, 2010).
What stands out in these improvement science and professional development literatures is a shift from
thinking about leadership as primarily administrative and management focused toward conceptualizing
leaders’ essential role in facilitating trusting professional relationships and collaborative, ambitious
professional learning for adults. Highly effective leaders thus influence children’s achievement
primarily through learning how to transform working relations among adult professionals so that all
mindsets, discourse, and activity are galvanized toward improving practice and children’s learning.
Fostering Instructional Leadership in Practice: Designing the PDI Pilot

Our research review made clear that investments in leadership and organizations are required if the early
education sector is to transition toward sustainable practices of evidence-based instructional
improvement (Joseph, et al, 2011). Therefore, we conceptualized and designed a professional
development intervention (the PDI) that builds program leaders’ foundational knowledge and core
competencies in supporting and improving high-quality classroom practice for children’s learning in
their organizations. The PDI’s theory of change used two of the five essential organizational supports
as entry points for strengthening the organization as a whole to improve teaching and learning:
● Inclusive and instructional leadership is the driver of change. Leaders are responsible for
creating a climate and conditions supportive of teaching and continuous improvement. This
includes establishing a vision for excellence, building relational trust, galvanizing staff activity
in service of improvement, and providing teachers with coherent instructional guidance and time
during the workday to collaborate with colleagues toward ambitious and improving practice.
● Teacher collaboration is the vehicle for improvement. The way teachers work together to
develop and continuously improve curriculum and instruction, emotionally supportive learning
environments, and engagement of families is far more important and predictive of achievement
and school improvement than any individual teacher or school quality characteristic
(Allensworth, 2015).
The substantive content of our intervention was crafted by knitting together the framework of the five
essentials with the practices of effective professional development, translating the empirical research
into an implementation framework for instructional leadership —a roadmap—specifying the
foundational knowledge, core practices, and dispositions of leaders in educational settings strongly
organized to the essentials and for improvement. We adapted the K–12 definitions of each essential for
fit and relevance to early education settings and practices and thoroughly assessed why these
organizational conditions tend to be so weak in early childhood settings. We determined the necessary
competencies of leaders and organizational systems to address these root causes of organizational
weakness and identified tasks associated with core practices to construct job aides and protocols that
systematized approaches to those tasks. In the end, we designed 12 professional development modules

designed to challenge and enable administrators to become instructional leaders who do their job in a
fundamentally different way.
We spent three years implementing, studying, and refining our instructional leadership framework and
intervention in four community-based, birth-to-five, early education programs in Chicago. That process

involved developing leaders’ foundational knowledge of improvement, grappling with their doubts,
illuminating their concrete responsibilities in creating strong organizational conditions, and
transforming how leaders interact with teachers to support continuous professional learning and practice
improvement. Amid struggles to shift their identity toward that of an instructional leader and how to be
in learning-focused relationships with teachers, leaders steadily grew their comfort and confidence by
increasing their knowledge and understanding of high-quality teaching practices and skills with
facilitating teacher inquiry and professional learning.
To strengthen the essential organizational support of teacher collaboration, the PDI fundamentally
shifted how leaders thought about professional development, and, critically, the leader’s role in building
the capacity of staff in sustained and systematic ways resulting in improvement. Our aim was to support
leaders in creating organizational systems that protect time— time for leaders to guide instruction and
time for teachers to collaborate—during the program day, week, and month. Ideally, these collaborative
times have explicit purposes, structures, and outcomes that result in professional learning. Leaders came
to understand that job-embedded professional development is the vehicle for organizational change and
instructional improvement. Teacher professional learning became embedded within the structure,
schedule, and daily work of teachers in participating centers.
Building on these two foundational transformations, we saw further shifts unfold for ambitious
instruction, supportive environments, and engaged families. These other three essentials were
strengthened as leaders redefined their role, challenged their assumptions about leadership and about
how teachers’ actually grow and improve their practice, reordered their priorities to shape teaching, and
evaluated policies and decisions through the aims and lens of the five essentials framework for
improvement.
Instructional Leadership at Scale: Delivery Across Illinois

After three years of piloting, refining, and evaluating the PDI, we iterated the logic model for feasibility
of implementation at scale and then began implementing Lead Learn Excel throughout Illinois in
partnership with the McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership and the state’s quality rating
and improvement system, ExceleRate Illinois. Our statewide implementation has been supported by a
federal Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge grant, in partnership with the Governor’s Office of
Early Childhood Development, the Illinois State Board of Education, and the Illinois Department of
Human Services.
Lead Learn Excel builds on the principles of the PDI pilot and intensifies the focus on developing
effective instructional leadership practices including installation and facilitation of JEPL routines.
Through Lead Learn Excel, instructional leaders create learning organizations with structures and
conditions that continuously support teachers in improving their practice. Lead Learn Excel helps
leaders transform their role from one focused on individual elements of quality, compliance and
administration, to one intentionally focused on instructional quality and the systematic support of
teachers in pursuit of improved outcomes for students and families. In Lead Learn Excel, leaders learn
about the multiple contexts for JEPL beneficial for practice improvement and how to install and facilitate
three such routines, including collaborative data dialogues, team lesson planning, and peer learning
groups.
Using a parallel design to the one leaders will implement with teachers, Lead Learn Excel engages
diverse administrators in three professional learning contexts to help them (a) develop new knowledge
about ECE teaching and learning and the organizational supports essential to improvement processes;

(b) apply that new knowledge into practice, and (c) reflect, improve and sustain change with leadership
peers. The Lead Learn Excel program thus includes four core supports critical to effective adult learning,
harnessing motivating, and enabling change in practice:
● Training & Knowledge Development: Training cultivates leader knowledge and understanding
of instructional leadership, organizational conditions, and job-embedded learning necessary for
improvement.
● Technical Assistance (TA): TA supports leaders to apply knowledge, change their instructional
leadership practice, and embed learning routines with teachers.
● Peer Learning: Leaders engage in peer learning to reflect on what works, examine their
practice, and collaborate on improvements with a group of peers.
● Tools & Resources: Protocols, templates, and videos scaffold effective leadership, equipping
leaders to systematically and sustainably improve practice over time.
Recognizing that early learning programs often lack resources to implement organizational change, Lead
Learn Excel leaders were also eligible to apply for “mini-grants” which provide a small monetary grant
to support quality improvement efforts in their school - such as the purchase of curriculum materials,
payments for substitute teachers to allow classroom teachers to meet together during the workday, and
other instructional resources. To expand the reach of the initiative, Lead Learn Excel launched an online
resource library available to all leaders across the state. The library curates high-quality and current
information and tools specifically on cultivating an effective instructional leadership practice,
facilitating structured JEPL routines, and achieving instructional excellence.
Implementation Experiences from Diverse Settings

Lead Learn Excel brought the PDI’s approach into a broader array of ECE program settings and
classrooms, all of which surfaced a variety of instructional leadership development and implementation
challenges and opportunities.
For example, working with public school districts meant not only working with the ECE program
administrators and principals to ensure a vision for instructional excellence and corresponding JEPL
routines was established and maintained, but also working with system-level administrators in the
district to develop the expectations and district-level supports that allowed administrators to prioritize
and engage in a daily practice of inclusive and instructional leadership to improve learning outcomes.
For public school districts, helping leaders chart a course for gradually evolving their role and changing
building-level systems to install JEPL routines took multiple steps - including working with their unions
to negotiate staffing allowances for protected time for teachers and leaders, strategically reconfiguring
master schedules, and exploring the benefits of JEPL with improving children’s learning outcomes. Lead
Learn Excel actively supported leaders with planning and installing the infrastructure for JEPL while
also helping leaders grow their skills with facilitating teacher collaboration and structured JEPL routines
of team data dialogues, team lesson planning for ambitious interactions and instruction, and peer
learning to examine practice. The Lead Learn Excel advisors supported districts in aligning Pre-K with
K-3rd grade teaching and learning expectations and quality improvement efforts so that teachers across
the early-grades receive coherent instructional guidance and opportunities to collaboratively plan and
improve practice.
Lead Learn Excel instructional leadership development involved complex work, and to be successful
drove sweeping changes. In one urban elementary school, the principal (a) introduced a Lead Learn
Excel framework and protocol – the focused teaching cycle and team lesson planning protocol – to
systematize lesson planning for greater rigor and use of standards and data, (b) revamped her school’s

process for analyzing and using both child and classroom data, (c) began facilitating routine peer
learning groups for teachers to share problems of practice; and (d) purchased and introduced a new math
curriculum to make a major improvement in the one curriculum area her staff assessed as weak. Using
Lead Learn Excel mini-grant funds to assist with the cost of the supplemental math curricula, the
teachers received training on the new math curriculum and also spent time in principal-facilitated peer
learning groups to problem-solve implementation issues they were experiencing with the new
curriculum. In addition, the principal also participated in weekly lesson planning meetings to help
teachers tie the math objectives to state standards, to other learning and development objectives, and to
differentiate and individualize the math experiences for their students.
LLE Focused Teaching Cycle
After this principal’s participation in Lead Learn Excel concluded, several colleagues and a head teacher
(who co-facilitates many of the peer learning groups at their school), started participating in a Lead
Learn Excel cohort of their own. The head teacher is now collaborating with the principal of a K-8th
grade school into which many of the pre-k students transition into kindergarten. The intention is for the
K-8th grade principal and his leadership team to begin participating in the peer learning groups facilitated
by the head teacher in an effort to extend those supports into their school’s early grades.
Lead Learn Excel frameworks and professional learning routines hold many implications for district-
and state-level systems work. For some school districts, Lead Learn Excel has been helping to shape the
organizational structures, systems, and birth-3rd and 8th grade alignments that are critical to school
performance and student success. One medium-sized school district in the northern region of the state
has made a commitment to building those district- and building-level systems that provide those aligned
and sustained JEPL supports to teachers by having not only the Pre-K principal, but also the K-3rd grade
principals, assistant principals, and its deputy superintendent participate together in a cohort of Lead
Learn Excel.
After a year of Lead Learn Excel participation – trainings, technical assistance, and peer learning – a
school-based pre-K center has been conducting regular peer learning groups for teachers to deepen
teachers’ knowledge and skills with analyzing and using child data. This instructional leader has used
the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS, Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008) domains and
dimensions to structure peer learning and advance teachers’ understanding of highly impactful teacher-
child interactions. Teachers are also supported with applying this knowledge and reflection directly to
their instructional practices because they meet with their instructional leader weekly in team lesson

planning meetings. Instructional leaders facilitate teachers’ teamwork to make sense of their child data,
classroom data, and state learning standards to plan more rigorous and ambitious learning experiences.
Teachers then carry that intentionality forward into their everyday activities and teaching.
Seeing the value of the CLASS as a conceptual framework for teacher professional development and
the benefit that has of cultivating teachers’ shared understanding of high-quality teacher-child
interactions, the deputy superintendent secured a private foundation grant to cover the costs of training
all K-3rd grade administrators, instructional specialists, and approximately 10 teacher-leaders on the
CLASS – K-3, so that these leaders can also infuse the CLASS lens and language into the work of K-
3rd grade teachers. The deputy superintendent is also in the process of strengthening district-level
systems, including cross-grade implementation of collaborative, JEPL routines so that there is
consistency across teacher learning and a like-minded focus on implementing the same high-quality
interactions and instruction Pre-K – through elementary grades regardless of the curricula or special
initiatives undertaken by the district. The district’s focus on developing these systems helps ensure the
instructional leadership practices and JEPL routines cultivated during Lead Learn Excel will be
sustained and grown district-wide.
While Lead Learn Excel has brought innovative approaches to instructional leadership and JEPL into
school district ECE settings, it continues to transform practice in community-based ECE programs and
settings. At a community-based center, the preschool program coach was initially skeptical that the
schedule would be able to accommodate regular meetings for JEPL and teacher collaboration. Indeed,
all professional development occurred off-site, three days per year, and as follow up to that training the
coach met with teachers individually to focus on monitoring and directing. Through Lead Learn Excel,
the coach now takes a relational, inclusive, collaborative, and competency-building approach to her
work with teachers. She has begun implementing the JEPL routines and using Lead Learn Excel
protocols, including the data dialogue protocol to support each teaching team to establish baseline
performance information and set goals. The coach is advocating with the director for changes to the
program schedule that will better protect (a) collaboration time within and across teaching teams, and
(b) leadership involvement in teachers’ professional learning and practice improvement. The coach is
laying the foundation for a stronger instructional leadership practice that includes routine JEPL, but has
already made substantial transformations in her own instructional leadership practice.
At a large inner-city child care center, two administrators (the director and assistant director) have
introduced to teaching teams and begun implementing the following JEPL routines with their teachers
and teacher assistants: data dialogues, team lesson planning, and peer learning teams. Through Lead
Learn Excel, these center administrators are prioritizing time to shape teaching and learning and to focus
deliberately on improving practice and children’s learning. For example, using the LLE protocol, the
assistant director facilitated a data dialogue with one teaching team. That teaching team then presented
a version of the data dialogue to their peers in the program and encouraged broad adoption and use of
the protocol. The ensuing collaborative discussions of the data resulted in the staff deciding together to
set a goal to focus on improving math instruction, center-wide.

Outcomes and Impact
During the pilot study and through implementation of Lead Learn Excel state-wide we have observed
notable growth in ECE leadership, teaching and young children’s learning taking place in schools and
centers with leaders equipped with the knowledge, skills, and dispositions of Lead Learn Excel.
For leaders, we observe:

● Transformed understanding of instructional improvement as an organizational process they are
responsible for leading
● Improved inclusive and instructional leadership skills with building trust, collective
responsibility, facilitating teacher inquiry, and galvanizing staff persistence with ongoing
practice improvement
● Fully-implemented systems for collaborative job-embedded professional learning in which
leaders learn together with staff through ongoing cycles of inquiry, data use, and practice
improvement
Leaders grew in their understanding of the impact of their leadership and organizational conditions on
supporting effective teaching, children’s learning, and instructional improvement. We also saw evidence
of growth in their respect for the complexity of teaching, the competencies teachers need to hone, and
that collaborative, JEPL is a more effective approach than traditional professional development for
improving teaching and learning. And we observed participants succeeded with creating a sustainable
schedule for weekly team lesson-planning meetings, monthly classroom observation and dialogue, and
one monthly reflective practice group.
For teachers who were recipients of leaders’ enhanced instructional guidance and facilitation of JEPL
routines, we observe:
● Improved rigor of lesson planning practices, including the design of standards-aligned, data-
informed, ambitious interactions and instruction
● Improved quality of teacher-child interactions as measured by direct observation using the
CLASS, with 76% of classrooms providing mid-to-high-quality emotional supports, classroom
organization, and instructional supports by the end of the pilot.
● Increased emotional support from colleagues and increased positive dispositions towards
collaboration
● Increased supportive relationships with leaders
● Increased commitment to continuous learning and improvement, specifically, by the end of the
pilot 85% of teachers reported that they were part of a professional community that supported
them in making practice changes.
For young children in the classrooms of teachers receiving enhanced instructional guidance and routine
opportunities to collaborate with peers, we observe notable growth in social-emotional development
compared to preschool children enrolled in matched samples of programs that did not enhance their
organizational supports for teaching and improvement. As leaders developed a more inclusive,
strengths-based approach to their relationships and instructional guidance with teachers, the teachers in
turn interacted with children in more positive and organized ways. We observed an indirect impact on
children’s learning of leaders’ developing a more emotionally supportive and collaborative environment
for teachers. Specifically, positive impacts were observed on closing the gap in social-emotional
learning and development for those children with two years of exposure to enhanced leadership and
JEPL. Given that two of the aims of transforming administrators to a stronger daily practice of inclusive
and instructional leadership is to increase professional trust and community in order to advance teachers’

pedagogical knowledge these results reflect the effectiveness of this approach in supporting and
improving instructional practice.
Through Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge funding, the State of Illinois has commissioned an
external evaluation of Lead Learn Excel that is being conducted by the University of Illinois-Chicago,
Center for Urban Education Leadership. This evaluation will examine the implementation of Lead Learn
Excel, explore change in leadership mindsets and practices in all participating settings, and analyze
impacts on teaching and children’s learning in a small number of programs. Final implementation
evaluation findings will be available in fall 2017, followed by final outcome and impact evaluation
findings in late winter 2017.
Conclusion
Lead Learn Excel deepens leaders’ understanding of how essential strong and sustained organizational
supports are to actually improving teaching and learning. It focuses leaders’ attention on the
responsibility they have with cultivating a trusting and collaborative community of practice, and with
facilitating inquiry and innovation instead of monitoring for compliance. It replaces traditional
disjointed professional development with a system of collaborative JEPL It motivates leaders to expand
their identity beyond “running the ECE program” into those of an instructional leader whose day-to-day
practice provides teachers with the relationships, guidance, conversations, and collaboration that
generates professional learning and practice excellence and improvement.
Efforts like ours, however, did not and cannot fully address the larger conditions—such as inadequate
and disjointed funding and burdensome and complex compliance demands—that contribute so mightily
to the challenges programs face in their efforts to improve teaching and learning. These essential
sustained supports and the instructional improvement that flows from them are far more likely to thrive
when the underlying context of the program, the center or school, the community, the school district or
agency, and the early childhood system are adequately strong and well resourced (Bryk, et al, 2010).
Our PDI, and comprehensive improvement efforts like it, could be successfully implemented in many
more programs, schools, and centers if there were a concerted effort to thoughtfully align program
metrics and child outcomes to structural supports—and if leadership competencies and the essential
conditions for improvement were kept at the forefront of accountability conversations about what gets
measured, funded, and supported (Regenstein & Romero-Jurado, 2014).
The more we explored the essential supports for improving educational settings, while emphasizing
inclusive instructional leadership as the primary driver of change, the more leaders co-constructed a
systems understanding of instructional improvement and their essential role in leading it. They shifted
from striving for buy-in and compliance to cultivating the collective understanding that ignites teachers’
attention, responsibility, and action for improvement. They began to aspire to lead something greater
than compliance. They began to know that together with their staff they could strive for excellence for
themselves and the children and families they serve.
Our vision and our work was timely. In 2015, (one year after we concluded our work to design, develop,
refine, and independently evaluate the PDI), the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council
released its seminal report, “Transforming the Workforce for Children Birth through Age 8: A Unifying
Foundation.” Two of the 13 recommendations specifically target early childhood program leaders,
including that the field specify knowledge and core competencies leaders need to support high-quality
practice in their organizations, and establish revised leadership standards, especially in the area of

instructional leadership. This is what Lead Learn Excel is designed to do and what promising evidence
from our pilot demonstrates that it is able to accomplish.
References
Allensworth, E. (2015). Keynote Address, UChicago Consortium 25th Anniversary Event, Chicago, IL,
November 18, 2015.
Anrig, G. (2013). Beyond the Education Wars: Evidence that Collaboration Builds Effective Schools.
New York: Century Foundation Press.
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. (2014). “Teachers Know Best: Teachers’ Views on Professional
Development.” http://k12education.gatesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Gates-
PDMarketResearch-Dec5.pdf
Bryk, A., Sebring, P., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., and Easton, J. (2010). Organizing Schools for
Improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Croft, A., Coggshall, J., Dolan, M., and Powers, E. (2010). “Job-Embedded Professional
Development: What It Is, Who Is Responsible, and How to Get It Done Well. Issue Brief.” National
Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Datnow, A. and Stringfield, S. (2000). “Working Together for Reliable School Reform.” Journal of
Education of Students Placed at Risk, 5, 183-204.
De Jong, T., and Ferguson-Hessler, M. (1996). “Types and Qualities of Knowledge.” Educational
Psychologist, 31(2), 105-113.
Ehrlich, S.B., Pacchiano, D.M., Stein, A.G., & Luppescu, S. (2016). Essential organizational supports
for early education: The development of a new survey tool to measure organizational conditions.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Consortium on School Research and the Ounce of Prevention
Fund.
Fitzgerald, M., & Theilheimer, R. (2013). “Moving Toward Teamwork through Professional
Development Activities.” Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(2), 103-113.
Fullan, M. (2007). The New Meaning of Educational Change. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
Green, B., Malsch, A., Kothari, B., Busse, J., and Brennan, E. (2012). “An Intervention to Increase
Early Childhood Staff Capacity for Promoting Children’s Social-Emotional Development in Preschool
Settings.” Early Childhood Education Journal, 40(2), 123-132.
Grissom, J., Loeb, S., and Master, B. (2013). “Effective Instructional Time Use for School Leaders
Longitudinal Evidence from Observations of Principals.” Educational Researcher,
0013189X13510020.
Hargreaves, A., and Fullan, M. (2012). Professional Capital: Transforming Teaching in Every School.
New York: Teachers College Press.

Heck, R., and Hallinger, P. (2009). “Assessing the Contribution of Distributed Leadership to School
Improvement and Growth in Math Achievement.” American Educational Research Journal, 46(3),
659-689.
Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., and Stigler, J. (2002). “A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession:
What Would it Look Like and How Can We Get One?” Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3-15.
Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2015). Transforming the Workforce for
Children Birth through Age 8: A Unifying Foundation. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press.
Jimerson-Campoli, A. (2011). A critical analysis of job-embedded professional development within a

distributed leadership framework [dissertation]. Hattiesburg: University of Southern Mississippi.
Joseph, G. E., Sandall, S. R., Porter, A., Lane, V., Shapiro, R., & Nolen, E. (2011). School readiness
for all children: Using data to support child outcomes. Seattle, WA: National Center on Quality
Teaching & Learning, University of Washington.
Leithwood, K., Anderson, S., Mascall, B., and Strauss, T. (2010). “School Leaders’ Influences on
Student Learning: The Four Paths.” The Principles of Educational Leadership and Management, 2, 13-
30.
Leithwood, K. A., and Riehl, C. (2003). What We Know About Successful School Leadership.
Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.
McLaughlin, M., and Talbert, J. (2006). Building School-Based Teacher Learning Communities:
Professional Strategies to Improve Student Achievement. New York: Teachers College Press.
Pacchiano, D., Klein, R., & Shigeyo Hawley, M. (2016a). Reimagining Instructional Leadership and
Organizational Conditions for Improvement: Applied Research Transforming Early Education.
Chicago, IL: The Ounce of Prevention Fund.
http://www.theounce.org/what-we-do/research/programs/Investing-In-Innovation
Pacchiano, D., Klein, R., & Shigeyo Hawley, M. (2016b). Job-Embedded Professional Learning
Essential to Improving Teaching and Learning in Early Education. Chicago, IL: The Ounce of
Prevention Fund. http://www.theounce.org/what-we-do/research/programs/Investing-In-Innovation
Pianta, R.C., La Paro, K., & Hamre, B.K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System Pre-K
(CLASS Pre-K). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.
Regenstein, E. and Romero-Jurado, R. (2014). “A Framework for Rethinking State Education

Accountability and Support from Birth through High School.” Policy Conversations (3). Chicago:
Ounce of Prevention Fund. http://www.theounce.org/pubs/policy-pubs/Policy-Convo-03-
Accountability.pdf.

Smylie, M. A. (2010). Continuous School Improvement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press and the
American Association of School Administrators.
TNTP. (2015). “The Mirage: Confronting the Hard Truth about our Quest for Teacher Development.”
TNTP. http:// tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTP-Mirage_2015.pdf
Whalen, S., Horsley, H., Parkinson, K., & Pacchiano, D. (in press). Journal of Applied Research on
Children, Special Issue: The Critical Years: Research and Progress in Early Education and Early Brain
Development.
Whalen, S., Horsley, H., Parkinson, K., & Tozer, S. (2016). The Ounce PDI Study: Development
Evaluation of a Job-Embedded Professional Development Initiative for Early Childhood Professionals.
Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago. http://urbanedleadership.org/what-we-do/research/the-
ounce-pdi-study/

Appendix. Five Essential Supports Adapted for Early Education
Inclusive and Instructional Leadership: Leaders focus strategically on children’s health, learning,
development and school readiness, and with actively supporting teachers to be effective in their daily
work with children and families. Leaders establish a vision for child-centered supportive learning
environments, ambitious teaching and learning, and partnerships with families in accomplishing that
vision. They hire staff determined to continuously improve learning opportunities and outcomes for young
children and families. In daily activities and interactions, leaders build and maintain mutually trusting and
respectful relationships. They galvanize staff activity in service of improvement and direct resources
toward a vision for sustained learning and improvement. Leaders build collective responsibility for
excellence and improvement by enlisting teachers in improvement efforts and practicing shared leadership
that cultivates a cadre of leaders among teachers, parents, and community members. Leaders ensure the
school is managed effectively, including the facility, budget, staffing, and resources.
Routine Teacher Collaboration: Leaders use supervisory and professional development resources,
performance feedback and social resources within the staff to build their professional capacity. Leaders
work together with staff to define their strategic focus and practice improvement goals, and to solve
learning and implementation problems along the way. Leaders protect time for routine teacher
collaboration during the work week, and facilitate those routines to ensure teachers are reviewing data,
examining and reflecting on practice, and collaborating to design instruction and try out practice
improvements. All staff work in collaboration to promote their own and their colleagues’ professional
growth. In such centers, teachers and staff are active partners in quality improvement, committed to the
center and the children and families it cares for and educates, and focused on continuous professional
learning, effectiveness, and improvement.
Child-Centered Supportive Learning Environments: In child-centered supportive learning environments,
all adults build supportive relationships with each other and with children and their families—the most
basic prerequisite for learning. In the earliest years, it is critical that children experience child-centered
supportive learning environments in order to develop a positive sense of themselves, the ability to trust
others, and successful approaches to learning. Leaders use resources and establish policies that ensure all
adults in the school community create consistently child-centered supportive learning environments. All
adults attend daily to the use of physical space, materials, daily structure and routines, continuity of care,
group size and ratio to create child-centered supportive environments. All adults interact with each other
and children in warm, positive ways that create a positive emotional climate allowing children to
consistently feel safe, liked, able to build relationships and actively explore. Teachers are trust-worthy and
responsive to children’s individual emotional and intellectual needs, they hold high expectations for
children’s capacity to learn, and they affirm and promote children’s exploration, friendships, engagement,
and persistence.
Ambitious Interactions and Instruction: All adults are provided guidance that articulates the what and how
of effective teaching and learning for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. All adults endorse and use early
learning and development standards and assessment information about children‘s progress toward the
standards to design meaningful learning opportunities. Teachers reflect on and plan intentionally for their
role in providing children with interactions that are emotionally supportive, organized, instructionally
meaningful, and individualized to each child’s needs. All adults partner with families in continuing to
learn about meaningful and effective learning opportunities for children both at home and at school. A
guidance system supports high-quality implementation and continuous improvement of teaching
interactions, instruction, and children’s learning. Structures for the implementation of curricula,
assessments, and use of materials are coordinated across the program. While teachers may have
substantial discretion in how these resources are used, teaching effectiveness depends on the community
of practice and supervisory dialogue and feedback that supports implementation.

Strong Ties and Partnerships Among Families, Schools and Community: Children do not exist alone; they
are a member of a family that lives within a community. When families, schools and communities focus
collectively on children’s needs, children are healthy, competent, motivated learners who realize long-
term social and academic success. Early parent-school partnerships shape parents’ awareness and capacity
for partnering with educators and advocating for their children’s needs to ensure positive experiences and
success in school. Through systematic approaches, the entire staff works to build responsive, respectful
relationships with families that motivate engagement and goal-oriented partnerships. Parents are partners
in developing and achieving goals for their child and their family. Staff value parents’ perspective and
participation and are willing to be influenced by it. All staff share and seek information from families to
build mutual respect and understanding. They make decisions collaboratively with parents and work
cohesively across home and school to support children’s participation, health, learning and development.
All staff cultivate strong ties with elementary schools and actively support parents, children and teachers
to make successful kindergarten transitions. Through referrals and connections to community resources,
staff work to reduce material hardships, promote well-being and increase family capacity to engage with
the children’s learning and development. By building social networks among families, staff work to
reduce isolation, increase social-emotional supports and open life and learning opportunities that
strengthen families and entire communities.

Benefits of Play-based Learning in the Kindergarten Classroom
By: Erica Pang and Lisa Simoncelli-Bulak
Author Bios:
Introduction:
According to the late Fred Rogers, “Play is often talked about as if it were a relief from serious learning.
But for children play is serious learning. Play is really the work of childhood,” (Fred Rogers Center for
Early Learning, 2014) The Benavides Kindergarten Center houses 500 preschool and kindergarten
students drawn from 12 different elementary schools in Aurora East School District #131. Benavides
offers full day preschool and full day kindergarten. Our full day kindergarten program balances
academics with social-emotional learning and play based learning. We have found much success in this
well-balanced program to support the development of the whole child. Educators often say letter names
and sounds are the most essential skills a kindergartner should know upon entering first grade. However,
one of the most critical components of a kindergarten program needs to be the development of oral
language skills. Oral language is how we express knowledge, ideas and feelings. This is the foundation
of learning. One of the best ways to develop oral language is to give students opportunities to listen to
and use language in the classroom (Trehearne, 2003). Listening to and speaking the English language
are the first domains to develop in English Language Learners. With seventy percent of Benavides
students being English Language Learners it is vital to provide a classroom environment with a variety
of opportunities for students to hear and speak the language. A play-based learning block in the
classroom is a perfect opportunity to allow students to develop oral language skills in a natural and risk-
free environment. Kids need to play. As Fred Rogers said, "Play is serious learning."
This is a student of Cory Mehnert, an early childhood educator at the Benavides Kindergarten School. The student is
playing in the Science center during our "Things that Move" unit.

Why play?
With a greater push for full-day kindergarten programs across the country, many professionals, experts,
and organizations see the value of early childhood learning by setting the stage for future learning and
social emotional well-being. The benefits of play are recognized scientifically. The neural pathways in
children’s brains develop through exploration, thinking skills, problem solving, and language expression
that naturally occurs during play (Canada Council of Ministers of Education, 2010). Children learn
through doing and they learn through play. Teachers need to facilitate opportunities for play in the
classroom while fostering a caring classroom community where all students are given ample
opportunities to grow and develop. According to Cory Mehnert (2016), an early childhood educator at
the Benavides Kindergarten School, “play is imperative in early childhood as children construct their
knowledge from experiences.” Overall, play-based learning can lead to greater social, emotional, and
academic success. Play is risk-free. Play is an ideal context for learning how to read, write and
communicate. Play supports the development of academic content such as literacy and math, but also,
social, emotional and physical development of children. Play allows children to problem solve, inquire
and begin to understand the world around them (Trehearne, 2003). Children are given an environment
to grow and learn that is natural and non-threatening in order to develop critical skills that are necessary
for future success in school.
Current Reality
Common Core State Standards have intensified academic expectations for students from kindergarten
to 12th grade. As a result time to integrate play-based learning in the classroom is being neglected in
many schools. According to the authors of Is Kindergarten the New First Grade, there are great
differences between the kindergarten classrooms of 1998 and those in 2010. After taking a look at some
of the experiences between then and now, the researchers conclude that current expectations have driven
the increased focus and time spent on academics and as a result, less time on nonacademic subjects like
drama, music, art and play. For example, in 1998 only 31% of kindergarten teachers expected their
students to learn to read; by 2010 this expectation jumped to 80% of teachers (Education Week, Feb.
2016) With higher expectations from the Common Core State Standards, we are concerned that students
are now excepted to learn and do more than what they may be prepared to do, with little emphasis on
how to prepare them. We need to focus on teaching students how to learn, which involves developing
social-emotionally first. Play-based learning provides students opportunities to learn how to learn.”
These expectations are then the focus of the kindergarten curriculum in schools with little or no time
devoted to areas such as drama, theater and the arts. Comparatively in 1998, only 18% of kindergarten
teachers did no theater activities; by 2010 the gap increased greatly to 50% of kindergarten teachers.
Importantly, dramatic play experiences allow students to imagine different scenarios and role-play
diverse characters in their play experiences. Yet, the percentage of kindergarten classrooms that actually
had a dramatic play area decreased from 87% to 58% of classrooms during this twelve-year period.
Compared to other countries, the U.S. falls flat in terms of allowing time for play in schools. On average,
American elementary school kids get 27 minutes a day. Their Finnish peers get an average of 75 minutes.
In Japan, children get 10-15 minute breaks each hour in addition to a longer recess period based on the
idea that kids' attention spans begin to wane after a certain amount of intense instruction (Eunjung Cha,
2015). By way of contrast, in America the school day is highly focused on academics, with little time
for movement, arts, crafts and play. Moreover, American classrooms now spend less time on child-
selected activities and more on teacher directed whole class activities using workbooks and worksheets.
These activities only promote rote memorization and basic recall. They are not developmentally

appropriate for students in kindergarten and do not encourage critical thinking. Lastly, teacher-directed
whole class activities of watching someone else do something may not be as engaging as “play which
allows for active exploration because the student can experience a task, lesson, or experience first hand”
(Mehnert, 2016).
What is play and how does it support learning?

What exactly is play-based learning? When asked about play in the classroom, many educators believe
that it means extra recess. Actually, there are many different forms of play, not simply playing outside.
Although playing outdoors is important, school play needs to benefit the cognitive, social, emotional
and physical development of children. There are many ways to play. Some play is very free and
unstructured, like playing with blocks. Other forms of play are very structured, such as playing “school”
or “restaurant.” The different forms of play that are used in the classroom are dependent on the teacher
providing structured experiences, instruction and materials. Edward Miller and Joan Almon (2009)
suggest that the following types of play should be considered for use in a kindergarten classroom:
Large-Motor Play – swinging, jumping, running. Students are given opportunities for recess and
physical education where they can develop gross motor skills
Small-Motor Play – playing with puzzles or sorting objects. Students are given opportunities to
develop fine motor skills.
Mastery Play – tying shoes. Students will continually practice task until it is mastered.
Rules based-play – creating games and rules. Students learn how to work with one another, negotiate
and adapt to each other.
Construction play – building structures. This allows for creative imagination and often is free form,
but can easily be scaffolded. For example, if a teacher provides toy animals to go along with blocks,
children may construct a zoo.
Make-believe play – acting and role-playing. Children can act out any scenario, story, or event. The
benefit of make-believe play is it allows for an opportunity to practice oral language.
Symbolic play – turning ordinary items into props. For example, a chair can transform into a car, or a
pencil into a magic wand.
Language play – when students tell or present stories and make up songs to develop their language
skills.
Playing with art – creating, painting, molding. Playing with art through a variety of mediums allows
students to express their feelings and ideas.
Sensory play – playing with dirt, playdough, water, sand. Students develop their senses when playing
with different items with various textures, sounds, and smells.
Rough and tumble play – when children play through interacting with each other in contact sports and
games.
Risk-taking play –testing physical limits. Students can challenge their limits and learn about their
physical abilities. The game limbo is an example of risk-taking play.

It is important to remember that play is fun. When learning is fun, children are more motivated to engage
in learning opportunities. There are many forms of play to consider for the kindergarten classroom.
Achieving balance is key. Children should have opportunities to initiate play, but teachers also need to
guide learning by designing purposeful activities that are scaffolded. It’s important to have variety in
the classroom with careful thought on when to introduce different forms of play and play materials such
as blocks, puppets, art supplies, puzzles, make-believe play clothes, kitchen utensils, and other tangible
items related to particular classroom themes.
A positive benefit of integrating play in the classroom is student engagement. When children are
engaged in purposeful play, they are discovering, creating and expanding their own learning, a natural
response to the environment around them. By manipulating objects, acting out roles, and experimenting
with different materials children are learning to take responsibility for their own learning (Canada
Council of Ministers of Education, 2010). According to psychologist David Elkind, “play is not only
our creative drive; it’s a fundamental mode of learning.” He emphasizes the interconnectedness between
play and academic work for young children. Play allows children to actively construct and expand their
own understandings by making connections to prior experiences (Canada Council of Ministers of
Education, 2010).
Most importantly play can easily be integrated into the curriculum. Teachers can take advantage of
children’s high interest and engagement in play experiences by planning an entire curriculum and
incorporating standards-based goals and objectives for children’s learning into their lessons. Throughout
these planned play experiences, the teacher incorporates standards of mathematics (number and
operations, geometry and spatial sense, and patterns and measurements) by introducing these concepts
in a meaningful context. The teacher may also integrate language and literacy goals and objectives by
helping children to discuss and document their play, and by providing literature and informational text
on specific topics or areas.
According to Benavides teacher Cory Mehnert, “Direct instruction can be utilized to introduce a new
idea or new concept, but with intentional, productive play experiences used for extra support and
scaffolding, children can take what they learn and apply them in context.” (2016) Furthermore, in early
childhood play becomes an avenue for introducing and teaching social-emotional skills to our youngest
learners. “Students cannot be expected to learn without first knowing how to self-regulate, focus, share,
understand, and empathize with others.” (Mehnert) Overall, play is an engaging means of learning.

Another one of Ms. Mehnert’s students who is playing with blocks that they had painted themselves. They created
Mondrian designs after we learned about the famous artist Piet Mondrian
How to assess play?

Standardized testing has trickled down to the early childhood classroom. Students are regularly assessed
on a variety of literacy skills and math skills with the expectation that they will be reading by the end of
the kindergarten year. Although this information is valuable in helping design academic instruction,
there is so much more needed for understanding the whole child. In order to fully understand where a
child is developmentally, a teacher needs to be a keen observer. There is much power in observation.
Using observation as a form of assessment in the classroom allows the teacher to get to know each child
more fully, to build relationships and to connect with children. Skilled observers reflect on their teaching
practices and use observational data to determine student strengths and weaknesses and reflect on their
own instructional practices.
Every child is unique and our students come from a variety of cultural backgrounds. When teachers
observe how children interact with each other, they can learn so much about the cultures, attitudes and
beliefs of their students, (Jablon, Dombro, and Dichtelmiller, 2007). Teachers must be given time to
be able to learn about the uniqueness of each and every child. Becoming a skilled observer will give
teachers very valuable data to help plan their instruction and to look at the academic, social-emotional
and physical development of each child.
So when is the best time for teachers to observe? One of the best ways to observe and collect assessment
data on children is when they are in a natural setting. Having a play-based learning block integrated
into the curriculum allows for a perfect time for assessment through observation. Taking anecdotal
notes, video recordings and pictures are all simple ways to gather meaningful information on every
child. The teacher should utilize a variety of approaches during this time. They can simply observe,
coach students, keep play open-ended or keep it very structured. Teachers can purposefully plan play
to incorporate math and literacy skills that can easily be observed and assessed during play. An example
of this would be a bakery. Having students take turns playing bakery hits a variety of academic and
social-emotional standards. If teachers wants to focus on math standards, they can focus on students
taking orders, counting cookies, or putting sprinkles on a cookie. Literacy skills could include store
signage, creating menus, and writing student orders. Oral language development can easily be observed.
Teachers can focus on social-emotional skills and see how students are sharing, taking turns, and self-
regulating their behavior. Depending on the teacher’s focus there really is no limit to what can be
observed during play. Specific standards can easily be incorporated into the play-based learning block
allowing for a natural setting for teachers to observe and learn about the whole child.
A student role-playing as a chef, creating a pizza in the pizza restaurant play center.

Conclusion: Considerations about Play
Play encompasses a variety of contexts. To ensure effective play integration in the classroom it is
important that teachers have the appropriate materials, such as blocks, dramatic play items, kitchens,
and art supplies. Districts need to support play and build time into the kindergarten day for play. A
clear definition of play and play guidelines needs to be developed in schools.
Within the classroom, we must make our play experiences engaging, meaningful, and intentional.
Materials should be well thought-out to include standards, yet be open-ended so that teachers can utilize
the zone of proximal development to meet each child where he or she is, and scaffold them to the next
level of learning. It is not enough to put toys on a shelf and tell children to "go play." Teachers need to
be diligent about providing materials that encourage rich language experiences, extend learning
opportunities, and cement concepts and foundational skills. A balance of child-initiated and teacher
guided activities is essential. Teachers should look at the various types of play and incorporate a variety
of play activities into their classrooms. Balance is key. As Cory Mehnert declared, “Play is the time
when, over and over, I see my students make connections between content and application. It is
also during play that we see the love and joy of learning.” (2016).
References
Unknown. (2016) Kindergarten Today: Less Play, More Academics. Education Week, Volume 35
(issue 20), 3 pages. http://www.edweek.org/ew/section/multimedia/kindergarten-less-play-
more-academics.html?print=1.
Canada Ministers of Education Council Report. (2010). World Conference on Early Childhood Care
and Education, Moscow, Russian Federation, September 27–29, 2010.
http://www.cmec.ca/publications/lists/publications/attachments/256/wcecce-moscow-sept-
2010-en.pdf.
Eunjung Cha, Arirana. (October 2, 2015). "The U.S. Recess Predicament: Extraordinary Photos
of What We Can Learn from Play in Other Parts of the World." Washington Post.
Jablon, Judy R. Amy Laura Dombro and Margo L. Dichtelmiller. (2007). Introduction. The
Power of Observation. Washington, DC: Teaching Strategies.
Mehnert, Cory. (March 13, 2016). personal communication with authors.
Miller, Edward and Joan Almon. (2009). Crisis in the Kindergarten: Why Children Need to Play
in School, 55. Retrieved at http://files.eric.ed/gov/fulletext/ED504839.pdf
Moore, Heidi. “Why Play is the Work of Childhood.” Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning
and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent College. Fred Rogers Center, 23 Sept. 2014. Web.
13. Mar. 2016.
Trehearne, Miriam P. (2003). Oral Language in the Classroom. Comprehensive Literacy Resource for
Kindergarten Teachers. Vernon Hills, IL: ETA Cuisenaire.

Early Childhood Developmental Enrichment Center
(ECDEC/Preschool For All) and District 15 (Palatine) find children at
risk and prepare them for the rigors of kindergarten
By: Elaine Moffitt
Author Bio:
Elaine Moffitt received her Master of Education in Early Childhood Curriculum and Instruction from
National Louis University in August, 2005, along with ESL endorsement in 2013. I am a National Board
Certified Teacher (Exceptional Needs Specialist/Early Childhood Through Young Adulthood, granted
November, 2008). She has been an Early Childhood Special Education teacher at Conyers Learning
Academy in Community Consolidated School District (Palatine) for the past 15 years. She can be
reached at [email protected].
Introduction
Community Consolidated District 15 houses nine sites for students (age 3-5) who have entered a
screening process and qualified for the Early Childhood Developmental Enrichment Center (ECDEC)
Block Grant (Illinois Preschool For All). District 15 served 575 kids, approximately 75% who are Latino
(slightly over 400), during the 2015-16 school year. Five classrooms are housed in an alternative school
where they blend with special education students. The remaining ECDEC classes are housed in
elementary schools and facilities in Palatine and Rolling Meadows. All ECDEC classes hire a Spanish
speaking instructional assistant and nearly all classroom teachers are endorsed in ESL.
ECDEC Program
As a “blended teacher,” 10 of my 15 students (per half day) are considered “at risk” and have been
screened and placed in my classroom through the ECDEC, funded through the Preschool for All Block
Grant. Five of the 15 have qualified for special education. ECDEC students are placed in my classroom
based on highest need with regard to multiple risk factors including poverty, linguistically isolated
homes, children from families involved in the child welfare system, disabilities/developmental delays,
low parental education and other factors. Half of my students are English Language Learners (ELL) with
Spanish as their first language. Some students also qualify for speech/language; occupational therapy,
physical therapy and social work services which are available in my building. My blended classroom
also serves as the least restrictive environment (LRE) for my students who qualify for Special
Education. Some of my students with Individual Educational Plans (IEP) who no longer qualify for
special education become part of the ECDEC program throughout the school year. All other ECDEC
sites serve 40 students daily.
The Family Involvement Nurturing Development Prevention Initiative (FINDPI) program is funded by
the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) and is included in the ECDEC Block Grant and offers parent
and child interaction activities, parent workshops and home visits for children from birth to age three
(www.ecdec.org ). The enrollment of 67 families and 72 students in fiscal year 2015 were all below
the poverty level and 62 of the adults had education levels below high school. The enrollment was
primarily Latino with families clustered in northeast Palatine, Rolling Meadows and a pocket of

Arlington Heights. Through May 2015, 950 home visits had been conducted and all families
participated in at least one “Promise to Play” family literacy based session weekly.
Family and community involvement is a priority for both programs, ECDEC and FIND. Parent
workshops and family engagement activities were frequent at all sites. Topics ranged from nutrition
and discipline to literacy and math. Collaborative partnerships included libraries, park districts, villages
and townships, hospitals and clinics, agencies that support basic needs, plus those that provide
enhancement such as Woodfield Area Children’s Organization (WACO), Toys for Tots and adult
education providers.
ECDEC/PFA uses Creative Curriculum, Project Approach, Scholastic, and Literacy based additional
curricula aligned with the Illinois Early Learning and Developmental Standards. By creating purposeful
and productive play experiences children grow in all developmental areas. Using a variety of
curriculum strategies, teachers provide children with opportunities to develop and receive support for
the following skills: language, social-emotional, cognitive, fine and gross motor. Parent workshops are
offered on a wide range of topics based on parent needs. These include school routines and
responsibilities, discipline, nutrition, literacy, health and safety, language acquisition and kindergarten
readiness (www.ecdec.org ).
ECDEC has received Gold Circle of Quality recognition from ExceleRate Illinois and two awards of
Excellence in Preschool Teaching and Learning in May 2016. They also submitted a portfolio for an
Award of Excellence for Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Practice in April 2016, in hopes of
receiving this prestigious award.
Overall the Illinois Early Childhood Policy Goals are 1) to increase the percentage of children who begin
kindergarten healthy, safe, eager to learn and ready to succeed in a rigorous, developmentally
appropriate K-12 curriculum, 2) to decrease disparities (racial, economic, geographic) in “readiness” at
kindergarten entry and in achievements by third grade, and 3) by 2021, 80% of all children will be fully
ready for kindergarten (Hernandez, 2016). ECDEC has consistently exceeded this goal. Student
learning outcomes in the ECDEC program were tracked three times during the FY 16 school year. Of
high importance are the kindergarten bound outcomes revealing that 95% of the students going to
kindergarten met or exceeded the program goal in the science/math domain and 84% of the students
going to kindergarten met the language/literacy goal.
Conclusion
Research has proven that if at risk children come prepared for kindergarten they will close the
achievement gap by fifth grade. If they do not come ready for kindergarten the gap will continue to
expand. ECDEC had a waiting list of 235 children during the 2015-16 school year (Ford, 2016).
Unfortunately, in spite of this pre-kindergarten program success, there continues to be a shortage of
classrooms and funds to serve those who are most in need. In April, 2016 the District 15 Facilities Plan
Committee v2.0 presented the School Board with recommendations for addressing the District’s long-
term facilities needs. Two broad goals were discussed: addressing the educational needs of students
and improving the accessibility and organization of schools. By expanding the community school
program near areas with families in greatest need, more young ELL students would receive intensive
services for more hours of each day, minimizing transportation issues. This will also provide increased
opportunity for students eligible for pre-school programs (District 15 Connections, June 2016).

References
Community Consolidated School District 15 Connections: A Newsletter for parents and the community,
June, 2016. www.ccsd15.net
Hernandez, R. (2016). Assistant Superintendent, Center of Language and Early Child Development,
Early Childhood Block Grant (ISBE)
Ford, K. (2016) Project Director ECDEC/Preschool for All. www.ecdec.org

Innovative Approaches to the Early Childhood Education Challenges
in Central Illinois
By: Georgette Comuntzis Page, Claudia Quigg, and Joyce Bezdicek
Author Bios
Georgette Comuntzis Page, Ph.D., an Associate Professor in the School of Education at Millikin
University, teaches courses in early childhood education such as Child Development, Family-
Community Engagement, and Arts Integration. Her research interests center around creativity,
aesthetics, and young children’s understanding of visual media. She can be reached at
[email protected].
Claudia Quigg, M.Ed., Adjunct Faculty in the School of Education at Millikin, founded Baby TALK in
1986. Collaborating with Millikin, she designed and initiated the Early Childhood degree curriculum,
and continues to teach in the program. Her particular early childhood education (ECE) interests are
birth-age three and working with families. She also serves as faculty for Boston Children’s Hospital on
the Touchpoints Approach and the Newborn Behavioral Observation. She can be reached at
[email protected].
Joyce Bezdicek, Ph.D., an Associate Professor in the School of Education at Millikin, teaches ECE courses
and courses for the ESL and bilingual endorsements. Her interests in these areas of education are
related to her experiences working with young bilingual children and families in the United States,
Japan, and the Canary Islands of Spain. She can be reached at [email protected].
Abstract
This article describes an early childhood program situated at a small, private university in central
Illinois, where program students graduate with skills for working with children and families in high-
needs situations. Factors that contribute to the uniqueness of such a program include its emphasis on
best practices, family engagement, early intervention, and ESL and bilingual education. Along with its
successes, the authors note the challenges that such a program faces.
Introduction
Millikin University is a private university in the mid-sized city of Decatur, Illinois, a community where
the majority of children are from high-needs families. Its long-standing School of Education has offered
teacher licensing degrees in elementary and secondary education for many years. Since 2004, the
early childhood education program has prepared students for working with children from birth to age
8. These highly qualified graduates have experienced quick placement into schools and programs who
benefit from the unique preparation Millikin students experience; when the 2016 cohort graduated in
late May, all members of the class were offered professional level positions by June 1.
The ECE program at Millikin benefits everyone, especially the students, who are members of a cohort
that advances through the program together in blocks of courses, experiencing most of these courses
with the same group of individuals who come to know and develop close relationships with each other.
Not only the students, but also the faculty benefit as they come to know their students and usher them

through their courses. Class sizes are small, enabling faculty to offer highly individualized levels of
support to cohort students.
The purpose of this article is to give a brief overview of Millikin’s early childhood education program
and to highlight its unique qualities in preparing graduates of the program to be strong advocates,
educators, and champions of children and families, especially those considered to be in high-needs
situations.
The Program’s Origin

The launching of this program was precipitated by the trend toward increased funding for early
childhood at both the federal and state levels and by Millikin’s partnerships with outstanding early
childhood programs in the community that could offer students meaningful practical experiences with
children and families. In the years since its inception, funding streams have indeed grown
exponentially and community partners have become very real collaborators on behalf of preparing
early childhood teacher candidates.
Seniors majoring in marketing at Millikin’s Tabor School of Business carried out a feasibility study to
determine the local need for such a program. They found that there was indeed a need. The study
projected that an evening accelerated program for adults would attract even more students than a
traditional day program. This prediction has been shown to be true as both programs attract students,
but the evening program attracts greater numbers. One of the successes of this program has resulted
from small class sizes (5-13 students in the traditional cohorts and 15-25 in the accelerated cohorts),
allowing for close collaboration between students and faculty. After Millikin had offered two
exploratory early childhood courses each year, beginning in 1996, the full program was designed in
2002-2003, received approvals in 2003-2004, and was implemented in 2004-2005.
Prior to designing the program, Millikin consulted other universities in Illinois both for curriculum
design and for what they considered to be the strengths and weaknesses of their programs. In addition
to adherence to state and university standards, the Millikin program was designed to address four
specific elements that other universities considered to be “gaps” in their early childhood programs:
1) Practicum experiences with children birth to age 3. This element was provided by Millikin’s
longstanding partner Baby TALK, a local program that serves the families of every baby born in
Decatur through a variety of program settings able to offer placements for Millikin students. In
addition to learning about infants and toddlers in class, Millikin students spend a semester with
these youngest children during the Sophomore Block. A Millikin ECE degree meets all
coursework requirements for Early Childhood Special Education Approval to serve children
receiving early intervention services.
2) Experiences with children from high-needs backgrounds. Because Decatur Public Schools
report a free or reduced lunch population above 70%, Millikin students have the opportunity
to work with families experiencing poverty and other circumstances which may compromise
children’s success. Baby TALK, Decatur Public Schools’ Preschool for All program, and Early
Head Start/Head Start provide many experiences with families with complex needs.

3) Experiences working with parents. Beginning in Sophomore Block, students work closely with
parents to assess family needs and child development, develop goals with families, and learn
effective communication skills with families. Baby TALK trains the Touchpoints Model,
developed by Dr. T. Berry Brazelton of Harvard Children’s Hospital, which is designed to
increase the competence of professionals in building relationships with families, and nurture
students in these relational skills.
4) Experiences working with children with special needs. Because of the significant increase of
children with IFSPs and IEPs, early childhood educators must be prepared to work with children
with diverse learning needs. Both coursework and practicum experiences provide a
background that enables Millikin ECE students to graduate with Early Childhood Special
Education Approval from the Illinois State Board of Education.
Overview of the Program

Students in the ECE program at Millikin take courses that center around developmentally appropriate
practices and assessment strategies for infants through children 8 years of age. Courses are both
theoretically and practically oriented as students become ECE professionals. For example, Early
Childhood Development introduces students at the sophomore level to the various perspectives of
child development, culminating in a major assignment, the Case Study, an in-depth investigation of
one infant/toddler, with whom students interact in their field placement work. Other courses help
students gain knowledge about children in preschools and K-2nd classrooms, ESL/bilingual education,
special education, methods of ECE, and family-community engagement. Many of these courses have
embedded signature assessments such as the Case Study, major assignments that are part of the
Millikin School of Education’s database showing how students are meeting state standards for 04
Licensure and other endorsements.
Our ECE courses combine theory with practice and push students to more sophisticated levels of
understanding various concepts in ECE. Along with coursework, students complete internships at
various early childhood programs throughout the Decatur community. These field experiences for
students support the content of their courses and offer opportunities for them to see “what is real” as
they develop their own philosophies of early childhood education. Placements include programs for
infant-toddlers, preschools, and elementary school classrooms, pre-K through 2nd grade.
At the beginning of their coursework, students in their freshman year take courses and are placed in
the field, observing various educational settings. In their sophomore year, students work with Baby
TALK, a local program that serves families of infants and toddlers in various settings, ranging from
classrooms at Baby TALK’s Early Head Start to shadowing developmental therapists, who work directly
with families in the Illinois Early Intervention Program. (Because of coursework as well as experiential
learning that focuses on children with special needs, Millikin students graduate with Early Childhood
Special Education Approval.)
In their junior year, ECE students at Millikin are placed in settings at Head Start and public schools,
working with families and children who are in preschool and at risk or in high-needs situations. In
these preschool settings, students learn about diversity and strategies for supporting children and
engaging their families. When they are seniors, ECE students are placed in public schools, K-2nd grade

to complete the student teaching requirement. Many student teachers are placed within the Decatur
public schools, serving children from diverse and high-needs backgrounds. Some students opt to go
to Chicago to do student teaching through The Chicago Center for Urban Life and Culture to gain more
of an understanding of urban education before graduating.
Some students have also completed student teaching in other countries such as the Dominican
Republic to gain multicultural knowledge and experience. Prior to student teaching, however,
throughout their coursework and internships, students in the ECE program at Millikin have numerous
opportunities for multicultural education abroad by enrolling in immersion courses which take them
to Spain, China, or the Dominican Republic. In these countries, students gain invaluable experiences
as they teach and become more knowledgeable about different cultures and educational systems.
Relating to these multicultural experiences, the ESL and Bilingual coursework and field experiences
contribute to the unique qualities of Millikin’s ECE program.
ESL & Bilingual Endorsements

Courses for the English as a second language (ESL) and the bilingual endorsements were first offered
in Millikin’s School of Education in fall of 2012. The development of these endorsements occurred
primarily due to two factors. First, Millikin’s NCATE accreditation, completed in 2011, pointed to the
need for preparing future teachers to serve English language learners (ELLs). Second, the Illinois State
Board of Education (ISBE) emphasized the need for education students to graduate with specializations
(i.e., endorsements) beyond just their degree (early childhood, elementary, middle school, or
secondary education). These two developments were timely and reflected a growing need for
preparing teachers with the knowledge base and skills for effectively serving the changing population
of children in U.S. schools. Information from the National Center for Education Statistics (2016) show
the percentage of ELLs rising from 8.8% to 9.3% from the 2003-2004 academic year to the 2013-2014
academic year. In addition, in Illinois, the population of ELLs also shows an increase, from 9% in the
2011-2012 academic year to 10.3% in the 2014-2015 academic year (Illinois State Board of Education,
n.d.). As communities throughout the U.S. reflect this changing population, school personnel--urban,
rural and suburban--are encouraged to plan for serving a growing population of ELLs and strive to hire
teachers with specializations such as the ESL and the bilingual endorsements (Samway & McKeon,
2007).
In response to this need, the courses for the endorsements were designed, approved, and then
incorporated into a four-year plan of study for all early childhood education students in both the
traditional and accelerated course formats. In Illinois, teacher education students are required to
complete six courses (18 credits) for the ESL and the bilingual endorsements (Illinois State Board of
Education, 2016). These courses were intentionally integrated throughout students’ sophomore,
junior, and senior years to enable our teacher candidates to learn from these courses as a regular,
integrated part of their early childhood education program. For example, in fall of their sophomore
year students take Foundations of Bilingual Education and in spring, Language Development and
Linguistics. During fall of their junior year they complete Integrating Culture in the Classroom and then
Methods and Materials in the Education of English Language Learners during spring semester. Finally,
seniors during their fall semester take Assessment of English Language Learners. The sixth course for
the ESL endorsement is an elective while the sixth course for the bilingual endorsement is a methods
and materials course specifically designed for bilingual teachers (Bilingual Methods and Materials).

In addition to these courses, as required by ISBE, students also complete 100 clock hours, which are
integrated with endorsement courses (20 clock hours per course). Some clock hours focus on visits to
bilingual program models in Decatur and surrounding communities while others engage students in
working with ELLs in local schools. Students are also encouraged to participate in a week-long
internship taking place during January (before semester classes begin) in Chicago, in collaboration with
the Chicago Center for Urban Life and Culture. This internship is optional, meets some of the 100 clock-
hour requirement, and provides students with opportunities to visit cultural neighborhoods and then
spend three days observing and working in some of the best dual language programs in the city of
Chicago. Students are highly encouraged to take part in the January Chicago Internship since the week-
long experience provides them with opportunities not available to them in Decatur and surrounding
communities.
Student observations often support the need for the ESL or the bilingual endorsement as they report
the increasing number of ELLs in classrooms and other educational programs. At the same time, they
note that most teachers in these settings do not have the ESL or bilingual endorsements for serving
their educational needs. Since 2015, ECE graduates from Millikin have had these credentials and are
beginning to make a difference in filling these teaching needs.
Best Practices
Family Engagement
Best practice is based on seeing a child as part of her family system, and, therefore, Family Engagement
is a significant focus of the Millikin EC curriculum, reflecting the national ECE trend toward building
collaborations with families. Baby TALK trains on the Touchpoints Approach of building relationships
with families, based on the work of Dr. T. Berry Brazelton (Brazelton & Sparrow, 2006) and the
Brazelton Touchpoints Center at Boston Children’s Hospital. Baby TALK program leaders use this
approach of seeing parents as experts on their own children, recognizing that parents want to do well
by their children, and supporting family mastery. Baby TALK staff teach Infants and Toddlers: Parents
and Assessment within the Sophomore Block at the same time when students are interning in Baby
TALK program sites where they witness this impactful family collaboration in action. Students begin
the work of engaging with families, consulting them about their goals for their children’s development
and facing difficult issues with them in compassionate conversations. The ethic of honoring families is
then affirmed throughout the duration of the course work and internships.
While all of Millikin’s ECE major courses address the importance of families, one course in particular is
geared toward student understanding of this important aspect of early childhood. ECE students take
Family and Community Engagement during their junior year when they also complete weekly hours in
an internship in a local ECE program such as Head Start, serving high-needs children and families. The
major goal of this course is for students to create and execute a family event in which they incorporate
the concepts of family and community engagement. This course coincides with other courses in the
Junior Block, especially those centering around best practices such as those of the Project Approach
and Reggio Emilia philosophy.

Child-centered Approach
Millikin’s Early Childhood Education faculty are concerned when children are not engaged or interested
in learning. They do not connect to paper and pencil activities that are teacher directed with
prescribed outcomes. Within the field of early childhood education, scholars support child-centered,
creative approaches that engage children (e.g., Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 2012; Helm & Katz, 2016;
Vecchi, 2010). Worksheets and other adult-centered experiences are not developmentally appropriate
for young children (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009), and yet these practices are evident in many early
childhood settings, where the curriculum steers what happens throughout a child’s day at school.
Therefore, one of the overall goals in Millikin’s ECE program is to move teacher education students
toward more child-centered and creative approaches in working with young children. Courses
emphasize the importance of observing and listening to children as well as the teacher’s role of
engaging children in meaningful experiences as they learn more about the world around them.
Children who come from high-needs environments often are subjected to more traditional approaches
to learning, and these environments are often not geared toward higher-order thinking skills (Dresden
& Lee, 2007). This stems from a need to keep children on task and hence presumably more prepared
for Kindergarten. Consequently, basic skills and rote learning are the main foci, and yet the early
childhood literature (e.g., Copple & Bredekamp, 2009; Helm & Katz, 2016) supports another way of
teaching, one that inspires creativity and higher-order thinking such as project investigation.
[Interestingly enough, the renowned children’s show Sesame Street is also supporting this approach in
their current season as Elmo is now “wondering and investigating” ideas that interest him.
(http://www.today.com/video/-elmo-s-world-get-a-sneak-peek-at-the-new-season-on-sesame-
street-848223811901) ]
The Project Approach

Millkin’s ECE department prepares students to use the Project Approach by teaching them about best
practices that are child-centered and how children learn best. They are first introduced to the Project
Approach in one of their Sophomore Block courses (Early Childhood Methods). In this course, students
learn about the three phases of the project approach and then, in groups, engage in a project as they
investigate a topic of interest on the Millikin campus. A project is defined as “an in-depth investigation
of a topic worth learning more about” (Katz, as cited in Helm & Katz, 2016, p. 2). The goal of this first
encounter with the Project Approach is for teacher education students to experience what learning
can be like when children are supported in exploring and learning about something that interests them
in their environment (as opposed to more teacher-directed activities).
Early childhood education students revisit the Project Approach again in their junior year. In Language
Arts and Social Studies in Early Childhood, students study the three phases of the project approach and
then later in the semester complete a project with the preschool children in their internship setting. In
Phase I, students observe children and listen to their comments and questions with the goal of
determining a topic that children are interested in learning more about. Once a topic is determined,
students then work to learn what children know about the topic and what questions they have. In
Phase II, students draw from children’s comments and questions as they guide the children in their
investigation of their topic. Finally, Phase III involves the creation of an event where the children can
share what they have learned. Along with this, in their Family and Community Engagement course
(mentioned above) students in their Junior Block develop a family–community engagement plan in

which they share what was learned from the investigation with the children’s families. Families attend
this event in their children’s early learning center (Head Start or another local ECE program) and
discover what their child accomplished in these investigations. At the event, the children also tell the
families about the investigations, showing photos and other documentation of what they did and
learned. These experiences provide ECE students with important examples of how a child-centered
approach engages children as well as their families, including those from many different cultures, in
meaningful experiences about relevant topics in their lives.
Reggio Emilia
Along with the project approach, students at Millikin are introduced to the philosophy of Reggio Emilia
in various courses such as Arts Integration and Early Childhood Development. Malaguzzi, the founder,
and others who support the Reggio approach, believe that the interests of children guide their learning.
In this approach, teachers facilitate learning experiences and view children as protagonists of their own
learning (Edwards, Gandini, & Forman, 2012), a significant shift from the more teacher-directed
practices. Millikin’s ECE courses introduce the Reggio philosophy, challenging ECE students to adopt
many of its concepts in their work with young children and families. Creativity and aesthetic
awareness, with an emphasis on the arts, are two important constructs in Reggio-inspired learning
(Vecchi, 2010), and students are asked to draw upon these ideas as they develop their skills. For
example, in the Arts Integration course, students are challenged to inspire creative experiences with
young children, culminating in a final project that incorporates many of the Reggio concepts. The
physical environment is also an important aspect of the Reggio philosophy. Students develop an
understanding of how aesthetically pleasing physical spaces play a major role in young children’s
learning (Deviney, Duncan, Harris, Rody, & Rosenberry, 2010; Strong-Wilson & Ellis, 2007).
Promoting Best Practices in the Field

It is also important to note that in 2015-2016, our ECE faculty received an EC Educator Preparation
Program Innovation (EPPI) Grant from the Illinois Board of Higher Education. This grant gave financial
support to teachers in the field and students pursuing the ESL and bilingual endorsements; the grant
also supported Millikin’s ECE faculty in conducting professional development sessions for various high-
needs early childhood programs in the Decatur area. The grant effected a notable dent in these
populations, illuminating the needs of ELLs and their families and supporting EC programs in their
struggles to provide more creative, child-centered learning experiences for their children.
External Pressures and Challenges

The accomplishments of Millikin’s ECE program in supporting high needs in our community are not
without challenges. External pressures continue to sharpen faculty’s work and keep them vigilant in
promoting what they know is best for children and families. One of the situations that causes
considerable pressure stems from preparing ECE students for the teacher preparation assessment
(EdTPA), which has the potential to steer the curriculum in ECE courses. The “teach to the test,” or in
this case the “assessment,” tendency has reared its head in Millikin’s School of Education. Faculty try
to ensure that students are getting what they need, regardless of this major hurdle, seeking to
persuade students that the EdTPA should not be their sole or ultimate concern. Often, however,
students are narrowly focused on passing the EdTPA, especially the video segment requirement.
Faculty have explored ways to cope with students’ angst by incorporating videography into courses at

the sophomore and junior levels, thereby helping students become more comfortable with video
recording by the time they are student teaching.
Another challenge stems from the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) requirement for students to
reach a 22 or above on their ACT exam. Many students accomplish this goal; however, some run into
difficulties in test taking or with other inhibiting factors and cannot meet the ACT requirement. Thus,
Millikin ECE students are encouraged to take the ACT as early as possible, much before they formally
apply for admission to the School of Education in their junior year. Sometimes they respond to the
challenge early enough; sometimes they wait until their junior year only to find that they might have
to change majors because they find themselves unable to achieve the requisite ACT score.
Finally, students who are in ECE at Millikin sometimes need more than four years to complete their
endorsements and other coursework. Time and money might become pressures as they advance
through the major’s requirements. Some discussions at the University level have addressed the
number of credits that students need to graduate, suggesting reducing the hours for completing the
ECE major and giving students the option to take courses for the ESL or the bilingual endorsement. The
inclusion of courses for these endorsements has been a source of pride and important strength in
Millikin’s ECE program. Faculty believe that ECE students need to understand that it is critical for all
early childhood educators to be adequately prepared to serve the growing number of young children
at risk requiring early interventions as well as those children who are emerging bilinguals in the U.S.
Meeting the ECE teacher preparation needs of both populations are essential aspects of Millikin’s ECE
program.
Conclusions
Within the field of early childhood, the opportunities have always existed and continue to grow. The
early prediction of the need for bachelor degree-prepared early childhood educators is borne out as
evidenced by the demand for Millikin ECE graduates. In fact, the demand is exceeding the pool of
available graduates, pointing to the need for early childhood degree programs to scale up in order to
prepare more early childhood educators.
This description of Millikin’s ECE program, its unique qualities, and experiences, offer guidance for
others who are interested in providing such opportunities to teacher education students who are
seeking ECE degrees. Since 2004, this program has prepared students for working with children from
birth to age 8. These graduates have easily found positions in schools and programs which benefit
from the unique preparation that Millikin students experience. As students, they not only embrace
best practices such as the Project Approach and Reggio philosophy, they also acquire the ESL or
bilingual endorsement and Illinois EC Special Education Approval. In addition, they learn to prioritize
and become sensitive to families’ diverse needs as well as to appreciate and utilize the contributions
that families can make. These elements create a special blend of qualities that afford students the
necessary skills and experiences to support children and families in high-needs environments.

References
Brazelton, T. B., & Sparrow, J.D. (2006). Touchpoints: Birth to three (2nd ed). Da Capo Press: Perseus
Books.
Copple, C. & Bredekamp, S (Eds.) (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early

childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd ed.). Washington, DC:
NAEYC.
Deviney, J., Duncan, S., Harris, S., Rody, M., & Rosenberry, L. (2010). Inspiring spaces for young
children. Silver Spring, MD: Gryphon House.
Dresden, J., & Lee, K. (2007). The effects of project work in a first-grade classroom: A little goes a
long way. ERCP, 9(1). Retrieved from ercp.uiuc.edu
Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (Eds.). (2012). The hundred languages of children: The
Reggio Emilia experience in transformation. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Helm, J. H., & Katz, L. G. (2016). Young investigators: The project approach in the early years
(3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Illinois State Board of Education. (n.d.). Illinois report card 2014 – 2015. Retrieved from
http://illinoisreportcard.com/State.aspx?source=StudentCharacteristics&source2=LEP&Statei
d=IL
Illinois State Board of Education. (2016, July 20). Illinois licensure, endorsement, and
approval requirements. Retrieved from http://www.isbe.net/licensure/requirements/
endsmt_struct.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2016, May). English language learners in public
schools. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgf.asp
Samway, K. D., & McKeon, D. (2007). Myths and realities: Best practices for English language
learners (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Strong-Wilson, T., & Ellis, J. (2007). Children and place: Reggio Emilia’s environment as third
teacher. Theory into Practice, 46(1), 40-47.
Vecchi, V. (2010). Art and creativity in Reggio Emilia: Exploring the role and potential of ateliers in
early childhood education. New York: Routledge.

Preparing Early Childhood Teachers for Classrooms of Today
By: Linda Dauksas and Lisa Burke
Author Bios:
Dr. Linda Dauksas is an Associate Professor of Education at Elmhurst College and Director of Early
Childhood and Special Education programs. Her research centers on preparing teacher candidates to
work in high needs settings and includes developing partnerships to engage all families in the growth and
development of their children.
She can be reached at [email protected].
Dr. Lisa Burke is a Professor of Special Education at Elmhurst College. Her research interests include
mentoring novice special education teachers, literacy development for children with Autism Spectrum
Disorder, and inclusive education. She can be reached at [email protected].
Abstract
Institutions preparing early childhood teacher candidates in the state of Illinois must take into
consideration the multiple audiences, including families; and complex student needs, including
children with medical diagnosis, delays and risk factors; served in programs and schools today.
Preparing teacher candidates to teach in these diverse and multi-dimensional environments is more
than a 4-year task. The implementation of an e-mentoring program offers supports to novice early
childhood teachers entering the profession. E-mentoring pairs teachers with the same licensure,
reinforces teacher preparation content and fortifies the skills needed in today’s early childhood
classrooms.
Keywords: early childhood teacher candidates, designing teacher preparation programs, diversity,
English as a second language endorsement, special education, e-mentoring, novice teachers
Understanding Early Childhood Education

Earning an early childhood teaching license in Illinois provides teacher candidates with opportunities
to work in diverse and multi-dimensional learning environments serving young children and families.
Diversity is the human aspect reflecting the varied demographics of the children and families along the
dimensions of age, gender, race, ethnicity, language, ability, sexual orientation, socio-economic status,
first and second language development, and so on (Workforce Design, NAEYC, 2008). Multi-
dimensional is the ever-expanding complexity of early environments where young children play/work,
grow and learn and where families are provided resources to extend their own learning.
In Illinois schools, the early childhood teacher license provides candidates with experiences teaching
young children with disabilities or delays across developmental domains including language, cognition,
social emotional and motor, or delays which may result from environmental factors placing the future
academic success of young children at risk. The current early education funding available to local
educational agencies (LEAs), provides opportunities for young children with qualifying characteristics.
Albeit termed, Preschool for All, the Early Childhood Block grant only serves young children meeting
specific criteria. The grant ensures services to young children (3-5 years of age) and families, deemed
at risk, because the home and community environment are subject to particular language, cultural,

economic and like disadvantages (Illinois State Board of Education [ISBE], 2015). The Individual with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) ensures services to young children either with qualifying medical
diagnoses or conditions determined by professional judgment to constitute a disability.
Early childhood services can be provided in blended classrooms with students qualified from the IDEA
and Preschool for All, or in separate classrooms defined specifically by funding streams. Within each
there are different levels of service, including all day and half-day programs. Some classrooms are age
specific, others span the 3-5 year old continuum. Some classrooms offer instruction in a language other
than English, while others accommodate children who are nonverbal and dependent on assistive
technology to communicate. All include families as members of their learning communities.
In addition to disability and other risk factors, the shifting demographics of our state have propelled
an increase in the number of racially and linguistically diverse children and families served in early
childhood classrooms. This demographic shift presents another imperative. Teacher candidates must
have the skills necessary to work with children and families in a culturally responsive manner as well
as using methods that are linguistically and developmentally appropriate.
The knowledge and skills of early childhood educators are the cornerstones of high quality programs.
Specialized knowledge and professional development in how young children learn is critical, as is the
quality of interactions between staff and children (Institute of Medicine, 2000). In addition to teacher
candidates’ knowledge and skills and continuity of relationships, knowledge of diversity in all arenas
of the early childhood education field is necessary to ensure educational equity for young children
(Workforce Design, NAEYC 2008).
A recent national survey of early childhood teacher preparation programs in two- and four-year
colleges and universities revealed that a majority of early childhood personnel—including teachers,
administrators, para-educators, and specialist—did not feel adequately prepared to educate young
children with disabilities (Chang, Early, & Winton, 2005). This is alarming since young children (3-5
years of age) with disabilities have been receiving services since 1975 when public law 94:142,
Education of All Handicapped Children Act, was enacted. This suggests that for more than 40 years
teacher preparation programs have not adequately prepared early childhood personnel to work with
young children with disabilities! Early childhood teacher preparation programs can no longer exclude
or minimize children with disabilities and developmental delays and families at risk and those learning
English in their curricula. Serving young children with disabilities and delays in our state is the essence
of early childhood education. Preparing teacher candidates for this responsibility is essential.
At the national level millions of dollars are being awarded to serve young children and families. Most
recently, $80 million has been awarded to the state of Illinois for early childhood education (Office of
Early Childhood Development, 2014), intensifying the need for an increased number of adequately
prepared licensed teachers to work with young children and families, including those with disabilities
and delays. In response to this new initiative and research demonstrating that early education
matters, Illinois needs both a larger pool of early childhood teacher candidates and programs that
prepare not only all teachers, but teacher leaders and administrators with a comprehensive
understanding of early education today and the skills necessary to support the ongoing development
of young children and families.

Assumptions Behind Elmhurst College Program Design
The Elmhurst College early childhood teacher preparation program remains committed to preparing
teachers and teacher leaders for the current needs in early education. To this end, the program is
guided by the following goals. Teacher candidates will:
 Seek to integrate content knowledge across disciplines and construct pedagogical content
knowledge to provide culturally relevant instruction that prepares all students for the
literacies needed in a changing and interdependent world.
 Apply differentiation, evidence-based practices and assessments, and innovative technologies
to meet the characteristics and needs of all students.
 Provide safe, caring classroom environments that demonstrate and encourage creative,
engaged learning for become lifelong learners, critical thinkers, and responsible citizens.
 Collaborate with students, families, colleagues, and community members to create learning
communities that value diversity.
 Act as reflective and ethical professionals who are committed to schools and the profession.
These guiding principles, coupled with the changing demographics of our state, provoked the teacher
preparation program to respond to the diversity and multi-dimensional factors in early education. As
the demands and demographics of Illinois have changed, our teacher preparation program has sought
to change to meet these new realities.
Before formal changes were made, selected faculty at this institution started advising teacher
candidates to take electives needed to earn the Letter of Approval for Special Education and the English
as a Second Language endorsement. In a relatively short period of time, a clearer understanding of the
needs of licensure course content emerged and hiring districts responded. Teacher candidates earning
the special education approval and ESL endorsement and student teaching in early childhood special
education classrooms were hired quite readily. Teacher candidates who did not elect to earn the
approval and/or endorsement had less success in seeking employment and in some cases were
directed to earn the approval and/or endorsement as a condition of employment.
This data was supported by interviews with district administrators from across the region. The
administrators explained their challenges and hiring needs. Districts were opting to serve young
children with disabilities and young children deemed at-risk in blended classrooms, a model supporting
the least restrictive environment (LRE) designation. Hiring a teacher candidate who had earned the
Letter of Approval for Special Education, allowed that teacher to provide services outlined in students’
Individualized Education Plans (IEP). In addition to supporting LRE, this was a cost saving measure for
the districts, since the early childhood teacher could also provide special education services.
District administrators also acknowledged changing demographics in their schools and the growing
numbers of children and families learning English upon entry. Administrators expressed a need for
teacher candidates with the ESL Endorsement and explained that beyond the endorsement, their need
for bilingual teachers was expanding and intensifying.

Program Redesign and Alignment
It became clear to teacher education program planners at Elmhurst College that all, not just a few,
early childhood teacher candidates needed to be prepared to teach all young children. Elmhurst
program planners concluded that it was the College’s responsibility to assure that teacher candidates
would understand and be prepared to serve their future student populations. Coincident with the
institution acknowledging these factors, the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) issued new
standards and expectations for the redesign of early childhood teacher licensure programs (ISBE,
2015).
As a product of the Elmhurst College teacher preparation redesign, early childhood electives have been
replaced with requirements. All candidates will earn the Letter of Approval and the ESL endorsement
and/or the bilingual approval when appropriate. Teacher candidates will move through courses in a
cohort exposing all to the same content in a developmental sequence mirroring child development.
Each semester’s courses focus on specialized knowledge including diversity, age bands and families.
Courses will be taught by a cadre of experts in each of the designated grade bands. Assignments and
authentic assessments will be completed in field-based placements under faculty supervision.
Upon entry, teacher candidates’ first semester consists of studying the birth-year three age band.
Fieldwork will be completed in natural environments alongside families and professionals serving
young children deemed at risk and young children with medical diagnosis and/or disabilities. Teacher
candidates will focus on engaging families as learning partners including those who are learning
English. Teacher candidates also have the option to complete an internship required to earn the
credential as a developmental therapist under the Illinois Department of Human Services.
The following semester teacher candidates study the 3-5 year old age band with a focus on young
children with disabilities (per IDEA) and young children deemed at risk for future school success (per
the Early Childhood Block Grant). Their assignments are field-based and supervised in selected school
districts where Elmhurst has signed agreements. Teacher candidates will work with teachers who
earned the Letter of Approval for Special Education, the ESL endorsement or bilingual approval when
appropriate. Aligned with the institution’s goals, teacher candidates will be taught to employ culturally
responsive methods for all children, integrated content and methods including science, technology,
engineering, the arts and mathematics (STEAM), instruction driven by assessment for all children
including English language learners (ELL) and practices engaging all families in early learning
environments and experiences.
The third semester of course-work focuses on the 6-8 year old age band (kindergarten-second grade)
and will be coordinated with selected elementary schools. Teacher candidates will again work
alongside a teacher with the ESL endorsement two days each week and prepare for an ESL action
research project. Concurrently, the teacher candidates will take courses that include primary methods
for literacy, integrated methods for mathematics, science and social science, and data driven decision
making to positively impact the learning environment and students’ learning.
The final semester will be comprised of two student teaching placements. One placement will be in a
3-5 year old learning environment including young children with disabilities and their families. The
other placement will be in a kindergarten to second grade classroom. One or both placements will be

completed in a classroom supporting students learning English in order to complete the action
research project during the student teaching semester.
Moving Forward: Challenges or Opportunities

As the demographics of our nation shift and the racial and linguistic diversity of young children
continues to increase, it is imperative that early childhood teachers and administrators have the skills
to work with children and families in order to be culturally as well as linguistically and developmentally
appropriate. Approximately 45 percent of children younger than five are racially, ethnically, or
linguistically diverse, and this percentage is expected to grow over the next decade (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2004). Moreover, diversity among early childhood teachers encourages and supports
children’s positive identity development and prepares them for success in an ever-changing and
increasingly diverse society. Diversity of early childhood leadership encourages young professionals in
their novice teacher roles (NBCDI, 1993; Calderón, 2005; Ray, Bowman, & Robbins, 2006). Change is
often perceived as a challenge. Elmhurst College teacher educators saw change as an opportunity to
cultivate teacher candidates prepared to teach all young children and families, most importantly those
children with disabilities or delays and those families learning English.
Support for Novice Teachers in High Needs Classrooms

The previously described initiatives and preparation program for early childhood educators describe
the expectations novice early childhood teachers now experience. These professionals are charged
with the important task of being the first teacher young children and families encounter, so it is
imperative that novice educators in these high needs teaching positions are confident in their problem
solving, decision making, and teaching abilities. Ingersoll & Perda (2010) reported that 40% to 50% of
novice teachers leave the profession within the first five years of teaching. Consequently,
implementing supports beyond a four-year preparation program are imperative. Supports may
include induction programs and mentoring opportunities for novice teachers, but these require
attention from policy makers, administrators, and higher education faculty to ensure successful
implementation. Ingersoll and Strong (2011) cited lack of support as a reason educators leave the
teaching profession, affirming that providing support to novice teachers in high needs positions, such
as early childhood education, should be a priority. Teacher retention must also become a consideration
for teacher preparation programs as institutions of higher education reflect the current needs of early
childhood education.
Darling-Hammond and Sykes (2003) confirmed that in order to retain successful teachers supports
need to begin during the pre-service years, then follow the novice teacher into the induction years in
comprehensive and cohesive ways. The Elmhurst College early childhood teacher preparation program
saw the need for continuation of support for their novice early childhood teachers entering high needs
teaching positions, often in high-need settings, and designed a study of support. Their study paired
novice and experienced early childhood teachers from the same teacher preparation program in an e-
mentoring relationship. E-mentoring is a form of mentoring between a novice and experienced
teacher designed to support novice teachers’ needs and concerns. The e-mentoring relationship is
conducted using technology, involving the use of mentors across schools, districts, and possibly states
(Smith & Israel, 2010). The goal of their study was to develop e-mentoring relationships as a tool for
developing problem solving skills for novice early childhood teachers, with the intent of retaining these
teachers in high needs position and viewing teaching as a lifelong career.

Our study was conducted during the 2015-16 academic year and ran from September to March. The
experienced mentor and novice early childhood teachers established a synchronous meeting time
using a Facetime platform on an electronic device. The participants engaged in weekly synchronous
and asynchronous meetings to discuss topics of their choice supporting the novice teachers’ abilities
to make decisions and problem solve, thus leading to professional growth for both the novice and
experienced mentor educators. To capture the essence of synchronous meetings topical log sheets
were compiled. Topics discussed ranged from balancing personal and professional responsibilities,
family communication, student needs (academic, functional and behavioral), collaborating with team
members, teacher evaluation, and administrator support and interactions. The mentor teachers were
able to share advice and revisit teacher preparation content on how to best deal with challenging
students or families, keep reliable and valid data for challenging behaviors and academic needs,
navigate the Danielson teacher evaluation protocol, create effective academic accommodations and
interventions, establish positive and collaborative communication techniques with co-workers and
team members, and acquire resources and support inside and beyond their school district.
At the conclusion of the study, the participants engaged in exit interviews about their e-mentoring
experiences. Both the novice and mentor teachers commented that they felt comfortable with each
other due to the commonality of their preparation experience within the same early childhood teacher
educator program. Participants were grateful for the experience and felt they were able to discuss a
wide range of topics based on what they were experiencing in an unbiased and non-judgmental
exchange of information. The novice teachers explained it was reassuring to know that someone in
the same situation, albeit outside their school district, supported them and would be there if
needed. Both the mentor and novice teachers commented that initiating the e-mentoring relationship
during a teacher candidates’ student teaching semesters and carrying the relationships into the first
year of teaching would be a positive and beneficial opportunity as the mentor teacher would also be
able to advise on resume and interview preparation and getting ready for the first professional
teaching experience. Overall, the teachers were positive about the e-mentoring experience and felt
the relationships developed will be initial steps in building a network of professionals outside their own
school. (V. Zurbuch, personal communication, April 19, 2016).
Conclusion
As teacher preparation programs are in process of redesign faculty must remain responsive to the
internal and external demands impacting stakeholders beyond their campus. Programs must
acknowledge the challenges and opportunities faced in early childhood education today. In order to
effectively prepare teachers, the process of teacher preparation cannot be completed in four years. It
must be ongoing. Teacher candidates, school administrators and teacher educators need to continue
to incorporate new knowledge and skills through a coherent and systematic program of learning
experiences. These experiences must be grounded in theory and research, be outcomes based be
structured to promote linkages between theory and practice, and be responsive to each learner’s
individual background, experiences, and the current context of his/her role. (Workforce Design,
NAEYC, 2008).

One evidence-based practice that deserves further attention in early childhood teacher preparation
programs is the inclusion of mentoring for novice teachers. Due to the broad spectrum of services
teachers provide and the ever-changing needs of young children and families, e-mentoring is a viable
support for early childhood educators. Districts may have as few as one early childhood classroom,
prohibiting the pairing of teachers of the same licensure area in a mentoring relationship. E-mentoring
allows pairing from the same licensure area. E-mentoring is believed to provide an additional benefit
to the building administrator who may not have early childhood licensure and finds the opportunity to
supervise early childhood educators beyond the scope of elementary grade supervision. Additional
research exploring the benefits of e-mentoring for building administrators is warranted to improve
student outcomes and teacher retention.
References
Calderon, M. (2005). Achieving a high-quality preschool teacher corps: A focus on
California. Washington DC: National Council of La Raza.
Chang, F., Early D., & Winton, P. (2005). Teacher preparation in special education.
Journal of Early Intervention, Vol. 27(2), 110-124.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for
education: The right way to meet the “highly qualified teacher” challenge.
Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33), 1-55.
Illinois State Board of Education. (2015). May. Rules - Title 23 Part 235 Early
ChildhoodBlock Grant. Retrieved from http://www.isbe.net/rules/archive/pdfs/235ARK.pdf
Ingersoll, R. M., & Perda, D. (2010). Is the supply of mathematics and science teachers
efficient? American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 563-594.
Ingersoll, R. M., & Strong, M. (2011). The impact of induction and mentoring programs
for beginning teachers: A critical review of the research. Review of Educational
Research, 81(2), 201-233.
Institute of Medicine. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early
childhood development. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
doi:10.17226/9824.
National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2008). Workforce designs: A
policy blueprint for state early childhood professional development systems,
Retrieved from
http://https://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/policy/ecwsi/Workforce_Designs.pdf
National Black Child Development Institute. (1993). Paths to African American
leadership positions in early childhood education: Constraints and opportunities.
Washington, DC.
Office of Early Childhood Development. (2014, December). Governor Quinn announces
Illinois wins $80 million federal investment for early childhood education.
Retrieved from
http://www.illinois.gov/gov/P20/Documents/What%27s%20New/Governor%20Quinn%20Announces%20Federal%20Inve
stment.pdf

Ray, A., Bowman, B. & Robbins, J. (2006, October). Preparing early childhood
teachers to successfully educate all children: The contribution of the state boards
of higher education and national professional accreditation organizations.
Retrieved from https://www.erikson.edu/wp-content/uploads/Teachered.pdf
Smith, S. J., & Israel, M. (2010). E-mentoring: Enhancing special education teacher
induction. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 23(1), 30-40.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). Racial and ethic composition: Percentage of U.S. children
by race and Hispanic origin from interim national population projections for
2008-2018. Washington, DC: Author.

An Integrated Approach to Early Childhood Teacher Education at
Lewis University
By: Rebecca Pruitt
Author Bio:
Rebecca Pruitt is Assistant Professor and program director of Early Childhood Education at Lewis
University. Pruitt holds a Ph.D. in Education, Curriculum Studies. Teaching areas of focus are culturally
responsive family-school partnerships, early childhood curriculum, and child growth and development.
Research interests are constructivist approaches in higher education and novice teacher beliefs and
development.
Introduction
Recent recognition of the lifetime impacts of early childhood education follows many years of neglect,
if not outright resistance. The effects of this indifference to the quality and availability of early
educational experiences are being documented in a surge of mounting evidence (Couse & Recchia,
2016). Although this acknowledgement reflects only rhetoric for some, growing resources being made
available at the federal and local levels are helping to increase access and quality of early childhood
experiences. Responding to such initiatives inevitably will require improvements in the preparation of
early childhood educators. Calls for reform in early childhood teacher education is in fact growing at
such an exponential rate that it is now being referred to as a “national outcry” (Couse & Recchia, 2016)
representing a “dramatic shift from earlier decades” (Whitebrook & Austin, 2015). Stemming from an
urgent need to improve the quality of educational experiences for our most vulnerable children, this
call for reform demands a well-informed understanding of how teachers of young children are best
prepared (Couse & Recchia, 2016; Whitebrook and Austin, 2015).
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) and National Research Council (NRC) (2015) recently released a
comprehensive study that expands on decades of research demonstrating the crucial role of the early
childhood years in establishing lifelong outcomes. Their large scale meta-analysis articulates factors
that impact growth and development in the early years, adding impetus to the focus on early childhood
education currently seen in federal and local initiatives. Included in the IOM & NCR report are results
of studies on the current state of early childhood workforce preparation. Key recommendations
reinforce the long-time goal of early childhood teacher education programs to align with the science
of child development in order to create field based experiences that provide opportunities for
connecting theory and practice. Cross-institutional relationships and partnerships with community
child and family service providers such as early intervention professionals and family support service
providers are recommended in the report as imperative in improving the quality of higher learning
experiences (IOM & NRC, 2015, p.525).
As the population of the United States grows ever more culturally and linguistically diverse in states
such as Illinois, especially in the Chicago metropolitan area (Heineke et al., 2013), it is critical that
teacher education programs increase teacher candidates’ ability to serve the various needs of all
children and families (Couse & Recchia, 2016; Heineke et al., 2013; Thorp & Sanchez, 2013). This
requires a rejection of the traditional deficit-based, add-on, superficial implementation of multicultural
education and special education. Effective early childhood teacher education programs employ a more

holistic approach that prepares candidates to develop contextualized, strengths-based practices
(Souto-Manning & Cheruvu, 2016) through a fully integrated approach to the teacher preparation
program of study.
Lewis University Early Childhood Education Program

In response to this urgent need for comprehensive early childhood teacher preparation programs, the
Lewis University early childhood program was uniquely designed from its inception to prepare pre-
service teachers for work with all young children and families, specifically culturally and linguistically
diverse children and children with exceptionalities. Offering dual-licensure in both early childhood and
early childhood special education with an added third endorsement in ESL/bilingual education, this
program was launched in the fall of 2012, as one of only two early childhood bachelor degrees in the
state to embed all three endorsements. As such, this endeavor not only was unique but required
substantial collaboration among multiple program directors and administrators.
Situated within the College of Education, the early childhood program benefits from a guiding
theoretical framework adopted to facilitate the design and implementation of initial licensure and
advanced preparation programs within the college. Based on the work of John Baptist De La Salle,
John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky, James A. Banks, Linda Darling-Hammond, Paulo Freire, Gail C. Furman and
Robert J. Starratt, the framework employs a lens of critical pedagogy to encourage the challenging of
dominant discourses. Specifically, all programs are designed to facilitate a commitment to critical
reflection and action (Freire); acknowledgement of the social forces at work in schools that create and
re-create existing culture, beliefs and practices (Dewey, 1938); and the ability to make subject matter
accessible and relevant to all students (Darling-Hammond et al., 2008). Three guiding standards stem
from this framework and guide all course and field experience development:
1. Candidates and faculty are knowledgeable critical transformative educators.

2. Candidates and faculty are multicultural educators.
3. Candidates and faculty are social justice advocates.
Program Design
All coursework, field experiences, and key assessments within the early childhood program were
developed with these standards in mind. Beginning in the first course and carried throughout the
program, candidates are engaged in an ongoing dialogue about how to best serve the diverse needs of
students and families. Embedded throughout the coursework are assignments that facilitate “critical
reflections of their worldviews and racial, social, and cultural locations” (Souto-Manning & Cheruvu,
2016), analyzing curriculum for bias and creating anti-bias curriculum, analyzing contexts and
approaches related to critical pedagogy concepts, and critiquing traditional parent involvement and
teaming approaches to develop more strengths-based, value added, collaborative approaches.
As demonstrated in a wide range of studies, field-based experiences are a critical component of any
pre-service education program (Bueno et al., 2010; Couse & Recchia, 2016; Heineke et al., 2013; Thorp
& Sanchez, 2013). To bring meaning to the learning experiences described above, pre-service teachers
must directly engage with diverse and under-resourced children and families in classrooms and
community settings. In the Lewis EC program candidates are required to complete 150 field experience
hours within four distinct placements: infants/toddlers, pre-Kindergarten, Kindergarten, and first

through third grades. Candidates must complete a practicum in at least one school setting and at least
one community setting. The infant-toddler field experience provides an opportunity for candidates to
observe and/or volunteer in a homeless shelter serving families with young children. They are also
given the opportunity within this field experience to participate in an early intervention home visit in
Chicago with culturally and linguistically diverse families, many of them with low- or no-income. The
PreK field experience is completed at a public school early childhood center that serves multi-age (3-
5) children in an inclusive and diverse setting. Specifically, this is a classroom that includes under-
resourced children, children with special needs, and dual language learners. Within our region, there
are multiple early childhood centers that employ a percentage- based system of placing children in
classrooms (for example, 30% identified with special needs, 30% regular education tuition paying, 30%
“at risk”). Multiple schools using this 3/3/3 model serve as regular placement sites for our candidates.
For the Kindergarten and 1st–3rd general education placements, candidates are placed in classrooms
with a significant population of students that are bilingual in at least one of these grade levels. There
is an additional 1st–3rd grade placement that is completed within a high-needs/low-incidence special
education classroom. Candidates are required to complete a child assessment project/portfolio in
collaboration with site coordinators and families. The intent of this project is to introduce candidates
to the process of working collaboratively with diverse children and families to address their needs.
For many of the candidates, these classroom learning activities and field based experiences can be
difficult or uncomfortable in the beginning. As they are mentored through the program by instructors,
advisors, mentor teachers and field supervisors, most begin to gain a new perspective. Some who begin
the program with the intention of teaching in their hometown experience a change of heart at some
point in their journey. It is common for these candidates to seek out positions in high-need schools
upon graduation because of a new sense of purpose and a growing confidence in their ability to
contribute to the well-being of children and families in an environment that was previously unfamiliar
and intimidating.
Recruiting Diverse Teacher Candidates

While maintaining this commitment to preparing candidates for work with culturally, linguistically, and
socio-economically diverse children in high-need schools, we must also increase efforts to recruit new
teacher candidates with diversified linguistic and cultural knowledge who can draw from firsthand
community experiences in their work (Nelson et al., 2012; Couse & Recchia, 2016). To this end, we
seek to provide a supportive environment to receive adult working students in both the undergraduate
and graduate programs. In particular, we reach out to adults who are currently working in schools in
various positions, such as bilingual classroom teachers, teacher assistants who provide translation
services within the school, long-term substitute teachers, and other para-professionals. As a result, the
most recent graduate level cohort is only 50% white female, as compared to the national demographic
for early childhood educators recently reported to be 78% white female (Saluja, Early & Clifford, 2002).
The linguistic and cultural knowledge, as well as the classroom experience these candidates bring are
invaluable components of the Lewis EC learning community.
Receiving transfer students from community colleges that serve a more diverse student population is
another effective way universities can increase diversity in bachelor level teacher education programs.
Formal articulation agreements between community colleges and universities can facilitate the
recruitment of these transfer students by formalizing transferability of coursework between associates

degree and bachelor degree programs (Couse & Recchia, 2016; IOM & NRC, 2015). In the four years
since the launch of the Lewis program, one such agreement has been formalized, while three additional
agreements are currently in process.
These agreements will serve students well and provide support for those who might otherwise choose
to end their formal education at the associate degree level. However, the alignment of coursework is
only one part of what is needed to effectively support students in accomplishing their degree
completion goals. When transitioning from the community college to the university, there are many
barriers beyond transferability of coursework. Vicki Garavuso outlines multiple obstacles that must be
overcome by these adult learners. Describing situational, dispositional, and institutional barriers,
Garavuso presents the many personal obligations, beliefs and attitudes, and financial challenges that
must be overcome to complete a bachelor’s degree. Situational barriers include any responsibilities
beyond their studies, such as caring for family, managing finances, and holding down jobs.
Dispositional barriers often include beliefs about their own relationship to schooling, which have been
shaped by prior experiences in under-resourced contexts. While many do experience high levels of
community and familial support, their cultural capital can differ significantly from that which defines
success in higher learning institutions. Institutional barriers include prohibitive class scheduling,
limited work hours of college staff, and program field experience requirements that conflict with work
schedules (Couse & Recchia, 2016).
As an institution serving a student population that includes many transfer students, Lewis University
has the infrastructure to support the needs of both traditional and non-traditional adult learners. In
addition, the early childhood program offers all professional education requirements for the Lewis
bachelor of arts degree through multiple formats to provide greater flexibility. For each course offered,
students have the option of either a daytime traditional course section or an evening course section.
Evening courses are designed for adult working students, and many are hybrid courses in which class
sessions are delivered in both face-to-face and online formats to ease the burden of the commute to
campus. The master of arts program is delivered alongside evening bachelor of arts courses for adult
working students, providing a community of learners with similar work experiences and daily demands.
Accommodations are made for students currently working in schools, so that time away from work is
minimized while still providing some field experiences in other classrooms and contexts.
Current Initiatives: Program Redesign

Ongoing program development includes efforts to prepare culturally responsive teacher candidates
effectively for work in high-need schools. New courses have recently been developed and others have
been revised to embed additional content and experiences that can support candidate growth in the
dispositions and skills that will address the various needs of young children and families. Continuing to
reject the “add-on” approaches of multicultural education and special education, coursework
throughout the program is now more meaningfully integrated with elements that facilitate
multicultural and inclusive teaching as a consistent daily practice. As Mariana Souto-Manning states,
“multicultural teaching is good teaching for all children” (Souto-Manning, 2013).
Field-based experiences play a crucial role in developing the cultural responsiveness and effectiveness
of teacher candidates as pre-service teachers. Consequently, much of the program revision has been
focused on enhancing these experiences by integrating them meaningfully into the coursework. New
partnerships are developing with high-need schools that will host early childhood candidates, and a

new partnership has formed with Child and Family Connections to collaborate in hosting free pre-
school screenings on campus.
Race to the Top Grant

As part of the allocation of funding to support early childhood work in Illinois, the Lewis early childhood
program was awarded a grant to fund new cross-institutional partnerships in early childhood
education. Due to this funding, Lewis is now partnering with three community colleges in our region
to create seamless pathways for degree completion and licensure in early childhood education. The
development of meaningful pathways that allow early childhood professionals to move seamlessly and
flexibly from one step to the next in their educational journey is an idea that enjoys widespread support
(IOM & NRC, 2015; Nelson et al., 2012).
Implementing this ideal was especially daunting for us in light of the various challenges we faced in
aligning program components. As a program that prepares teacher candidates for both general and
special education, plus embedding additional coursework to confer an endorsement in English as a
Second Language, the Lewis EC bachelor of a arts curriculum is large and dense, with 60 credit hours
in professional education requirements. Our decision to align this BA licensure program with an
associate of applied science (AAS) degree from each of the three other institutions within the
consortium complicated the process even further because of the limited number of general education
courses required to obtain each of these AAS degrees. However, we maintained our commitment to
the AAS students in particular, as they typically are those that have already demonstrated a
commitment to the field of early childhood and are more closely connected with early childhood
faculty as mentors. This viewpoint was corroborated by advisors from each campus who confirmed
that these students were the most likely to be supported by an articulation agreement. Our collective
commitment to overcome these challenges serves as the foundation for our partnership, a
collaboration that produced three fully aligned pathways to degree completion that are now in process
toward formalized agreements between institutions. These partnerships will continue to serve
transitioning students as they navigate the difficult road between institutions.
ACI Project LEAD

Associated Colleges of Illinois’s Project LEAD (Leaders in Education Advocating for Diversity) is
supporting the work of member colleges in the endeavor to recruit and retain a more diverse student
population in teacher education. Serving as an ambassador with my students in this program has
provided me with extensive resources, such as new and relevant research, connections with colleagues
at other ACI member colleges who are “kindred souls,” and many creative ideas for how to attract and
retain candidates from the greater Lewis student population. Current initiatives include the
distribution of candidate recruiting videos, collaborating with the Office of Multicultural Student
Services on high school college fairs, and providing Project LEAD student ambassadors as college
ambassadors.
Conclusion
The Lewis University early childhood education program launched in the fall of 2012. As of the spring
semester of 2016, 35 candidates have graduated from the program. Many of these graduates now
teach in high-need schools with the intention to continue to grow as teachers who invest in their
communities. Some are already emerging as leaders in their schools and districts, advocating for

change to better serve the diverse needs of their young students and families. As funding grows to
support the expansion of early childhood classrooms and services in the state of Illinois, early childhood
teacher education programs must increase efforts to recruit qualified candidates. There is growing
concern about the gap between the expected number of early childhood education program graduates
and the number of new classroom teachers that will be needed over the next several years. The Lewis
program has grown from 10 students (undergraduate and graduate) in the first year to now over 50
current students. We hope to see our numbers increase even more as additional articulation
agreements are formalized. Our program will continue to focus efforts on preparing culturally
responsive and inclusive pre-service teachers, as well as on recruiting new teacher candidates with
diversified linguistic and cultural knowledge. Together with the many other early childhood education
programs around our state, we hope to meet this growing demand and raise the quality of educational
experiences for our youngest citizens.
References
Bueno, M., Darling-Hammond, L., & Gonzalez, D. (2010). A matter of degrees: Preparing teachers for
the pre-K classroom. Washington, DC: Pew Center on the States. Retrieved from
http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media
/legacy/uploadedfiles/pcs_assets/2010/amatterofdegreespdf.pdf
Couse, L.J. & Recchia, S.L., (Eds.). (2016). Handbook of early childhood teacher education. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.) (2005). Preparing teachers for a changing world:
What teachers should learn and be able to do. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: MacMillan.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Heineke, A., Kennedy, A., & Lees, A. (2013). Preparing early childhood educators for the culturally
and linguistically diverse classrooms and communities of Illinois. Early Childhood Research & Practice,
15(2).
Institute of Medicine (IOM) & the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies (2015).
Transforming the workforce for children birth through age eight: A unifying foundation. Washington,
DC: National Academy of Sciences.
Nelson, C.C., Main, C., & Kushto-Hoban, J. (2012). Breaking it down and building it out: Enhancing
collective capacity to improve early childhood teacher preparation in Illinois. Chicago, IL: University of
Illinois at Chicago, College of Education.
Saluja, G., Early, D.M., & Clifford, R.M. (2002). Demographic characteristics of early childhood
teachers and structural elements of early care and education in the United States. Early
Childhood Research and Practice, 4(1).

Souto-Manning, M. (2013). Multicultural teaching in the early childhood classroom: Approaches,
strategies, and tools. New York: Teachers College Press and Washington, DC: Association for
Childhood Education International (ACEI).
Thorp, E.K. & Sánchez, S.Y. (2013). Infusing cultural and linguistic diversity into pre-service and in-
service preparation. In P.J. Winton, J.A. McCollum, & C. Catlett (Eds.), Preparing effective
professionals: Evidence and applications in early childhood and early intervention. Washington, DC:
ZERO TO THREE Press.
Whitebrook, M. & Austin, L.J.E. (2015). Early childhood higher education: Taking stock across
the states. Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California,
Berkeley.

Benefits of Play Volume 13 Issue 1 - 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benefits of Play Volume 13 Issue 1 - 4

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Benefits of Play Volume 13 Issue 1 - 4

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Success in High-Need Schools Journal

Volume 13, Number 1

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 1

Author Bio ……..

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 2

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 3

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 4

Dr. Giraldo may be reached at [email protected].

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 5

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 6

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 7

Organizational Leadership is Essential for Student Learning

Groundbreaking longitudinal research on school improvement by the University of Chicago Consortium

Attending to these organization-level dimensions was

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 8

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 9

Fostering Instructional Leadership in Practice: Designing the PDI Pilot

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 10

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 11

Instructional Leadership at Scale: Delivery Across Illinois

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 12

Implementation Experiences from Diverse Settings

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 13

LLE Focused Teaching Cycle

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 14

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 15

For leaders, we observe:

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 16

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 17

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 18

Jimerson-Campoli, A. (2011). A critical analysis of job-embedded professional development within a

Regenstein, E. and Romero-Jurado, R. (2014). “A Framework for Rethinking State Education

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 19

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 20

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 21

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 22

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 23

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 24

What is play and how does it support learning?

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 25

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 26

How to assess play?

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 27

Mehnert, Cory. (March 13, 2016). personal communication with authors.

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 28

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 29

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 30

Ford, K. (2016) Project Director ECDEC/Preschool for All. www.ecdec.org

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 31

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 32

The Program’s Origin

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 33

Overview of the Program

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 34

ESL & Bilingual Endorsements

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 35

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 36

The Project Approach

Journal for Success in High-Need Schools, Volume 13, Number 1 Page | 37