07 Apr Effective early childhood leaders positively impact their programs by making targeted, data-driven decisions. They become consumers of in

Colleagues, Note, this is a GROUP DISCUSSION. Please do not be late in working with your colleagues!

Colleagues,

Welcome to Week 6 and Module 3 Part 2. This is a good time to look ahead and think about which member of your group will help to organize the presentation so each colleague will be able to contribute to build a quality group presentation. Although everyone is expected to contribute, someone will need to step into a leadership role for the PPT. I will not assign any of your individual contributions to the group project, but I wanted to alert you to the need to think ahead. The better presentations had voice overs by each of the group members, which is easy to accomplish on PPT. Please…no Prezi presentations and no presentations on the cloud.

 

Group Discussion: Part 2 – By Day 6 of Week 6 – Saturday, 10 April 2022

Each member posts the following:

· Describe the major findings that you analyzed, including the stakeholders for whom the data were obtained and/or focused.

· Using the information garnered from your evaluation and evaluations 6 and 7:

· Describe what you perceive to be program strengths.

· Describe what you perceive to be opportunities for improvement.

· Explain how effective the might program be and why.

Support your analysis with specific references to evaluation data and the evaluation’s scoring and/or rating scale.

Note what you have learned and/or any insights you have gained as a result of the comments your colleagues made and the connections you have made with the Learning Resources.

Revisit this Discussion Board throughout Week 6 to explore and discuss analyses shared by group members. Respond to all group members. Post ways colleagues' posts contributed to your learning.

Note: Coming up — Interviews with an early childhood program director and a stakeholder from the same organization that went through an accreditation process. This assignment will not be revised or substituted with a video.  

Wishing you a good week!

Barbara

Dr. Mary Barbara T

Group Discussion: Step 2: Collect the Data

Effective early childhood leaders positively impact their programs by making targeted, data-driven decisions. They become consumers of information, systematically evaluating and acting upon the insights gained through data collection.

In this Group Discussion Board, you and your group members share data collected from Connor Street’s evaluations. Like a detective, you begin your investigation by sifting through the data to highlight information about the program’s strengths and opportunities for improvement. You then use this information to provide insight into the program’s effectiveness.

To prepare

Review the Head Start resources presented in this module. As you explore the interactive content and videos, reflect on best practices early childhood leaders use to collect data. Then, revisit the evaluation you selected for the Assignment and submitted in Week 4 by conducting additional research to learn more about the evaluation. Last, begin a preliminary review of your evaluation data and the data that are presented in Evaluation 5 (NAEYC Accreditation Decision Report) and Evaluation 6 (NAEYC Self-Assessment Teaching Staff Survey), and Evaluation 7 (NAEYC Self-Assessment Family Survey) found in Module 2 resources.

Day 5

Each member posts the following:

· Describe the major findings that you analyzed, including the stakeholders for whom the data were obtained and/or focused.

· Using the information garnered from your evaluation and evaluations 6 and 7:

· Describe what you perceive to be program strengths.

· Describe what you perceive to be opportunities for improvement.

· Explain how effective the might program be and why.

Support your analysis with specific references to evaluation data and the evaluation’s scoring and/or rating scale.

Note what you have learned and/or any insights you have gained as a result of the comments your colleagues made and the connections you have made with the Learning Resources.

Revisit this Discussion Board throughout Week 6 to explore and discuss analyses shared by group members. Respond to all group members. Post ways colleagues' posts contributed to your learning.

Submission Information

Post by Day 5 of Week 5 and Respond by Day 5 of Week 6

To participate in this Group Discussion:

Groups

http https://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/ncpfce-markers-of-progress.pdf://nieer.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/7-1.pdf

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/evaluate/evaluation/framework-for-evaluation/main

http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/culture/cultural-competence/understand-culture-social-organization/main

https://www.naeyc.org/principles-effective-family-engagement

Required Media

https://cdn-media.waldenu.edu/2dett4d/Walden/EDDD/8084/CH/mm/audio_interviews/module3.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wahgefv7waY

,

1

Accreditation and Evaluation

Lua Shanks

Dr. Trube

EDDD8084

03-27-2022

Accreditation and Evaluation

Accreditation and evaluation are two concepts that hold different meanings although used interchangeably. Accreditation refers to a process by which a school gains the status that shows that the school has met all the requirements as per the accreditation agencies. In contrast, evaluation is a system in which institutions are assessed either by an agency or by themselves in accordance with the standard of the practices that have been established with respect to their goal as a school. It entails assessing utilization of resources, promotion of integrity, and the extent to which the institutions are achieving it. Schools are accredited depending on the level, and what they specialize in. A school offering different programs may utilize a distinct accreditation system compared to another. Accreditation means a lot to parents and stakeholders who run the school (Matveeva, 2019). Parents will choose the best school with proper accreditation by the relevant agencies compared to the schools that do not meet the standards. Unaccredited schools may cost a lot of harm to a student in his future studies, he might not fit in with other students from accredited schools.

Evaluation can be done internally without involving evaluation agencies. The institutions themselves can do an evaluation regarding the goals, student performance, and the objectives of the school. The main aim of the evaluation is to determine if the school is able to meet its standards. This process is important for an institution that seeks to rate themselves according to specified academic standards. Therefore, accreditation and evaluation differ in terms of roles and the institutions involved. Accreditation is the act of giving credentials, and a checklist of what should be present in a school or institution in order to meet the standards (Yoo et al., 2020). On the other hand, evaluation is an assessment of the school is intended to achieve its goal toward the standard the accreditation agencies had already set. Accreditation is the act of accrediting, while evaluation is the process of completing analysis or a mathematical operation to determine the performance of the institution over a period of time let’s say a year. Accreditation is granting the institution approval to conduct some practices, while evaluation is determining the value of some variables.

There are various ways in which accreditation and evaluation may overlap. For instance, they all utilize regulatory bodies that help in maintaining the recommended standards of education and determining the goals of the institutions. Accreditation follows a guideline to ensure that the institutions comply with some of the rules the agency has put in place (Stura et al., 2019). Similarly, the evaluation process also does the same in ensuring that the educational institutions work on specific goals and objectives to which they must follow to attain the recommended standards of education. Both accreditation and evaluation are to ensure the standards are followed in a certain manner that all the institutions comply with. This means both systems act as governing bodies in institutions that make sure the standard in which the students are taught allows the students to be equal to their peers in other institutions.

In the last few years, agencies that would perform accreditation used to visit every institution and analyze the subjects being taught and the method of learning to which they use. Basically, all the schools were required to use the same curriculum all over the country. However, over time, several institutions emerged and they came up with different teaching skills that could be better. The accreditation agencies began to look for new ways to accredit the institutions. Certain standards were set and these allowed the private institutions to use their own ways of teaching yet maintain the standards of education. The future of accrediting institutions will now base on specific institutions, whereby the institution may set their own standards, and making sure the students are competent enough to face their future careers.

References

Matveeva, O. A. (2019). Development of the Voluntary Accreditation for Study Programmes in Russia. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii= Higher Education in Russia, 28(7), 19-28.

Stura, I., Gentile, T., Migliaretti, G., & Vesce, E. (2019). Accreditation in higher education: Does disciplinary matter?. Studies in educational evaluation, 63, 41-47.

Yoo, H. H., Kim, M. K., Yoon, Y. S., Lee, K. M., Lee, J. H., Hong, S. J., … & Park, W. K. (2020). Changes in the accreditation standards of medical schools by the Korean Institute of Medical Education and Evaluation from 2000 to 2019. Journal of educational evaluation for health professions, 17.