This page is for workgroup member comments related to the second agenda item, which includes:
The Workgroup will explore the following overarching questions through a combination of presentations, facilitated discussions, and public comment.
What are the characteristics of high-quality preschool programs for three- and four-year-olds and how do these characteristics support healthy child development and learning?
What are the characteristics of high-quality preschool programs across different settings within a mixed-delivery model and how do other places implement or support these characteristics?
How do parents define quality and what characteristics do they value in preschool programs?
What do we want children to get out of their preschool experience, and what should these experiences look like in high-quality preschool programs?
Lease renewal negotiations are starting now between school districts and with Community-Based Organizations (CBO) that provide early care and education. Districts are pressuring childcare programs to serve their ELOP students in their school-age program next year. If they do not serve this population, the districts are considering not renewing their lease next year. The ELOP reimbursement is lower than CCTR or their tuition-based program putting CBOs in a difficult position to remain fiscally sound.
Other districts are requesting that CBOs serve the overflowing TK in wrap-around or CCTR, however, CBOs have not been included in initial planning or conversations on partnering so the CBO did not plan for the request. The CBOs are concerned that the inability to serve the students will jeopardize their agreement and lease with the district.
The CBO is not included in the initial conversations or planning therefore did not anticipate the request. What can legislators put into place to ensure or require districts to have to engage CBOs or other programs that provide similar services within their district facilities at the beginning of the year to maximize capacity, funding, and spaces? If centers lose their leases this will close more programs and limit parent choice and ultimately the mixed delivery system.
We know that COVID has influenced center closures and loss of care for families. It would be another blow to families if additional centers close due to the expansion of TK and ELOP. (test)
A provider recently shared with me that strong family involvement is reflected through a partnership between home and school where there is: two-way communication, reflection of each child’s family in the classroom (e.g. family pictures, items and stories from home), and shared information about children’s progress, growth and needs.
Thank you to Catalyst California for the presentation and valuable information on parent perspectives. I am wondering if the families from the focus groups were already receiving services?Or, if there was feedback on parent perspectives in their ability to access programs that reflect these characteristics?
Yes, and redefining what family involvement/engagement really looks like (one-way vs 2-way); programs need to align with what families believe is the purpose of school/programs
Thanks so much to Catalyst for the information they collected and presented from families. The charts in the fact sheet online on the hours of care that families want are so helpful. It would be great to have more detailed information like this at the local level so communities and districts have a comprehensive sense of what families need - including language and setting preferences.
We hear from families who are very concerned about their child’s toileting needs being a barrier to accessing early learning opportunities. Not all children with toileting support needs are children with disabilities. Excluding children based on this need has been deemed as a civil and human rights issue in some states. Excluding or failing to accommodate children who are unable to complete toileting tasks or who have a delay in toileting skills may constitute discrimination in violation of federal civil rights laws.
As we think about the continuum of services and a wide array of early learning opportunities in a mixed delivery system, and authentic family choice, I wonder where we stand with Senate Bill 75 and the Part C to B Workgroup recommendations. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/ac/documents/sb75partctobfinal.pdf
According to the Equality Act 2010 schools must not discriminate against or disadvantage disabled children or those with special educational needs. A delay in achieving continence - or not being toilet trained - is considered a disability. As a TK/ kindergarten teacher in a public school, I have worked with children still working on this skill.
The presentation by Catalyst California was very informative and thorough. It depicts how critical it is to keep the voice of parents in the “quality” conversation - no matter the setting. The strengths-based slides shared by Manuel (slides 23-26) give clear answers to the two questions you are posing for us about “what parent perspectives are” and “what experiences we wish for all children to have” in high quality child care & preschool settings.
Under the slide “Individualized Early Learning and Care and Instruction” the bullet indicates “Supporting children with disabilities” I agree this should be a priority, and we might discuss how we support the early care and education workforce by providing professional development, coaching and training on supporting children with disabilities.
Supports for children with disabilities in community-based programs, and family childcare settings is needed to fully support parent choice and meet family needs. What legislation can place to ensure partnerships between SELPA and Special Education at the school districts are in place to support IEP services and supports to be provided in non-school district programs
looking at the supplemental catalyst document, i am curious about: 1) how many of the 3,867 families in the statewide survey had children ages 0-5, 2) if the 14 focus groups are from where the 110 parents with children ages 0-5 (because the 110 seems like a low outcome in terms of how many focus groups were held, 3) what was the geographical and socio-economical breakdowns of these groups of parents/families, 4) did the focus group and statewide survey use the same questions for parents/families, 5) may we see a copy of the survey/questions used for these groups, 6) may we see a breakdown of the child care need data (hours and days) by each group (focus vs. statewide survey) with a 0-5 breakout of the statewide 0-12 data?
i was surprised to see the almost 30% of families that need care from 6a-8a
I’ve worked in LEA PreK settings, CDE funded programs, and Head Start and Head Start seems to be the only one that accepts children regardless if they are potty trained or not, regardless of their age (there have been 3 and 4 year olds that were not potty trained and did not have a disability). Perhaps this needs to be examined by LEAs implementing TK and a plan developed for accepting these children. They will also need an operating plan on how they will work with families to train the child if it’s not due to a disability.
Consistency of staff is an expectation of parents in high-quality preschool programs and that continues to be a challenge in most programs due to the staffing challenges.
?