Child Care & Early Education Research Connections
This study is provided by Child Care & Early Education Research Connections.
Kentucky Professional Development Framework Impact on Quality and Child Outcomes, 2006-2007 (ICPSR 26341)
Principal Investigator(s): Rous, Beth, University of Kentucky. Human Development Institute; Grisham Brown, Jennifer, University of Kentucky. Human Development Institute
Summary: In 2000, the Kentucky General Assembly passed historic early childhood legislation (Kentucky?s KIDS [Kentucky Invests in Developing Success] NOW Initiative) of which a component included the development of a seamless professional development system. The professional development system includes core content, articulation, credentials, scholarships and a training framework. This comprehensive professional development system, along with other initiative components in assuring maternal and child hea... (more info)
One or more files in this study are not available for download due to special restrictions; consult the restrictions note to learn more. You can apply online for access to the data. Authentication is required to apply for access.
Users are reminded that this data collection may not be used for any purpose other than statistical reporting and analysis. Use of these data to learn the identity of any person or establishment is prohibited. To protect respondent privacy, the Public-Use and Restricted-Use versions of the data differ by an ID variable. The Restricted-Use Data contains the original center number variable: SURVNUM. The Public-Use Data contain a new, ICPSR-generated center number: PROGRAMID. To obtain files with the original center variable (SURVNUM), researchers must agree to the terms and conditions of the Restricted Data Use Agreement, found via ICPSR's online Restricted Data Contracting System, by clicking the "apply online for access to the data" link above.
WARNING: Because this study has many datasets, the download all files option has been suppressed, and you will need to download one dataset at a time.
Rous, Beth, and Jennifer Grisham Brown. Kentucky Professional Development Framework Impact on Quality and Child Outcomes, 2006-2007. ICPSR26341-v3. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2010-02-05. doi:10.3886/ICPSR26341.v3
Persistent URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR26341.v3
This survey was funded by:
- United States Department of Health and Human Services. Administration for Children and Families. Administration on Children, Youth and Families (90YE0071)
Scope of Study
In 2000, the Kentucky General Assembly passed historic early childhood legislation (Kentucky?s KIDS [Kentucky Invests in Developing Success] NOW Initiative) of which a component included the development of a seamless professional development system. The professional development system includes core content, articulation, credentials, scholarships and a training framework. This comprehensive professional development system, along with other initiative components in assuring maternal and child health, supporting families, enhancing early care and education, and establishing a support structure, have moved the field of early childhood care and education forward in the state and improved child and family outcomes.
This study was designed to build on the KIDS NOW Initiative by conducting research investigating the degree to which a statewide unified professional development system impacted the educational level of early care and education providers and subsequent classroom quality. It focused on three major predictors of professional development outcomes:
- Individual teacher characteristics, including learning readiness, education (level and type), training experience, attitudes towards training, personality (conscientiousness, self-efficacy), job satisfaction (perceptions of support)
- Characteristics of the program administrator, including administrator education and administrator support of professional development
- Characteristics of the teacher?s work setting, including program administration, and policies and procedures, and classroom setting (Child Care, Head Start, or Public Preschool)
The impact of these three predictors was measured on two major outcomes: (a) professional development outcomes, as measured by job status, learning and transfer of learning, and (b) organizational outcomes, as measured by program quality, child outcomes and staff retention.
The research questions guiding this research were focused on determining the degree to which (1) a unified professional development framework initiated at the state level results in positive child outcomes, and (2) the educational level of early care and education providers enhances the quality of classroom environments. Specifically:
- What components of a professional development framework are more effective in encouraging and supporting individuals to remain in early care and education settings?
- What components of a professional development framework are more effective in supporting early care and education professionals in enhancing classroom quality and child outcomes?
- Are there specific factors that impact early care and education professionals? ability to participate in professional development activities at various levels?
- Does the level and intensity of professional development experiences impact classroom quality and child outcomes?
- What personnel factors have the highest impact on quality classroom environments and child outcomes?
- What is the interaction between the personnel, professional development, and program variables on classroom quality and child outcomes?
Subject Terms: administration, career development, child development, classroom environment, job satisfaction, literacy, personality, policies and procedures, professional development, teacher attitudes, teacher education, teacher qualifications, teachers, work environment
Smallest Geographic Unit: urbanicity
Date of Collection:
Unit of Observation: individual, classroom, early childhood program
Universe: Administrators, teachers and children in child care, Head Start and Pre-K programs in Kentucky
Data Types: observational data, survey data
Study Design: To answer the research questions, a quasi-experimental design was used with teacher educational experience (e.g., AA, BA) and classroom type (Head Start, Child Care, and Public Preschool) as the main variables for selecting participants. Within this design, the theoretical framework took into consideration administrator and organizational predictors; the level of incentives for participation in professional development components; and individual outcomes related to job status, learning and transfer of learning combined with organizational outcomes of program quality, child outcomes and staff retention.
Sample: stratified, purposive sample
Mode of Data Collection: coded on-site observation, cognitive assessment test, mail questionnaire, on-site questionnaire, telephone interview
Description of Variables:
Four categories of variables were identified for inclusion in the study. Based on previous research and expert knowledge of early care and education systems in Kentucky, system, program, teacher and child level variables were used. The theoretical model for this study hypothesized that the level and intensity of participation in components of the Professional Development Framework in Kentucky by teachers and the support of administrators for this participation have an impact on teacher retention, program quality and child outcomes.
- Teacher: Teacher Demographics; Education Level and Type; Amount and Type of Training Attended; PD Plan; Attitudes Towards Training; Learning Readiness; Personality; Self Efficacy; Perceptions of Organization and Job Satisfaction; Perceptions of Supervisor Support
- System: Administrator Education; Administrator Support of Training and PD; Program Administration, Policies and Procedures, Program Supports (Wages, Benefits)
- Program: Program Type; Children Served; Classroom Quality; Turnover Rate
- Child: Child Demographics; Child Developmental Status
Response Rates: Of 645 programs contacted for participation, 227 agreed to participate for a response rate of 41.4 percent.
Presence of Common Scales:
1. The Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale, Revised Edition (ECERS-R) (Harms, Clifford, and Cryer, 1998)
2. The Early Language and Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO) (Smith and Dickinson, 2002)
3. The Head Start Family and Child Experiences Survey (FACES) battery. Specifically, the:
- McCarthy Scales of Children's Abilities (McCarthy, 1972)
- Story and Print Concepts (FACES, 2001)
- Color Names and Counting (FACES, 2001)
- Pre-LAS 2000 (Duncan and Avila, 2000)
- Woodcock-Johnson-III, (Woodcock and Mather, 1990) and the
- Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III (Dunn and Dunn,1997)
4. The Social Skills Rating System (SSRS) (Gresham and Elliot, 1990)
Please refer to the Professional Development Framework Research Collaborative Report for full descriptions of the measures used.
Extent of Processing: ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:
- Created variable labels and/or value labels.
- Created online analysis version with question text.
- Performed recodes and/or calculated derived variables.
- Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
Original ICPSR Release: 2010-01-19
- 2010-12-16 The Restricted Data Use Agreement has been updated.
- 2010-02-05 The Restricted Data Use Agreement was updated.
- 2010-01-22 Codebooks for the Restricted-Use Data were updated
Use any of the notification links to add this study to your RSS feed; you will then receive notification if the study is substantively updated.
- Citations exports are provided above.
Export Study-level metadata (does not include variable-level metadata)
If you're looking for collection-level metadata rather than an individual metadata record, please visit our Metadata Records page.