Public √ Report No. #11-04-1296 Private Date April 27. 2011

HALIFAX REGIONAL SCHOOL BOARD Advisory Committee for Achieving Equitable Learning Outcomes (ACCELO) Report

PURPOSE: To provide the Board with an update and recommendations from the

ACCELO committee. BUSINESS PLAN GOAL: To continue to improve student achievement for all students. BACKGROUND: ACCELO was created in 2008 to replace the Inner City Education

Advisory Committee (ICEAC), a committee whose mandate was to advise the Board on issues affecting students and families in four schools historically designated by the Board as Inner City Schools. The objectives of ICEAC were to foster an understanding of diversity and cross-cultural awareness as it related to inner city communities, to promote the academic, social and emotional well-being of inner city students, and to identify the needs regarding the development of educational and curricular services as they relate to inner city student requirements.

In its mandate, ACCELO builds upon these objectives but it also

extends them to encompass the improvement of the educational experience for students in any schools identified by the Superintendent as requiring additional attention and resources.

The membership of ACCELO consists of 8-10 members selected

from expressions of interest, who represent various partners in education, including parents and those involved in such areas as community services, health and social justice, with consideration of geographic representation. Experience with issues relating to socio-economic conditions that impact learning is considered an asset. At least one representative of ACCELO is drawn from the geographic area that covered the communities serviced by the former ICEAC.

ACCELO has the following mandate:

• To provide advice to the Board on how to better meet the learning

outcomes for at-risk students in particular communities. • To raise issues that may affect the education of these students and

their families. • To respond to all matters, staff reports and committee reports that

are referred to ACCELO. • To provide advice to the Board on how to best engage parents in

particular communities. • To provide advice on policy consultations through the lens of

equitable learning outcomes.

CONTENT: Since its initial meeting, ACCELO identified the following areas of

priority:

• increasing early learning opportunities at schools • finding ways of increasing parental engagement • reducing teacher turnover • improving learning outcomes for at-risk students • allocating resources, as it pertains to the committee’s mandate

The committee members considered two other reports; one by the Canadian Education Association regarding the declining levels of student engagement across the country, and another on the “History of Early Learning opportunities in HRSB” (please see Appendices). These reports allowed the committee to put into a wider perspective some of the challenges faced by the HRSB when it comes to student engagement and the development of early leaning programs.

COST: N/A FUNDING: N/A TIMELINE: Ongoing APPENDICES: A. ACCELO Annual Report B. “History of Early Learning opportunities in HRSB” –

Prepared by English Programs, March 2010 C. Report on the State of Early Childhood Learning – Canadian

Education Association. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Board receives this report for information. COMMUNICATIONS:

AUDIENCE RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE Board Members Heather Syms –

Coordinator, Education Quality and Accountability Lance Bullock – Coordinator, Programs and Student Services

Following Board Approval

From: For further information contact Heather Syms and/or Lance Bullock. To: Board – April 27, 2011 Filename: ACCELO Report Date Last Revised: April 15, 2011

Advisory Committee on Creating Equitable Learning Outcomes (ACCELO) Annual Report Presented to the Halifax Regional School Board April 27, 2011

History and Mandate ACCELO was created in 2008 to replace the Inner City Education Advisory Committee (ICEAC), a committee whose mandate was to advise the Board on issues affecting students and families in four schools historically designated by the Board as Inner City Schools. The objectives of ICEAC were to foster an understanding of diversity and cross-cultural awareness as it related to inner city communities, to promote the academic, social and emotional well-being of inner city students, and to identify the needs regarding the development of educational and curricular services as they relate to inner city student requirements. In its mandate, ACCELO builds upon these objectives but it also extends them to encompass the improvement of the educational experience for students in any schools identified by the Superintendent as requiring additional attention and resources. The membership of ACCELO consists of 8-10 members selected from expressions of interest, who represent various partners in education, including parents and those involved in such areas as community services, health and social justice, with consideration of geographic representation. Experience with issues relating to socio-economic conditions that impact learning is considered an asset. At least one representative of ACCELO is drawn from the geographic area that covered the communities serviced by the former ICEAC. ACCELO is chaired by the Chair of the Board or designate. In addition to community and parent members, other Board staff attendance is determined by the Superintendent on an as-needed basis. In the past two years, ACCELO meetings have benefitted from the regular attendance of the Superintendent Carole Olsen, as well as the following staff members: Heather Syms, Coordinator of Education Quality and Accountability, and Lance Bullock, Coordinator of Programs and Student Services. Our Board Chair, Irvine Carvery, is also a member of this committee. Current community and parent membership includes: Andrea MacDonald, Early Childhood educator; Mike Mansfield, social worker with the Department of Community Services; Darren Ruck, Parent; Gina Jones, Parent, Tatjana Takseva, Associate Professor and educator at Saint Mary's University.

2

ACCELO has the following mandate:

• To provide advice to the Board on how to better meet the learning outcomes for at-risk students in particular communities. • To raise issues that may affect the education of these students and their families. • To respond to all matters, staff reports and committee reports that are referred to ACCELO. • To provide advice to the Board on how to best engage parents in particular communities. • To provide advice on policy consultations through the lens of equitable learning outcomes. ACCELO meets at least 3 times annually. Since its initial meeting in 2008, the committee discussed its mandate and priorities, as well as which schools would be considered by the committee. Since its initial meeting, ACCELO identified the following areas of priority:

• increasing early learning opportunities at schools • finding ways of increasing parental engagement • reducing teacher turnover • improving learning outcomes for at-risk students • allocating resources, as it pertains to the committee’s mandate

In our discussions, in addition to the staff members’ regular reports, the committee members also considered two other reports; one by the Canadian Education Association regarding the declining levels of student engagement across the country, and another on the “History of Early Learning opportunities in HRSB” (please see attached). These reports allowed us to put into a wider perspective some of the challenges faced by the HRSB when it comes to student engagement and the development of early learning programs. One of the recurring areas of concern for the committee has been the budget allocated to the Board and to schools, and budgetary reductions. The committee has great concerns that in the present budgetary climate, these priorities may not be seen as feasible or relevant. We strongly urge Board Members to ensure that whatever budgetary decisions are made, they do not decrease learning opportunities at-risk students and their communities. In terms of increasing early learning opportunities in schools, the committee agreed it is vital to engage government representatives, who should be invited to schools to see the realities of the learning environment and the challenges faced by students and teachers. The committee suggested that daycares and schools should partner together to have a larger voice in lobbying the government for support of increasing early learning opportunities.

3

4

Based on these deliberations, and in accordance with its mandate and objectives, ACCELO wishes to put forward a series of recommendations to the HRSB. Recommendations

• Invite government representatives to visit schools identified by the HRSB as requiring additional attention and resources in order to see the challenges first hand

• Develop strategies to connect schools with daycares and other community agencies

dealing with pre-school aged children to facilitate better transition into the school system

• Develop more ways for inter-agency collaboration in order to benefit the whole child, by increasing communication with community services, public health, etc.

• Keep the current Early Learning Opportunities program and actively seek additional funds

to expand ELO in more communities

• Develop systemic strategies to increase engagement of students, parents and communities, such as Schools Plus, as an internal example, and KidsFest, as an external example

• Increase opportunities for engagement of adolescent learners by meeting their individual

needs regarding their social, emotional, academic, and physical development (example: Sir Robert Borden – student engagement – student voice)

• Continue to increase alternate learning opportunities for learners, such as the current

FLECs program, Options and Opportunities, Youth Pathway and Transitions.

• Continue to develop strategies to recruit and develop/support the best possible teachers to reduce teacher turnover

• Continue to work with partners, such as HRM, to ensure there is a safe and inviting

learning environment that extends from inside the school onto the playground and surrounding school areas where children spend part of their school day.

We believe that the HRSB’s serious consideration and adoption of these recommendations will result in significant improvements in education for all students, but especially for at-risk students. Prepared by: Tatjana Takševa, on behalf of the ACCELO membership

History of Early Learning Opportunities in HRSB

Four Plus • Began in 1982 (Joseph Howe, St. Patrick’s Alexandra and Bloomfield) • 1983 Rockingstone Heights added • Additional sites added and closed over the years (Added: St. Joseph’s A. McKay, Nelson Whynder, Harbourview and South

Woodside) • Staffed by a teacher and an educational assistant

Pre-Primary (Department of Education)

• Began in 2006 (Ian Forsyth, Robert Jamieson (Oyster Pond Academy), Hillside Park, Central Spryfield) • Two year provincial pilot for 06-07 and 07-08 • Third year cancelled due to age change for new entrants • Staffed by a Lead Early Childhood Educator and a Support Early Childhood Educator

Early Learning Opportunities (ELO)

• Began in September of 2008 at five of the former 4 Plus sites (Joseph Howe, Rockingstone Heights, Nelson Whynder, Harbourview and South Woodside)

• Insufficient registrations at St. Joseph’s A. McKay and St. Pat’s Alexandra so those sites were amalgamated with the Joseph Howe site.

• Staffed by a Lead Early Childhood Educator and a Support Early Childhood Educator (The majority were former pre-primary staff)

Note

• During the 06-07 and 07-08 school years both the 4+ program and the pre-primary program were running simultaneously, giving HRSB a total of 11 early learning classrooms.

Prepared by: Jeff Carruthers, English Program Consultant P-9 March 2010

REPQRT,,7in Canada

J

#1

I’

r. - -,

.

This publication is available electronically on the Canadian Council on Learning’swebsite at www.ccl-cca.ca.

For additional information, please contact:

CommunicationsCanadian Council on Learning215—50 O’Connor Street, Ottawa ON K1P 6L2Tel.: 613.782.2959Fax: 613.782.2956E-mail: info@ccl-cca.ca

© 2007 Canadian Council on Learning

All rights reserved. This publication can be reproduced in whole or in part with the writtenpermission of the Canadian Council on Learning. To gain this permission, please contact:info@ccl-cca.ca. These materials are to be used solely for non-commercial purposes.

Cite this publication in the following format:Canadian Council on Learning. Report on the State of Early Childhood Learning in CanadaReport on Learning in Canada 2007 (Ottawa: 2007). page(s).

Published in August 2007.Ottawa, Ontario

ISBN 978-0-9782220-4-8

Aussi disponible en français sous le titre Rapport 2007 sur I’état cle l’apprentissagechez les jeunes enfants au Canada.

The Canadian Ccjncil on Learning is an independent, notfor-proflt corporation fundedthrough ar agreement with Human Resources and Social Deveiooment Canada. Its mandateis to promote ano support evidence-based decisions about lear- ;g t-roughout ah stagesof life, from early childhood tnrough to the senior years.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE 2

CHATER 1 Introduction 4

CHAPTER 2 Indicators o Early Chidhood Development 5Birth weight 5Physical development and movement 6Cognitive development 7Language arid communication skills development 8Emotional and social development 10

CHAPTER 3 The Road Ahead 12Where does Canada stand? 12What don’t we know? 12What will CCL do9 13

END NDTES 16

I

L

PREFACE

If learning is a lifelong journey, then the first few yearsare vital in determining what direction the journey islikely to take. A growing body of research indicates thatthe experiences during the first five years of a child’slife have a major bearing on his or her future success inschool, in the workplace, and many other aspects of ahealthy, fulfilling life.

Early childhood is a time of play and discovery, but it isalso the time when children should be mastering fourkey skills—social and emotional, physical, cognitiveand language. These developmental pillars are essentialto their ability to function insociety. Some argue that society’s wisest learning investments are concentrated onearly childhood learning anddevelopment, on the verysolid grounds that the earlyyears are overwhelminglysignificant to all dimensionsof life’s prospects.

Of course, parents play akey role shaping children’sabilities and fostering theirdesire to learn. They providethe earliest and most lastinglearning experiences in theirchildren’s lives and create alearning environment thatwill influence how well theirchildren perform at school,in the community and in theworkplace.

As their children’s first teachers, adults also are models oflifelong learning. By upgrading their skills and acquiringnew knowledge, adults notonly demonstrate their ownability to make informed decisions and lead successfullives, they also improve the likelihood, through example,that their children will become successful lifelong learners.

lifelong learning strengthens individuals, families andsociety. Its cumuiative benefits are passed from onegeneration tc the next, enablinc indiviouals to contributemore fully a parents, worKers, community membersand citizens. An informec and engagec citizenrythat continues to learn tnroughout life is essential to

Canada’s social, economic and cultural well-being-—andis a key ingredient of a vibrant democracy.

This report is an update of the early childhood learningchapter from State of Learning in Canada: No Time for

Complacency, published in January 2007. It containsthe most current data on early childhood learning anddevelopment in Canada, including factors that affectchildren’s learning through their physical, cognitive,communicative, and emotional and social development.

What we see is that mostCanadians are born healthyand their level of development is similar to that of children in other member countries of the Organisationfor Economic Co-operationand Development (OECD).However, more than one infour children in Canada enters school with a learningor behavioural problem thatthreatens his or her futuresuccess. And although family income is not as stronga factor in a child’s success

- at school when comparedwith other countries, thereare inequities that must beaddressed if Canada is tosustain its comfortable levelof social well-being anc economic prosperity.

Early childhood learning anddevelopment are inextricable—without a strong foundation ofphysical, emotional, cognitiveand social development, successful learning is less likely tofollow.

A survey conducted by CCLin 2006 suggests Canadianparents overwhelmingly

agree that children need a well-rounded approach in

their early years. For example, parents place greaterimportance on fostering a positive attitude towardlearning than on school readiness. And their actionsseem to bear out their intentions. The number of parentsand other adults reading daily to children is on the rise—65% in 2004—2005, up from 56% ten years earlier—anactivity known to have a positive impact on a child’sability to learn.

“AT LEAST ONE IN FOUR CANADIAN

YOUNG CHILDREN IS VULNERABLE”

/f\/1J,j; J L ViiJi,’;jL)e Chdc/i a a

According to Whims, children (0 to 11 years

old) are considered as vulnerable’ ai tiier intheir cognitive (learning.) domain or behavioural

domain, based on the “vulnerability index”derived from the National Longitudinal Surveyof Children and Youth.

The index aims to identify children whosechances of leading hcsaltliy and productivelives are somewhat reduced unless there is aconcerted and prolonged effort to intervene ontheir behalf. Children are classified as vulnerable

in their cognitive domain if they score:

• low in their motor and social development(age 0 to 3);

• low on receptive vocabulary (age 4 and 5); or

• low on their mathematics skills (age 6 to 11).

Children are classified as vulnerable in theirbehavioural domain if they:

• were rated as having a difficult temperament

(age 0 to 1); or

• were deemed to have one of six behaviourproblems (i.e. anxiety/emotional problem,hyperactivity, inattention, physical aggressionor indirect aggression) at age 2 to 1 1.

F

PREFACE

1:

CCL’s Survey of Canadian Attitudes toward Learningalso reveals that, when it comes to public support forearly childhood learning and development, there isa significant gap between parents’ expectations andreality. Nearly two-thirds of parents feel that localchild-care services are under-funded and that there areinadequate resources for parents who stay home withtheir children. The survey shows that Canadians wantmore support for both options.

Yet despite everything we know about early childhoodlearning, there is still far too much that we do not know.Like much of CCL’s work, this report and the earlierState of Learning in Canada report underscore the needfor comprehensive, consistent, nationwide indicatorsfor early childhood learning. Given the importance thatCanadian parents place on the best way to raise andcare for their children, we need reliable, countrywideinformation to show how our children are progressingand where weaknesses exist. A solid base of evidenceis required in order to identify where improvementsare necessary and what can be done to address thechallenges.

Although the Government of Canada has started torelease a series of annual and bi-annual reports on thestatus of early childhood development under the termsof federal-provincial-territorial agreements on earlychildhood development and care, too many aspects ofearly childhood development in Canada remain unknownand unexplored. Canadians need to know whether we,as a country, are giving our future generation the bestpossible start—and if not, what steps should be taken toremedy the situation.

If we do not tackle such knowledge gaps, we increasethe risk that we might overlook emerging challenges, orthat we will lack the tools to address them.

To help close these gaps, the Canadian Council onLearning and its Early Childhood Learning KnowledgeCentre are studying new approaches to monitoring andreporting on the state of early learning in Canada.

For example, while many indicators of early learningare assessed just before school age, CCL’s EarlyChildhood Learning Knowledge Centre (a consortium oforganizations led by the Centre of Excellence for EarlyChildhood Development at the Université de Montréal)will promote the use of additional indicators of childdevelopment, and of the environment in which childrenare growing up (including resources and services forfamilies), from before birth to the age of four.

We hope that innovative initiatives such as these, alongwith reports such as those issued by the Governmentof Canada, will help bridge the research gaps neededto further the understanding of the formative earlychildhood years in Canada—and ensure our children arewell prepared for the lifelong journey that is learning.

Too often, debate about early childhood learning anddevelopment is polarized around issues of home careversus day care, or private versus public care. What isreally needed is an evidence-based approach focussedon helping individuals and communities address theirown unique concerns. In a world where one size doesnot fit all—where parents and governments requirechoice and response to local conditions—we needcommon benchmarks whereas the data is cohesive,coherent and comparable in order to assess results.

EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNINGCHAP!RC1

Children’s experiences in the first years of life have alasting impact on their development and future learning.As Nobel laureate James J. Heckman stated, “Learningstarts in infancy, long before formal education begins,and continues throughout life .... Early learning begetslater learning and early success breeds later success.”1

To express it in terms of the four pillars of learning2earlychildhood is when children learn to know, to do, to live•together and to be.

As children develop, they adopt ever more complexskills. Their ability to use their senses and controltheir movements shapes their emotional and socialdevelopment. As they mature emotionally and socially,new cognitive abilities, such as the use of language,emerge.

An important aspect of children’s learning is that itoccurs in stages. There are specific periods during whicha young brain will develop particular skills, such as theability to see with both eyes, to control emotions and tospeak. If a child does not acquire these skills at the rightstage, it may be difficult to catch up later.3

ATTITUDES TOWARD EARLY LEARNING

The Canadian Council on Learning’s 2006 Survey ofCanadian Attitudes toward Learning found that:

• Canadians think learning at all stages of life iscritical to success

• Canadians think that early childhood learningshould focus more on attitudes—such asfostering a positive attitude toward learning—than on school readiness

THE WIRED BRAIN

Human clevelopmtiit is not matter of natureversus nurture, but of nature and nurture

working together. In response to stimuli from theenvironment, the nerve cells of the brain formphysical connections and pathways. This hi inwiring process, which beqins before birth and

continues through life, is most intensive during this’

first three years of development.

CARE AND NEGLECT

A study of children adopted from foreigninstitutions demonstrates the extent to which

serious early neglect can affect a child’sdevelopment. The research revealed that children

reared in privation had lower lOs at the age offour than children ,-aised in caring homes. Perhaps

more surprising was that the difference in brainfunction persisted at age II, even alter the children

had spent seven years with adoptive patents.5Animal research shows that intense stress earlyin life can lead to brnn damage, underscoring

the strong link between early careand a later ability to think and learn.

• There are more than 2 million children under theage of six in Canada.

• The proportion of children under six years ofage declined from 9% of the total Canadianpopulation in 7975 to 6% in 20O5.

4

CHAPTER 02EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

2, dctrs f Eary C dhoo DevecprnetTo understand the state of early childhood learningin Canada, we need to examine four main areas ofdevelopment: physical; cognitive; language and communication; and emotional and social development. Theseareas are linked and interdependent.

Measurements of motor skills, vocabulary, emotionalcontrol and social interactions, for example, tell us howCanadian children are developing and maturing. Wealso need to know about the environmental factors thatinfluence early childhood learning. The most effectivemeasurements are those that are repeated at regularintervals and therefore reveal trends.

In the pages ahead, we explore the state of earlychildhood development in Canada according to thefollowing five indicators:

• birth weight• physical development, including fine

and gross motor development• cognitive development• language and communications skills development• emotional and social development

We review the research on these indicators, describewhat is known about Canada’s performance andprogress, and highlight areas for further attention andinvestigation.

lRTh WEIGHT

The link between low birth weight and risks to laterdevelopment and learning has been established fora long time. A recent study, for example, found thatlow birth weight is associated with lower cognitivedevelopment at ages 7, 11 and 16.8

Birth weight can also provide an indication of theenvironmental factors influencing a child’s health andlearning, as low birth weight is associated with poornutrition, smoking, and alcohol and drug use.’

Societal factors affecting birth weight include a greaterprevalence of fertility treatments and the increasedtendency for women to delay childbearing into their 30sor later.1°

What do we know about Canada’s progress?In 2003, 6% of Canadian babies were born with lowbirth weights (weighing less than 2.5 kg, or 5.5 lb.), aproportion that has remained constant for the past 25years. The frequency of low birth weights in Canadais slightly below the average among countries ofthe Organisation for Economic Co-operation andDevelopment (OECD). The Scandinavian countries,the Netherlands and South Korea have the smallestproportion of low-weight births.

I

TOOLS OF THE TRADE

Under an historic agreement on early childhood development reached by federal, provincial and territorialgovernments in September 2000, the Government of Canada is transferring $500M per year via the Can ada

Social Transfer to provinces and territories for investment in programs and services for children under sixand their families. As part of this agreement, governments have aqreed to report annually on their investmentsin Early Childhood Development programs and services and biennially on a common set of indicators of young

children’s well-being. This agreement has expanded the use of, and interest in, assessment and monitoringtools for early childhood development.

CHAPTERQ

EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

Percentage of babies born with low birth weights,1980—2003

isaz .j.j.i. i,iea

Australia 5.6 “i 6.1 6.3 6.4 ‘°

Canada 5.8 5.5 5.6 5.8

Denmark 5.8 5.2 4.9 5.5

FInland 3.9 3.6 4.3 4.1

France 5.2 1911 5.3 6.4 6.6

Germany 5.5 5.7 6,4 6.8

Iceland 3.4 2.9 3.9 3.1

Italy 5.6 5.6 6.7 6.520a2

Japan 5.2 6.3 8.6 9.1

Korea .. 2.6 3.8 4.1

Netherlands 4 “i’ 4.8 5.1 5.4

New Zealand 5.8 6.2 6.4 6.1

Norway 3.8 4.6 5 4.9

Sweden 4.2 4.5 4.4 4.5

Switzerland 5.1 5.1 5.9 6.5 2O9

United Kingdom 6.7 6.7 7.5 7.6

United States 6.8 7.1 7.6 7.9

Median 5.6 5.6 6.3 6.6

Source: OECD, Health at a Glance 2005

SIA DE’ELD As!: MD’’’!-T

Physical development in the early years includes thedevelopment of the body, the senses, and skills such ascoordination and balance. A vital component of physicalmaturation is motor development, which includesincreases in strength, coordination and movementcontrol. Motor development affects exploration, playand interaction with peers, which in turn influencecognitive, language and social development.

In the first two years of life, a child experiences rapidmotor development. What begins as a few spontaneousand reflexive movements progresses into purposeful armmotions, greater balance, and a newfound ability to sit,crawl, stand and walk.

From ages two to six, children usually learn to run, jump,skip, climb, catch and throw—skills triat are criticai forplay, organized sports and recreational activities. Finemotor skills are also necessary to prepare chi’dren forcommon school tasks, such as controlling a pencil andturning pages.

Many factors affect the development of motor skills,even before birth. A mother’s consumption of tobaccoor alcohol during pregnancy,1’ or maternal stress ordepression, can have negative impacts. Children who livein conditions of poverty, homelessness or family violenceare also more likely to suffer delays in developing basicmotor skills.12 Also, environmental hazards, such asexposure to certain chemical agents during pregnancy,can have adverse effects on development. 1314

A child who does not master gross and fine motor skillsmay struggle at school or develop feelings of inadequacyand frustration.15

What do we know about Canada’s progress?

Gross motor skills

Gross motor skills are required for the movement oflarger muscles in the arms, legs, torso and feet. Theseskills were last assessed in the National LongitudinalSurvey of Children and Youth (NLSCY) in 2000—2001.Nearly 90% of children aged four and five were found tohave average or above-average gross motor skills. Therewas little difference between boys and girls.

Gross motor skills, 0 to five-year-olds, 2000—2001

89.7% 10.3%

Both sexes 89.2% 10.8%

Fine motor skills

The NLSCY also assessed fine motor skills, which involvethe coordinated movement of the hands, fingers, toes,wrists and other smaller muscles. In 2004—2005, 87% of0 to five-year-olds were considered to have average orabove-average fine motor skills. More boys (15%) weredelayed in their development than girls (11%).

Fine motor skills, 0 to three-year-olds, 2004—2005

Boys

Girls

AVERAGE OR ABOVE DELAYED

88.8% 11.2%

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth

I

AVERAGEOR ABOVE DELAYED

Source: Statistics Canada. ‘ational Longitudina Survey of Chilciren and Youth

CHAPTER(2EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

I

OGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

Cognitive development involves mental processes suchas thinking and reasoning. Every child develops at adifferent pace, but cognitive development generallytends to occur in stages.

Cognitive development milestones1”17

AG L

Zero—onemonth newborn reflexes; recognition memory for simple stimuli

One—four deferred imitation of adults’ facial expressions, somemonths awareness of object permanence; limited anticipation of

events

sensibility to changes In number or amount of things;Four—eight development of object concept; use of shape, texture, andmonths colour to Identify ol,jects; use of own body but also of simple

landmark cues to locate objects in space

ability to retrieve an object from the first location In which ItElght—12 Is hidden; categorization of social stimuli (for example, humanmonths versus non-human movement patterns); simple problem

solving by combining sub.goals

12—18 classification of objects according to physical similarities;months exploration of objects by acting on them In novel ways;

experimenting with actions when solving problems

at ago two, memory span of abouttwo Items; use of naming18—36 and looking as simple memory strategies; ability to drawmonths scribbles; elementary planning capabilities

more complex thematic object classification (objects thatfunction together or complement one another); recognitionperformance for 50-plus items; understanding thatThre. thinking is something that takes place inside oneself; basicy.ars understanding of numbers 1—10; ability to uses symbol fora real.world event, as component of problem solving; child’sscribbles now become pictures

basic understanding of how one can take the perspectiveof another; understanding of pretend and make-believe;Four years enhanced categorization skills; concept of cardinality; recallof three or four itemi can occur

understanding relations such as bigger and smaller, drawingsFive—six become more realistic; can distinguish between theory andyears evidence

Many factors can promote or hinder cognitive development. Development is most likely to progress when:

• parents encourage learning through games andthe use of appropriate play materials;Th

• books are available and parents read to their children;19• mothers encourage their children, show affection

and engage in their activities;20a children in child care enjoy high-quality care with

trained caregivers and organized, age-appropriateand stimulating activities;21children are raised in a safe and comfortableneighbourhood and a clean environment;23

• children are not exposed to tobacco, alcohol ordrugs in the womb;24and

• children from high-risk environments are integratedwith those living with more advantages.25

What do we know about Canada’s progreThe National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youthapplied two tests to assess cognitive developmentamong children aged four and five.

a The “Who Am I?” Test involved copying andwriting tasks designed to gauge a child’s ability toconceptualize and reconstruct geometric shapes,and to understand and use symbols like letters andwords.The “Number Knowledge Assessment” examineda child’s early comprehension of numbers.

By both measures, most Canadian children demonstratedan average or advanced level of development in2004-2005. However, significant differences were notedbetween children based on family income.

In the “Who Am I’?” Test, 19% of children from low-income families were considered to have delayeddevelopment, compared to 14% of other children. Inthe Number Knowledge Assessment, 28% of childrenfrom low-income famiIies showed delayed development,compared to 14% of other children.

Cognitive development of four- and flve-year-olds byfamily income, 2004-2005

I LI AVI RAC I Al Al I

Whe Am l? Teat

Total 14,8% 65.8% 19.4%

Above LICO * 13,8% 65.5% 20.7%

Below LICO 19.4% 67% 13.6%

Numb.r Knowledge Assessment

Total 16.4% 72.6% 11.1%

Above LICO 13.8% 74.2% 12.1%

Below LICO 28.4% 64.8% 6.8%

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth* Low income cut-off

Although the risk of developmental delay is greaterfor children in economically disadvantaged families,it is important to note that children from all economicbackgrounds can experience developmental delay. infact, the Ontario Child Health Study demonstrated thatwhile children in lower-income families were more likelythan children from wealthier families to have cognitive orbehavioural disorders, the greatest number of childrenwith these difficulties is actually from middle-incomefamilies.

ChAPTER aEARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

Developmental disorders by family income,ages four to 16

$1O,000—$25,000 17.4 26.5%

$25,000—S50,000 16.8 48.7%

>$50,000 14.9 10.3%

All Income Levels 18.2 - 100.0%

Source: Norrie McCain, Margaret and J. Fraser Mustard. Early Years Study FinalReport (Government of Ontario, Ontario Children’s Secretariat, 1999)

International comparisons

A 2002 study used the “Who Am I?” Test to comparethe ability of six-year-old children in five countries tounderstand and copy shapes and symbols. Canadianchildren scored higher overall than children in Swedenand India, about the same as those in Australia, but lowerthan children in Hong Kong.

International comparison of “Who Am I?” Test results,six-year-olds, 2002

Source: de Lemos, Molly. Patterns of Young Children’s Development:An International Comparison of Development as Assessed by Who Am I?(Gatineau, Que.: Human Resources Development Canada, 2002).

;: .:::—

From birth to age six, oral language is pivotal for achild’s development.26 In primary and elementaryschools, the acquisition of language has an impact ona child’s capacity to read and write,27 socialize28 andunderstand what is going on in the classroom.29

8 For most children, learning to speak seems natural andeffortless. This is not, however, always so. In fact, about

• 8—9% of young children suffer from speech difficulties.30Speech impediments, especially if they persist past theage of five, increase the risk of social, academic and

• emotional problems later in life?1

sounds and non-verbal communicative acts;

Birth to one year from eight to 12 months, there is more controlover vocalization and the use of invented words,gesturing and gaze direction

the first meaningful words are spoken end aOne to two years vocabularybegins to emerge

the ordering of words and sentences points to theTwo to three years development of grammar skills

continued increase In sentence length and theformation of complex sentences signal theThree to five years consolldstlon and advancement of languagelearning

Factors influencing language learning include:33a family history of language or learning difficulties,gender, as males have a higher rate of languageand learning difficulties, andneurological injury or other types of physicaldisorders that lead to learning difficulties.

External factors also affect language development,including:

• how much parents speak to the child and thecomplexity of their vocabulary and grammar,34how much parents or other caregivers read to thechild, particularly as this develops an emotionalcloseness, and

a the mother’s ability to respond verbally to thefocus of the child’s attention and activities.35

Reading with the child, often and regularly, promoteslanguage deveiopment, especially if the child is askedquestions and is engaged in the activity. Other ways topromote language include reciting poems, teaching thechild to recognize letters and their sounds, and teachingchildren to recognize and write their names.36

<$10,000

RISK Of OI’iE OR F’I*RCENiAOE Or TOFALFAMII INCOMF I 1ORI— DI Of OP CAO S II II

(I’ER 1110 CffI_DRKIA RADII 1111(011— I-rI-I

36.3 14.5%

Canadian researchers are leaders in the studyof language and literacy impairments and

their association with behavioural problemsfrom infancy into the school years. Canadianresearchers of the Canadian Language andLiteracy Research Network (CLLRNet) arecurrently studying how early verbal delays

are linked to social adjustment.

Early language development generally occurs in thefollowing sequence:32

a8La

0aa

Australia Canada Sweden India Hong Kong

Mean scores on symbols I Mean score on copying scale

CHAPTER G2EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

What do we know about Canada’s progress?Receptive vocabulary

The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test—Revised (PPVT-R)assesses receptive vocabulary—or the words a childcan understand—at ages four and five. The test,included in Canada in the NLSCY, requires the child toidentify pictures that match words being read out by aninterviewer.

Most Canadian children assessed with the PPVT-R since1994—1995 showed average or advanced progress in thisarea. The proportion of children scoring in the delayedrange showed a slight decline, from 16% in 1994—1995to 14% in 2004—2005, the most recent year for whichstatistics are available.

PPVT-R test of language development, four- and fiveyear-olds, 1994—1995 to 2004—2005

1994—1995 15.9% 68.8% 15.3%1996—1997 16.7% 69.5% 13.9%1998—1999 15.9% 70.8% 13.3%2000—2001 14.5% 69.1% 16.4%2002—2003 13.1% 69.6% 17.3%2004—2005 13.6% 70% 16.5%

Approximately one-quarter of children from low-incomefamilies were considered to have delayed receptivevocabulary development, compared to 11% of otherchildren.

PPVT-R test of language development, four- and fiveyear-olds by family income, 2004—2005

CE! AYED AVERCE ADVANCEL

13.6% 70%

11.2% 70.7%

canada 16.5%Above LICO’ 18.1%Below LICO 8.9%

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth*L0W income cut.off

24.8% 66.4%

Communication skills

The NLSCY assesses communication skills by measuringa child’s capacity to vocalize, understand oral speech,and pass a message on to someone else. In 2004—2005,almost 90% of children aged 0 to 3 years had average orbetter communication skills. However, more boys (13%)than girls (8%) fell within the range considered delayed.CommunicatIon skills 0 to three-year-olds, 2004-2005

.iiw_

Boys 86.9% 13.1%Girls 92.6% 7.5%Both s.xes 89.7% 10.3%

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and ‘Youth

Reading to children

A higher proportion of children under the age of sixwere being read to daily by their parents or other adultsin 2004—2005 (65%) than in 1994—1995 (56%), accordingto the NLSCY. Again, the survey demonstrated a linkbetween a family’s income and its likelihood of dailyreading. In 2004—2005, 57% of children in low-incomefamilies were read to daily, compared to 67% of otherchildren.

Proportion of children, from birth to five years, beingread to daily, 1994-1995 to 2004—2005

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%MORE ON EARLY LITERACY

For further information, please see HowParents Foster Early Literacy, publishedby the Canadian Council on Learning aspart of its Lessons in Learning series.

Available at www.ccl-cca.ca.

I0%

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey ci Children anc Youth

CHAPTE

EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

F

EMOT DNA.. AND SDCA DEVELOPMENT

Children in their early years have to learn to live withothers and to develop relationships. The emotionaland social development of young children involves thefollowing:

• The development of social and emotional bondsof attachment with a significant adult, usuallythe parentThese bonds are particularly important duringtimes of distress, sickness or fatigue.37 Such bondsalso teach independence, the capacity to interactwith others and to recognize emotional signals.

• The ability to control emotionsEmotional and behavioural self-control, whichtypically begins at the age of two, is associatedwith an ability to pay attention and concentrate,and to regulate emotional responses in differentenvironments.

• Integration within peer groupsFrom the age of one, a child can interact withother children.38 Limited at first, these interactionsbecome increasingly important and frequent bythe time the child is in school or child care. Peerinteractions teach social rules and cues. As childrenintegrate into their peer groups, they learn tosuppress aggressive behaviour, understand groupsocial structures, develop leadership skills and formfriendships.

Steps in a child’s emotional and social development include:

Infants can communicate with other infants through smiling,Six months touching and babbling.

Most children can participate with their peers in activitiesOne year related to objects.

Children can play with other children, imitate others, andTwo years change their roles in play.

Pro-social behaviour, or behaviour intended to help or

Three to five benefit others, and games of simulation are developedand aggressive behaviour diminishes. At four, children canyears name their best friends and distinguish between peers theylike and dislike.

What do we know about Canada’s progress?To gauge the social and emotional development ofCanadian children, the National Longitudinal Surveyof Children and Youth (NLSCY) measured physicalaggression (bullying, being mean, fighting), indirectaggression (taking revenge, telling secrets, spreadinggossip), and personal and social maturity.

As the tables on the following pages reveal, genderdifferences are common. More boys (16%) than girls(12%) between the age of two to five show highlevels of physical aggression. The proportion of preschool children displaying high degrees of indirectaggressiveness decreased from 11% in 1994—1995 to 6%in 2004—2005.

On the other hand, the proportion of girls (11%)considered to have delayed development in personaland social skills was almost half that forrn boys (18%).However, it is important to note that boys and girls tendto follow different trajectories.39

TRENDS IN PHYSICAL AGGRESSION

The NLSCY illustrates three distinct trendsin physical aggression as a child matures

from toddler age to pre-adolescence.For most children (83%) physicalaggression decreased over this

period, but one in six children retainedtheir aggressive behaviour.

Children with consistently high levelsof aggression tended to be boys, tocome from low-income families, and

to have mothers with little education.The mothers, moreover, were more

likely to report more hostile andineffective parenting strategies.4

CHAPTER 2

[1

EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth

HF I,H ID (‘F:

[Physical aggressiveness among Indirect aggressiveness among Personal/social developmentI two- to flve-year-olds, four- to flve-year-olds, among 0 to three-year-olds,

2004-2005 2004—2005 2004—2005

EBeth sex.s 85.8% 14.2% Both sez•s 93.7% 6.3%[ Both s.x.s 14.6% 85.4%I Boys 84.0% 16.0% Boys 93.7% 6.3%[Giris 87.7% 12.3% Girls 93.7% 6.3%

Boys 17.9% 82.1%

Girls 11.1% 88.9%Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal Source: Statistics Canada, National LongitudinalSurvey of Children and Youth Survey of Children and Youth Source: Statistics Canada, National Longitudinal. Survey of Children and Youth

Children aged four and five with high levels of indirect aggressiveness, 1994—1995 to 2004—2005

14%

12%

10%.

8%

6%

4%

2%

0%.1994-1995 1996-1997 1998-1999

.c

1L2004-2005

• Canada • Boys • Girls

2002-2003

CHAPTER

EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

r

frHER DDES CANADA STAND?

The research leaves no doubt that early childhoodlearning and development are vital for lifelong learningand life readiness. And yet, many Canadian children arenot experiencing optimal early development.

In fact, more than one in four children (29.54%)is entering Grade 1 with learning or behaviouraldifficulties that could affect future success in academicsand life in general.4’ Although some children are atgreater risk of developmental delays, such problemsaffect children in all demographic groups. Thus, itis important to achieve a better understanding ofthe current developmental status of Canadian children,and how this status can be improved.

Toward that end, governments in Canada have beenseeking new ways to monitor and report on thestatus ofearly childhood development. For example, in supportof the federal-provincial-territorial agreement on earlychildhood development, each government reportsbiennially on indicators of child well-being.42 This is inaddition to regular reporting on their investments andprogress in enhancing programs and services for youngchildren and their families.

The well-being reports are based on a collaborativefederal-provincial-territorial effort to develop and reporton a set of common indicators, using the best availabledata on children’s well-being in the areas of physicalhealth and motor development, emotional health, socialknowledge and competence, and cognitive learning andlanguage communication. The Well-Being of Canada’sYoung Children: Government of Canada Report coversthe common set of indicators of child well-being at thenational level as well as information on the family aridcommunity contexts in which children are growing up.

Individually, and together, these reports—which arebased on findings from the National Longitudinal Surveyof Children and Youth and key national sources of healthdata—contribute to a greater understanding of howCanada’s young children are doing, and the factorscontributing to their well-being, across the domains ofchild development.

Significant information on early childhood developmenthas come to light through the creation of new datasources. Examples, which are described in greater detailon pages 14-15, include:

Early Development Instrument• Linked provincial databases in Manitoba• The Early Years Evaluation• The Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child

Development• Understanding the Early Years

WHAT DON’T WE KNOW?

As illuminating as they are, the current data sourcesprovide only a fragmented picture. There is significantroom to expand these types of initiatives and startpiecing together a richer picture of what we know aboutearly learning across Canada.

The information on early childhood learning collectedat present does not tell us everything we need toknow at a pan-Canadian level. The current tools, suchas the NLSCY and other data initiatives, provide a richunderstanding of determinants of early childhooddevelopment, such as parental education. However,there is a need for better assessment of the “outcomes”of early childhood development, and learning inparticular. Another key knowledge gap is in the area ofthe factors influencing the development trajectories ofchildren with fewer opportunities, especially Aboriginaland disabled children.

Ideally, Canada would gather data that would also allowus to make more complete comparisons between ourdomestic situation and that of children living in othercountries. To achieve that goal, there is a need for aninternational forum to share the current knowledgeof early childhood development science and developcommon instruments.

A 2004 report by the Organisation for EconomicCo-operation and Development43 found that there issignificant scope to expand our research and deepenour understanding of early learning across Canada. Oneapproach would be to develop a comprehensive data

CHAPTER a3EARLY CHILDHOOD LEARNING

F

strategy on early childhood learning and development,with a focus on children’s development trajectories.This would require more longitudinal data (such as theNLSCY and the Quebec Longitudinal Study of ChildDevelopment) with more direct assessments at differentpoints in a child’s early development stage, and thenlater in life as a youth and adult.

No single survey will ever answer all the questionsrelated to a field as complex as early childhood learningand development. Consequently, the data strategyshould take advantage of available data sources for earlychildhood development, as well as integrate data fromdifferent sources—something Manitoba is trying to dowith its linked database initiative.

Action is required on a number of knowledge fronts—from enhanced data and information collection, tomore analysis and research in key areas, to betterdissemination and sharing.

WHAT WILL CCL DO?

Early childhood learning is one of five priority issuesidentified by the Canadian Council on Learning. CCLhas established the Early Childhood Learning KnowledgeCentre to identify and share effective practices andways to improve monitoring and reporting on the stateof early learning in Canada. The knowledge centreis a consortium of organizations led by the Centre ofExcellence for Early Childhood Development at theUniversité de Montréal.

Currently, many indicators of early learning are assessedjust before school age. The Early Childhood LearningKnowledge Centre intends to promote the developmentand use of additional indicators that would provideinformation on child development from before birth tothe age of four. CCL will also highlight the importance ofindicators related to the environment in which childrenare growing up, including the resources and servicesthat are available to families.

Canada’s future depends on our ability to provide ourchildren with the foundation they need to achieve theirfull potential in life. Governments, early childhoodeducators, parents and society as a whole all have aninterest in supporting early development.

Unfortunately, today we do not have all the informationwe need to understand how well our children aredeveloping in Canada, information that would enableus to identify the steps that should be taken to get allyoung Canadians on a path toward a fulfilling life. Asits contribution to the efforts to fill this gap, CCL isdeveloping a comprehensive data strategy that willidentify the information required to understand areasof strength and weakness, and provide a foundation forbetter decision making by governments, educators andparents themselves.

CH

APT

ER

EAR

LYC

HIL

DH

OO

DL

EA

RN

ING

TH

FF

ply

flFV

EL

OPM

EN

T!IM

ENT

The

Farl

yD

evel

opm

ent

Inst

rum

ent

(ED

I)w

ascr

eate

din

1997

toas

sess

child

deve

lopm

ent

and

scho

olre

adin

ess

atki

nder

gart

enag

e.It

was

desi

gned

byth

eO

ffor

dC

entr

efo

rC

hild

Stu

dies

(for

mer

lyth

eC

anad

ian

Cen

tre

for

Stu

dies

ofC

hild

ren

atR

isk)

atM

cMas

ter

Uni

vers

ityin

Ham

ilton

,O

nt.,

inpa

rtne

rshi

pw

ithth

eF

ound

ers’

Net

wor

kan

dth

eE

arly

Yea

rsA

ctio

nG

roup

inN

orth

Yor

k,O

nt.

The

EDI

serv

esas

anou

tcom

em

easu

refo

rea

rly

life

and

asa

base

line

mea

sure

for

the

scho

olye

ars.

Thr

ough

ach

eckl

ist

fille

dou

tby

kind

erga

rten

teac

hers

,th

ein

stru

men

tga

uges

phys

ical

heal

than

dw

ell-

bein

g,so

cial

com

pete

nce,

emot

iona

lm

atur

ity,

lang

uage

and

cogn

itive

deve

lopm

ent,

and

com

mun

icat

ion

skill

san

dge

nera

lkn

owle

dge.

Eac

hca

tego

ryco

ntai

nsa

vuln

erab

ility

thre

shol

d.C

hild

ren

who

scor

ebe

low

the

thre

shol

dar

esa

idto

belim

ited

orvu

lner

able

inth

atpa

rtic

ular

dom

ain

ofth

eir

deve

lopm

ent.

Com

mun

itie

sar

ein

form

edof

the

prop

orti

onof

vuln

erab

lech

ildr

enw

ithin

thei

rge

ogra

phic

boun

dari

es.

The

EDI

gath

ers

data

onab

out

half

ofal

lfi

ve-y

ear-

olds

inC

anad

a.It

isus

edin

Bri

tish

Col

umbi

a,M

anit

oba,

Ont

ario

and

othe

rre

gion

sof

the

cOun

try.

InB

ritis

hC

olum

bia,

for

inst

ance

,th

eH

uman

Ear

lyL

earn

ing

Par

tner

ship

(HEL

P)us

edth

eED

Ito

iden

tify

scho

oldi

stri

cts

whe

rech

ildr

enw

ere

mos

tin

need

ofin

terv

enti

ons.

(See

map

.)

14Fo

rm

ore

info

rmat

ion

onth

eED

I,pl

ease

see:

ww

w.o

ffor

dcen

tre.

com

/rea

dine

ss/

Least

Vu

lnera

ble

14.0

Wes

tV

anco

uver

15.2

Koo

tena

y-

CoL

umbi

a16

.6R

ocky

Mou

ntai

n18

.1C

ampb

ell

Riv

er19

.4V

erno

n

Vul

nera

bili

tyby

Scho

olD

istr

ict

Per

cent

age

ofch

ildr

envu

Lne

rabl

eon

one

orm

ore

scal

esof

the

EDI

Cyc

le1

Most

Vul

nera

ble

Lowri

BeL

ow16.3

[j

16.4

to22.8

rzi2

2.9

-27.5

[27.6

-31.1

Hig

h(JA

bo

ve

31.2

35.7

40.0

40

.34

0.4

43

.7

Van

couv

erIs

Lan

dW

est

Nis

ga’a

Van

couv

erP

rinc

eR

uper

tC

entr

alC

oast

Not

ew

Sour

er,

EDI

Cyc

le1(

2000

-20

04).

Hu

man

Ear

lyL

aarn

lag

Part

ners

hip.

The

tota

lso

mpl

esi

zein

43.4

35.

For

Arr

owL

akes

,R

evol

otok

e.C

entr

alC

oast

,V

anco

uver

Isla

ndW

est

and

Nia

gon

(dio

ttlc

ts10

,19.

49.8

4an

d92

.res

pcct

rtcl

y),

Cyc

leII

nclu

des

data

from

2005

sod

2006

Inor

der

tole

rera

seth

esa

mpl

esi

ze.

Col

our

elam

lifra

tlos

Isb

aud

up

on

puw

loda

lod

ghbo

urho

rdsy

,ind

lo-f

lFfl

’S

ept

2006

sozo

54S

e4

eC

o.,

4—

—Is

—IO

5t*

35O

afoa

aI54

5454

4.54

CH

APT

ERQ

3EA

RLY

CH

ILD

HO

OD

LEA

RN

ING

TH

EEA

RLY

YE

AR

SE

VA

LU

AT

ION

The

Early

Yea

rsE

valu

atio

n(E

YE)

isde

sign

edto

help

educ

ator

sas

sess

the

skill

sof

child

ren

aged

four

tosi

x,w

hoar

em

akin

gth

etr

ansi

tion

tosc

ho

ol.

4Fi

veas

pect

sof

earl

ych

ildde

velo

pmen

tan

dsc

hool

-rea

dine

ssar

eev

alua

ted:

•aw

aren

ess

ofse

lfan

dth

een

viro

nmen

t(g

enra

Ikn

owle

dge)

•so

cial

skill

s,be

havi

our

and

appr

oach

esto

lear

ning

•co

gnit

ive

skill

s

•la

ngua

gean

dco

mm

unic

atio

n

•ph

ysic

alde

velo

pmen

t

The

eval

uatio

nco

nsis

tsof

a10

-min

ute

asse

ssm

ent

bya

teac

her

and

adi

rect

asse

ssm

ent

com

plet

edby

the

child

over

20to

3Dm

inut

es.

1(51

Res

earc

hIn

tern

atio

nal

Inc.

has

cond

ucte

dth

ree

pilo

t stu

dies

toas

sess

the

relia

bilit

yof

EYE.

Mor

ein

form

atio

nis

avai

labl

eat

:w

ww

.ksi

rese

arch

.com

/eye

l

TH

EQ

UE

BE

CL

ON

GIT

uDIN

AL

STU

DY

OF

CH

ILD

DE

VE

LO

PME

NT

The

Que

bec

Lon

gitu

dina

lS

tudy

ofC

hild

Dev

elop

men

t(Q

LSC

Iai

ms

toid

enti

fyfa

ctor

sth

ataf

fect

the

soci

alde

velo

pmen

tan

dac

adem

icpe

rfor

man

ceof

youn

gpe

ople

inth

epr

ovin

ce.

The

firs

tro

und

ofth

eQ

LSC

Dbe

gan

in19

98w

itha

coho

rtof

2,12

0ch

ildr

enbo

rnin

1997

—19

98.

The

chil

dren

wer

esu

rvey

edan

nual

lyfr

omth

eag

eof

five

mon

ths

tofo

urye

ars.

Ase

cond

phas

eof

the

stud

yis

now

unde

rway

and

will

cont

inue

until

2011

.

For

mor

ein

form

atio

n,pl

ease

see:

ww

w.j

esui

sjes

erai

.sta

t.go

uv.q

c.ca

letu

de..a

n.ht

m

UN

DE

RST

AN

DIN

GT

hEEA

RLY

YE

AR

S

Und

erst

andi

ngth

eEa

rlyY

ears

(UEY

)is

are

sear

chin

itiat

ive

fund

edby

Hum

anR

esou

rces

and

Soci

alD

evel

opm

ent

Can

ada.

Und

erU

EY,

part

icip

atin

gco

mm

unit

ies

rece

ive

info

rmat

ion

onth

esc

hool

read

ines

sof

thei

rki

nder

gart

ench

ildre

n,fa

mily

and

com

mun

ity

fact

ors

that

infl

uenc

ech

ildre

n’s

deve

lopm

ent,

and

the

avai

labi

lity

oflo

cal

reso

urce

sfo

rch

ildre

nan

dfa

mili

es.

LIN

KE

DPR

OV

INC

IAL

DA

TA

BA

SES

INM

AN

ITO

BA

The

Man

itoba

Cen

tre

for

Hea

lthPo

licy

(MC

HP)

atth

eU

nive

rsity

ofM

anito

baus

esan

onym

ous

aãni

nist

rativ

eda

taba

ses

that

can

belin

ked

toge

ther

for

spec

ific

rese

arch

proj

ects

(ww

w.u

man

itoba

.ca/

cent

res/

mch

p/da

ta.h

tm).

Whi

leth

elin

kbe

twee

nso

da-e

cono

mic

stat

us(S

ES)

and

scho

olpe

rfor

man

ceis

gene

rally

wel

les

tabl

ishe

d,th

ecr

eativ

eus

eof

prov

inci

alda

taba

ses

allo

wed

the

MC

PHto

prod

uce

even

mor

ete

lling

stat

istic

sfo

ra

proj

ect

know

nas

the

Chi

ldH

ealth

Atla

s20

04.

The

top

grap

h(r

ight

)il

lust

rate

sw

hat

scho

ols

see

whe

nth

eyre

view

Edu

cati

onM

inis

try

data

onth

epe

rfor

man

ceof

chil

dren

taki

ngth

est

anda

rdiz

edG

rade

3la

ngua

gear

tste

st.

Nin

ety-

four

perc

ent

ofst

uden

tsliv

ing

inhi

gh-S

ES

area

spa

ssed

the

test

, com

pare

dto

83%

ofth

ose

from

low

-SE

Sar

eas.

How

ever

,th

ebo

ttom

grap

h(r

ight

)te

lls

adi

ffer

ents

tory

.In

this

case

,res

earc

hers

incl

uded

mor

eco

mpr

ehen

sive

popu

lati

on-r

egis

try

info

rmat

ion.

Whe

nal

lch

ildre

nw

hosh

ould

have

been

in•

Gra

de3

inW

inni

peg

in19

98-1

999

wer

ein

clud

edin

the

expa

nded

data

set.

only

50%

ofth

ech

ildre

nfr

omlo

w-

Lau

nche

din

1999

inN

orth

Yor

k,O

nt.,

UEY

was

refi

ned

asa

pilo

tpr

ojec

tin

12co

mm

unit

ies.

Itha

sbe

ena

pan-

Can

adia

npr

ogra

msi

nce

2004

,w

ithup

to10

0co

mm

unit

ies

rece

ivin

gsu

ppor

tbe

twee

n20

05an

d20

08.

Mor

ein

form

atio

nis

avai

labl

eat

ww

w.h

rsd.

gc.c

a/en

/hip

/sd/

300_

UE

Yln

fo.s

htm

l

SES

fam

ilies

pass

edth

ete

st.

Chi

ldre

nfr

omth

elo

wes

tSE

Sgr

oup

wer

em

ore

likel

yto

have

fail

edth

ete

st,

been

abse

ntor

exem

pted

,or

had

alre

ady

been

held

back

atle

ast

one

grad

ean

dw

ere

ther

efor

eno

long

erw

ithth

eir

Gra

de3

coho

rt.

Mor

ede

tail

son

this

proj

ectm

aybe

foun

dat

:w

ww

.um

anit

oba.

calc

entr

es/m

chp/

repo

rts/

chil

djne

qual

iti&

Per

form

ance

ofW

inni

peg

pupi

lson

stan

dard

ized

Gra

de3

languag

.ar

tste

st,

base

don

fam

ilyIn

com

e19

98—

1999

Pass

/fai

lra

teof

thos

ew

how

rote

the

test

Figu

res

with

all

eigh

t-ye

ar-a

Ids

who

shou

ldha

vew

ritt

enth

ete

st

lxx ¶i.

I:.

Law

l.aw

-mid

dIe

MId

cIH

iqh

Sod

a..,

cra

nk

llam

a

END NOTES

F

Heckman, James J. Invest in the Very Young (Chicago: Ounce of Prevention Fundand the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy Studies, 2000).Available at www.ounceofprevention.org. Accessed Sept. 26, 2006.

2 United Nations Educations). Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO):Four pillars of learning. Available at www.unesco.org/delors/fourpil.htm

3 Norrie McCain, Margaret and J. Fraser Mustard. Early Years Study Final Report(Government of Ontario, Ontario Children’s Secretariat, 1999).Available at www.children.gov.on.ca. Accessed Oct. 14, 2006.

4 Norrie McCain, M. Early Years Study Final Report, 1999.

5 Beckett, C., et ci. “Do the Effects of Early Severe Deprivation on CognitionPersist into Early Adolescence? Findings from the English and RomanianAdoptees Study,” Child Development, 77(31(2006). pp. 696—711.

6 Bremner, J. D. “Does Stress Demae the Brain?” Biological Psychiatry, 45 (1999).pp. 797—805. Also, McEwen, B. S. The Effects of Stress on Structural andFunctional Plasticity in the Hippocampus,” Neurobiology of Mental Illness (NewYork: Oxford University Press, 1999). pp. 475—493.

7 Statistics Canada. “Estimates of Population by Age and Sex for Canada,Provinces and Territories,” CANSIM (Ottawa). Table 051-0001.

8 Jefferis B., C. Power, and C. Herrsman. “Birthweight, childhood socioeconomicenvironment, and cognitive development in the 1958 British birth cohort study,”British Medical journal. 325(73591:305 (Aug. 10,2002).

9 Public Health Agency of Canada. Healthy Development of Children and Youth:The Role of the Determinants of Health (Ottawa: Health Canada, 1999).Available at www.phac-aspc.gc.ca. Accessed Oct. 14, 2006.

10 Or,ganisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Health eta Glance:OECD Indicators 2005 (Pari OECD, 2005).

11 Trasti N. and T. Vik. “Smoking in Pregnancy and Children’s Mental andMotor Develqpment at Age 1 and 5 Years, Early Human Development, 55(2)11999). pp.l3?—4?. Also, Autti-Ramo, I. and M. Granstrom. “The PsychomotorDevelopment During the First Year of life of Infants Exposed to IntrauterineAlcohol of Various Duration:Fetal Alcohol Exposure and Development,” Neuropediatrics, 22(1991).pp.S9—64.

12 Solan, H. and R. Moslan. “Children in Poverty: Impact on Health, VisualDevelopment and School Failure.” Journal of Optometric Visual Development,2811997) pp.?—25.

13 Wigle, Donald T., et ci. “Environmental Hazards: Evidence for Effects on ChildHealth,” Journal of Toxicology & Environmental health: Part B 10, 1(2007),pp.3-39.

14 Grandjean, p. and Landrigan P.J. “Developmental neurotoxicity of industrialchemicals,” The Lancet 368, 9553 (2006), pp. 2167- 2178.

15 Doherty. Gillian. Zero to Six: The Basis for School Readiness (Human ResourcesDevelopment Canada, 1997).

16 Berk, L E. Child development, Second Canadian Edition (Toronto: PearsonEducation Canade, 2006).

17 Bukatko, D. and M. W. Daehler. Child development: A Thematic Approach, FifthEdition (Boston: Houghton Muffin, 2004).

18 Bradley, R. H., at al. “The Home Environments of Children in the United States.Part I: Variations by Age, Ethnicity, and Poverty Status,’ Child Development, 7212001). pp. 1,B44—1,B67.

19 Lefebvre, P. and P. Merrigan. Family Background, Family Income, MaternalWork and Child Development (Ottawa: Human Resources Development Canada,1998). Also, Lipps, G. and 3. Yiptong-Avila. From Home to School—How CanadianChildren Cope lOttawa: Statistics Canaoa’s Culture, Tourism and the Centre forEducation Statistics, 1999). Catalogue no. 89F01 1 7XIE.Available at www.statcan.ca. Accessed Sept. 11, 2006.

20 Keating, 0. P. and F. K. Miller, “Individual Pathways in Competence and Coping:From Regulatory Systems to Habits of Mind,” Developmental Health and theWealth of Nations: Social, Biological and Educational Dynamics (New York:Guilford Press, 1999). pp. 220—234.

21 Early Childhood Learning Knowledge Centre. “Why is High-quality Child CareEssential? The Link Between Quality Child Care and Learning,” Lessons inLearning (Ottawa: Canadian Council on Learning, 2006) Available at www.ccl.cca.ca. Accessed Sept. 9, 2006.

22 Kohen, D., C. Hertzman and M. Weiris. “Environmental Changes and Children’sCompetencies”. Technical Report, W-98-1 5E lOttawa: Applied Research Branchof Human Resources Development Canada, 1998).

23 Bradley, R. H. “The Home Environments of Children in the United States,”Child Development.

24 Fried, PA. “Tobacco Consumption During Pregnancy and its Impact on ChildDevelopment,” Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development, Online version(Montreal: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development). Available atwww.excellence-esrlychildhoed.ca. Accessed Oct. 12, 2006.

25 WilIms, 3. D. “Quality and Inequality in Children’s Literacy: The Effects ofFamilies, Schools, and Communities,” Developmental Health and the Weafth ofNations: Social, Biological and Educational Dynamics (New York: Guilford Press,1999). pp. 72—93.

26 Tomblin, B. “Literacy as an Outcome of Language Development and its Impacton Children’s Psychosocial and Emotional Development,” Encyclopedia on EarlyChildhood Development, Online version (Montreal: Centre of Excellence forEarly Childhood Development). Available at www.excellence-earlychildhood.ca.Accessed on Sept. 12. 2006.

27 Ehri, L. C., at ci. “Phonemic Awareness Instruction Helps Children Learn to Read:Evidence from the National.Reading Panel’s Mete-analysis,” Reading ResearchQuarterly, 36 (2001). pp. 250—287. Also, Storch, S. A. and 0. J. Whltehurst. “OralLanguage and Code-related Precursors of Reading: Evidence from a LongitudinalStructural Model,” Developmental Psychology, 38 (20021, pp. 934—945.

28 Cohen, N. J. Language impairment and psychopathology In Infants, chIldren, andadolescents (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2001).

29 Whitehurst, 6. J., and C. J. Lonigan. “Child Development and EmergentLiteracy,” Child Development, 69(3)11998). pp. 848—872.

30 National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, StatistIcson voice, speech, and language (Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Deafnessand Other Communication Disorders; National Institutes of Health). Available atwww.nidcd,nih,gov. Accessed Sept. 14, 2006.

31 Glogowska, M., et al. “Early Speech-and-language-Impaired Children:linguistic, literacy, and Social Outcomes,” Developmental Medicine and ChildNeurology, 48(2006). pp. 489—494. Also, Cohen NJ. “The Impact of LanguageDevelopment on the Psychosocial and Emotional Development of YoungChildren,” Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development, Online version.(Montreal: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development). Available atwww.excellence-earlychlldhood.ca. Accessed Sept. 12,2006..

32 Partly adapted from Dc Maio, Louis J. Stages of Language Development(Moorhead, MN: Parent-Child Communication Program of Minnesota StateUniversity). Available at http:I/www.mnstate.edu/pccp/. Accessed Oct. 13,2006.

33 American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of MentalDisorders, Fourth Edition, test revision (Washington, D.C.: 2000),

34 Hart, B. and T. R. Risley. Meaningful differences in the everyday experience ofyoung American children (Baltimore, U.S.: Paul H. Brookes Publishing, 1995).

35 Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., M. H. Bornstain and L Baumwell. “MaternalResponsiveness and Children’s Achievement of Language Milestones,” ChildDevelopment, 72 (2001). pp. 748—767.

36 Canadian Council on Learnin, “How Parents Foster Early Literacy,” Lessons inLearning (Ottawa: 2006). Available at www.ccl-cca.ca. Accessed Feb. 1,2006.

37 Bowlby, 3. Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1 INew York, NY: Basic Books, 1969).

38 Boivin, M. “The Origin of Peer Relationship Difficulties in Early Childhoodand their Impact on Children’s Psychosocial Adjustment and Development,”Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development, Online version IMontreal:Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development, 20051.Available at www.excellence-earlychildhood.ca. Accessed Sept. 15, 2006.

39 Eaton, Warren 0. and Alice Piklai Vu. “Are Sex Differences in Child MotorActivity Level a function of Sex Differences in Muturational Status?” ChildDevelopment 60,4(1989), p.p 1005—1011.

40 CSté, S.M., et al. “The Development of Physical Aggression from Toddlerhoodto Pre-adolescence: A Nation-wide Longitudinal Study of Canadian Children,”Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 34(11(2006). pp. 71—85.

41 lMllms, D. Vulnerable Children Table 3.2 p. 54 (Edmonton: University of AlbertaPress, 2002). Also, Kershaw, P., et a). The British Columbia Atlas of ChildDevelopment, First edition (Human Early Learning Partnership and WesternGeographical Press, 2005).

42 The Federal/Provincial/Territorial Communiqué on Early Childhood Developmentis available at www.ecd.elcc.ca/en/ecd/ecd...home.shtml.

43 OECD. Early Childhood Education and Care Policy: Canada Country Note (Paris:OECD Directorate for Education). Available at www.sdc.gc.ca/en/cs/sp/sdc/socpol/publications/reports/2004-00261 9/Country.pdf. Accessed Sept. 26. 2006.

44 Information presented here on the EYE is largely based on Whims, J. D., andJ. Beswick. The Early Years Evaluation—Teacher Assessment 11<51 ResearchInternational Inc.) Available at www.ksiresearch.com/eye/. Accessed Sept. 29,2006.

45 Toe Institut de Ia statistique oe Québec. Quebec Longitudinal Study of ChildDevelopment IQuebec). Available at www.jesuisjeserai.stat.gouv.qc.ca/.