Ready schools

Ready schools are schools that seek to meet the unique needs of the students and families they serve. The concept of ready schools is part of the larger school readiness movement, which seeks to better prepare children for school and schools for children.

History

The concept was popularized in the 1990s by the United States National Education Goals Panel, a taskforce of educators and politicians. The purpose of this taskforce was to set national educational policy in terms of readiness goals for children and schools. This work was discontinued with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act. Ready schools work was continued at the state level, particularly in North Carolina, and through initiatives led by the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation.

The National Educational Goals Panel (1998) recognized that preschool and family support services may not be sufficient to enable children to learn skills that precede an ability to succeed academically. The Panel stated that schools had a responsibility to be ready to meet the diverse needs of children. The ten key principles that the panel considered essential to achieving “ready” schools are that schools must:

• Smooth the transition between home and school
• Endeavor to achieve continuity between early care and education programs and elementary schools
• Help children learn and understand their complex world
• Strive to help every child achieve success
• Help every teacher and every adult who interacts with children during the school day be successful
• Introduce or expand approaches shown to raise achievement
• Alter practices and programs if existing ones do not benefit children
• Serve children in communities
• Take responsibility for results
• Have strong leadership

State work

North Carolina

The North Carolina School Goal Team developed a self-assessment instrument for schools. The portion of the instrument described here is very specific in recommending requirements for teachers and administrators and also address types of programs, practices, curricula, and interactions that should occur with children. These expectations go beyond what many states feel they can track and measure. The team specified that:

• Administrators and teachers read, process, and understand the National Association for the Education of Young Children’s (NAEYC) Developmentally Appropriate Practices.
• The school use developmentally appropriate assessment instruments. These instruments must identify individual differences and needs and allow a determination of reasonable expectations of children’s capabilities.
• The curriculum address each child’s needs
• Curricula offer learning centers, value “play” as the work of young children, and provide interrelated, hands-on, active learning.
• Curricula have a meaningful context for learning rather than having children learn different skills in isolation.
• Curricula integrate children’s new experiences with their previous experiences through project work and mixed-grouping (ability/age) in a way that is not hurried.
• Teachers use a wide variety of teaching materials and methods.
• Teachers develop children’s social skills with conflict resolution strategies taught in meaningful contexts.
• The daily schedule for children balance open-ended and structured time as well as include daily rituals and routines.
• Teachers use language and communication development as a rich and valued curriculum component.
• Teachers use multicultural materials and nurture the cultural and linguistic diversity of students.
• Teachers assess each child’s growth and development through work samples, student and parent interviews, teacher observations, photographs, etc.
• Teachers practice inclusion, placing children in the least restrictive environment.
• Teachers participate in research-based, state-of-the-art on-going professional development.

Recommendations for facilities are not as extensive and tend to be discussed along with issues such as class size. The same North Carolina self-assessment instrument for schools not only expects that the physical environment is welcoming to children and arranged in learning centers to encourage choice, problem solving, and discovery, but also anticipates the availability of some services on-site. Specifically, children would receive on-site health assessments for physical, vision, and dental health annually (Report of the Ready Schools Goals Team, 2000).

Ohio

"The Ready Schools Project has provided us the opportunity to expand our perspective to a greater educational arena. We are grateful for our new partnerships with early childhood care-givers and for the by-products of new knowledge, collaboration, and collegiality. We are in a better place due to our involvement in Ready Schools."
Chet Lenartowicz
Principal, Youtz Elementary
Canton City Schools

Introduction

In February 1998, the National Education Goals Panel convened national leadership to address the importance of schools being ready for all children. The panel identified ten keys to a ready school (The National Education Goals Panel, 1998) in recognition that ready children must attend schools that are ready for them. In 2006, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation (WKKF) Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids (SPARK) elected to advance the ready school agenda through their Pathways to Ready Schools. All SPARK recipients were required to develop a plan to address the school readiness concept within their overall SPARK plan. To address the concept of a ready school, the Sisters of Charity Foundation of Canton, the Ohio Department of Education (ODE), Office of Early Learning and School Readiness (EL&SR) and the Ohio Association of Elementary School Administrators (OAESA) entered into a partnership to develop a ready school guidance document. Ohio’s ready school proposal to WKKF emphasized that “readiness” is accomplished through the shared responsibility of early childhood educators and district leadership. The “leadership from both the early education and formal school arena must pave the way to create “enduring ties” that will lead to cohesive educational programs” (SPARK, Ohio Ready for School—Ready Schools proposal).

History

In 2001, the Sisters of Charity Foundation, Canton, Ohio received a grant from the W.K. Kellogg Foundation to participate in an initiative devoted to helping the most vulnerable children and their families secure the resources and services needed to help children be ready for school. Although the emphasis was on ready children, WKKF positions readiness within an integrated system of ready families, ready schools, and ready communities and with the support of local and state leadership and the development of practice models that would influence state-level polices. The first two years of the five-year national SPARK initiative were primarily focused on “ready kids.”

SPARK Ohio elected to work in two school district locations, one urban and one rural school, to identify the unique challenges and opportunities afforded within both school contexts to help children be “ready.” The SPARK Ohio model includes:

1. parent learning partners who provide learning plans and materials to children and their families;
2. the administration of health and developmental screenings for all children within the SPARK project and referrals as needed;
3. working with families and schools during kindergarten registration to ensure a seamless transition for the SPARK children;
4. working with the schools to develop learning opportunities for children and families in the spring or summer prior to school entry;
5. collaborating with local libraries to provide additional “take-home” learning materials;
6. partnering with the Ohio Department of Education, Office of Early Learning and School Readiness to determine how to best impact state policy; and
7. conducting evaluation studies and assessing data on all aspects of the SPARK Ohio initiative to determine effectiveness and identify ways to refine to build upon the working model.

In year three, the focus of the national SPARK initiative shifted to ready schools. The local work with the two school districts and the state-level partnership laid the foundation for the next step in the WKKF comprehensive model.

Ready for School—Ready Schools

Preschool-age children whose families need or desire out of home care have access to licensed center-based programs (over 4,000) and family home child care settings (14,000 plus providers). Each of these early education and child care programs offers varying degrees of education and health services and family support. In turn, these children enter into one of over 2,000 elementary schools operating through 614 school districts. Therefore, children enter into the formal education system with varying degrees of “readiness” defined by each program, every family, and early childhood and kindergarten teachers. Ohio has accomplished much to ensure children’s readiness for school through the required use of program guidelines and early learning content standards of programs administered by the Ohio Department of Education (ODE).

The funding afforded by WKKF to delve deeper into the transition practices between preschool and kindergarten provided Ohio with a unique opportunity to advance the ready school concept. The Sisters of Charity Foundation and ODE’s Office of Early Learning and School Readiness (EL&SR) partnered with OAESA to accomplish the work. OAESA is a statewide organization that has a working subcommittee whose goal is to advance the work of early childhood within school district operation.

In April 2006, a statewide team of elementary school principals, kindergarten and early childhood teachers, and higher education faculty was identified to develop a ready school guidance document for principals. The team reviewed the research on transition practices and surveyed elementary principals to learn of their knowledge of the ready school concept and learn of the challenges and needs in becoming a ready school.

Seven key themes emerged during this early investigation period. The information was translated into set of recommendations for the ready schools document and was made available for final review through the OAESA annual state conference and regional focus groups with school principals. As a result of the recommendations and dialogue with educators from the early childhood and elementary communities, Ohio defined a ready school as the following:

- Ready to respond to the diverse learning needs of all the children they receive;

- Ready to look beyond “risk factors” and build upon the social, emotional, physical and cognitive skills of all children as they make the transition from home or preschool to kindergarten and then adjust to school life; and

- Ready to make a decisive difference in every child’s life.

With agreement on the definition and key topics, the principals were very clear about their expectation: the document must be easy to read, actions must be made concrete through real-world examples, linkages to resources should be made available through internet access, and work plan templates need to be included for immediate use. After one year, the "Strong Beginnings, Smooth Transitions, Continuous Learning" resource guide was finalized.

Strong Beginnings

Seven topics were identified as important in becoming a ready school. They are: leadership committed to understanding and connecting with early childhood; a transition process that starts well before kindergarten registration; attention to supportive environments that recognize the child and family need for engagement and belonging; setting high expectations and high quality instruction through aligned standards, instruction and assessment, preschool through grade 3; a shift to understanding diversity as building home-to-school bridges; acknowledging new ways to engage families and improve home-school connections; and building communities of adult learners.

Each chapter of the document includes a brief overview of the research, key definitions or understandings, a one-page self-assessment, examples of action plans that lay the groundwork for beginners and national and state exemplary models of ready schools, early education and primary school resources and when called for, planning forms.

Smooth Transitions

The state team created a two-year dissemination plan working with ten elementary school principals to understand both the nature of ready school work at the local level and the usefulness of the resource guide in helping school leadership move toward a more intentional plan. Each selected school was located in one of ten geographical zones, an organizational structure used by OAESA for statewide work. The selection of schools in each zone assured the team that there would be representation of Ohio’s 614 districts.

The two-year plan includes the following: a memorandum of understanding signed by the school principal and the district superintendent; financial support for two years; access to a coach to assist them in developing and implementing their plan; participation in an evaluation study; and attendance at regularly scheduled advisory meetings, that include the two coaches, the evaluator, OAESA and EL&SR leadership.

Since September, the full advisory team has met on three occasions. Each school has received one on-site visit by their coach and has had a phone conference call with the evaluator, with follow-up visits to be scheduled. In addition, during the months of January, February and March, the two coaches conducted a full-day workshop within each zone site with other interested school principals to share information about the project, walk them through the ready school resource document and solicit interest for a year two cohort. To date, nine meetings brought together 247 interested principals. A final meeting will be scheduled with over 40 elementary school principals, all participants in their local P-16 partnership.

Continuous Learning

The Sisters of Charity Foundation has a requirement for evaluation of all projects it funds. Data collection, analysis, and interpretation to determine effectiveness form the continuous improvement model for their organization. While the learning from the ready school work is yet to be fully realized, a five-month review of what has been accomplished to date provides some insight into the challenges and successes.

Learning #1: Team composition matters. When one ready school team arranged for parents to complete the ready school evaluation outside of the nominated team members, the ready school team was surprised at the different results. The result was the addition of parents and community members to the team. What the parents and community members outside of the school perceive as needed for a smooth transition is often different from school staff. The differences in perceptions and diverse viewpoints need to be identified and addressed. The ready school assessment is a starting point for building an action plan with shared understandings of the needs of each participant in the transition process.

Learning #2: The importance of working strategically. The school district superintendent, local board of education, curriculum and assessment coordinators as well as the early childhood/primary educators need to be involved in the planning and implementation from the beginning. Some promising strategies for gaining wider support include providing ongoing updates of the progress of the work to key leadership; inviting district personnel to be part of the ready school team; presenting to the school board; inviting board members to ready school events; and making apparent links to district initiatives and existing programs; finally inviting other schools within the district to participate at a feasible and sustainable cost.

Learning #3: Data matters. Using the self-assessment in the resource guide, each school team rated current strategies and activities in each of the seven key topics and identified goals for implementation. The top rated strategies identified: 1) the development of an organized team that would serve as a transition team to coordinate the plan to assure that timelines are met; 2) improving communication with families as to how best to support learning at home; and 3) developing a regular communication plan with representatives of the preschool community. Initially most schools took on too many goals and did very little to “alter” the transition activities that were implemented in the past.

Through the work with the coaches, attention to evaluating the results of the activities led to internal questioning about the selected strategies and planned activities. Rather than place “blame” on the family, the local preschool or community-based teacher, for an activity not going well or received with enthusiasm, the leadership team is beginning to see the value in understanding what is not working well and asking why from all involved in the transition process.

Learning #4: Take time! Some schools are using their ready school funding to hold all day, off-site planning sessions with a broad group of community and parent representatives joining the staff to develop a shared vision and goals. The extended and uninterrupted time promotes collaboration, deeper discussion, and more opportunities to share perspectives.

Learning #5: Build leadership. The school principal cannot be the lone lead. A ready school coordinator who monitors the planning and implementation of each activity in the action plan has been identified in several sites. In addition to this role, some sites have created committees around each of their identified strategies. A teacher has been identified to take the lead for each activity with the charge to select appropriate members from across the stakeholders groups as needed to successfully implement the activities.

Next Steps

Our next steps have been developed as a result of lessons learned in this initiative, in SPARK and our prior work with elementary school principals in other projects. We will continue to build understanding and momentum. In April 2009, the second cohort of principals will be selected for round two of funding. Cohort one principals will determine how they can best serve as a resource to this new group of schools. The coaches will continue to play a significant role in assisting both cohorts of schools and will be working with OAESA and EL&SR leadership to determine if and how to grow up a coaching role as more schools come on board.

Professional development is critical to principals’ understanding of a ready school concept and the use of the resource document to accomplish their goals. Next year, all school districts receiving funding for early childhood education services will be required to identify a ready school team, conduct a self-assessment and develop a plan for year two implementation. OAESA and EL&SR will be meeting to discuss how to support the additional 200 plus districts in becoming a ready school. Working both ends of the continuum for a ready school is essential. Ohio is organized through sixteen regions to provide technical assistance and support to school districts for a range of educational needs. The early childhood personnel at each of these locations will be “trained” on the use of the document and will be available to facilitate the connections from the early childhood community to the school district.

A little funding goes a long way. Funding from private sources as well as funding within the school system is needed to ensure that the practices of transition receive the attention needed. To that end, Ohio representatives have presented the ready school work to the state funders collaborative. A proposal with a working plan to meet with interested funders is underway. And finally, every school involved in SPARK Ohio’s replication sites (fifteen) now have the requirement of using the ready school resource tool as part of their SPARK plan. In this manner the ready school work is embedded within the early childhood and kindergarten requirements of SPARK.

Each of the above avenues provides OAESA and EL&SR leadership with understanding what is working and why and what needs to be adjusted and why. The ready school resource document "Strong Beginnings, Smooth Transitions, Continuous Learning" is serving as a bridging tool between the early childhood system and elementary schools. It is one small step forward, but an important one in creating the best foundation for readiness.

Foundation Initiatives

The W.K. Kellogg Foundation launched the Supporting Partnerships to Assure Ready Kids (SPARK) Initiative in 2001 to create community partnerships that prepare children for school and schools for children. The W.K. Kellogg Foundation uses nine Pathways to Ready Schools to frame the ready schools work being done through the SPARK initiative. The nine pathways are:

1. Children succeed in school
2. The school environment encourages a welcoming atmosphere
3. Strong leadership exists at every level
4. The school is connected to early care and education
5. The school connects culturally and linguistically with children and families
6. There is a high level of parental involvement
7. The school forms partnerships with the community
8. The school seeks out and uses assessment results
9. The school constantly seeks to improve its quality

Examples of Ready Schools

The SPARK Initiative Level Evaluation Team identified four diverse schools throughout the United States that display characteristics of ready schools. These schools are International Community School in Decatur, Georgia; Ka 'Umeke Ka'eo Public Charter School in Hilo, Hawaii; La Mesa Elementary School in Albuquerque, New Mexico; and Nailor Elementary School in Cleveland, Mississippi (Simons & Curtis, 2007).

The first large-scale implementation of a ready schools framework was launched in the Miami-Dade County Public School System (the fourth largest school district in the country). This major, urban school reform effort seeks to raise the quality of both pre-school and elementary schools throughout Miami-Dade County by focusing on school transitions, a quality rating and improvement system for early childhood programs, teacher professional development (Ready Schools University), strong school leadership and effective community partnerships. The initiative incorporates the Pathways to Ready Schools framework that came out of the Kellogg SPARK initiative, and was influenced by the PK3 framework developed by the Foundation for Child Development. Ready Schools Miami is funded by a grant from the W.K. Kellogg foundation to the Early Childhood Initiative Foundation and The Lastinger Center for Learning at the University of Florida.

References

• National Educational Goals Panel (1998). Ready Schools. Washington, DC: Author.
• Report of the Ready for School Goal Team (2000). School Readiness in North Carolina Strategies for Defining, measuring, and Promoting Success FOR ALL CHILDREN. North Carolina Office of Education Reform. Available from
• Simons, K.A., & Curtis, P. A. (March, 2007). Connecting with communities: Four successful schools. Young Children (62)2, 12-20.