A Career Ladder for Early Education and Out of School Time: A resource for our workforce A Joint Initiative of EEC and BTWIC

Career Ladder Background EEC has long recognized the need for a career ladder to define professional growth in early education and out of school time and a ladder’s potential to remedy the inadequate compensation in our field. Developing a career ladder is in EEC’s legislation and has been advanced by the 2008 Workforce Development Task Force, the Professional Development Workgroup of EEC’s Advisory, and ad-hoc work groups on family child care and out of school time. In September 2010, BTWIC released its “Blueprint for Early Education Compensation Reform.” The report’s first recommendation is the development of a career ladder. EEC and BTWIC partnered to implement this common goal. 2

Career Ladder Definition and Principles “A career ladder should support and value our ECE/OST workforce and recognize that a diverse workforce is essential for a quality ECE/OST system that yields positive outcomes for every child and family. A career ladder has multiple entry points and clearly defines multiple pathways for professional growth and movement.” 3 Quality is important at every level of the ladder. “You are competent” even if you have alternative qualifications instead of a degree. All sectors of the field and the workforce are valued. Everyone must recognize themselves in the ladder. Our field is not a dead end; there are continuing opportunities for professional growth. Reflective practice and lifelong learning are key to professional growth. Professional growth requires peer support and networks.

Career Ladder Goals Develop one common career ladder for educators across early education and OST settings that is simple and easy to understand. Borrow from established career ladder models in other fields; This initial basic ladder will evolve and develop over time as it is used and adapted by our field. Focus on educators working directly with children and those who are responsible for professional development and/or curriculum; not on administrative staff. Identify basic levels of responsibility (job functions) and the knowledge, skills, and abilities they require. Do not base it on existing job titles. The responsibilities at each level may look different in different types of care but they require the same underlying skills. Educators can enter the ladder at any level that they qualify for whether they work in a home-based or center-based setting. Don’t be restricted by QRIS standards or licensing regulations. The ladder may eventually be aligned with these systems. 4

5 Levels of Responsibility 5 Experience: Providing direct care and instruction to children during all types of program activities for at least 12 hrs. per week. Qualifying experience includes regular observation by, and consultation with, a more qualified educator from the Independent Level or above. In-service Training: Intentional, on-going professional development and training to meet established requirements and to increase competency within a given level. Often includes ongoing, formative observation and feedback by a supervisor or qualified peer. Continuing Education: Professional development that advances an educator’s professional growth with the intent of helping the educator move up the ladder. Levels: Leadership Supervisory Independent Novice Beginner/Entry Each Level Includes: Responsibilities Education Experience In-service Training Continuing Education

Career Ladder Comparison with Regulations 6 Career Ladder Levels of Responsibility EEC Regulations (Minimum qualifications) GCCFCCSACC Leadership Level Director I or II needs less education and experience Licensees need less education and experience Program adm. needs less education and experience Supervisory Level Lead teacher needs less education and experience Licensee for 10 children needs less education and experience Site coordinator needs less education and experience Independent Level Teacher needs less education and experience Licensee for 8 children needs less education Group leader needs less education and experience Novice LevelSame as Teacher Licensee for 6 children needs less experience Assistant leader needs less education and experience Beginning/Entry LevelSame as AssistantRegular asst. needs less experience Same as Assistant leader Education and experience in the Career Ladder exceed the minimum requirements in the Regulations.

Career Ladder Comparison with QRIS Education and experience in the Career Ladder generally are less than qualifications at QRIS Level 2, Level 1 is meeting licensing regulations. GCC qualifications only distinguish between administrators and program staff. There are no separate standards for FCC administrators. Standards for ASOST programs only address program administrator and site coordinator. 7 Career Ladder Levels of Responsibility QRIS Standards (Level 2) Workforce Qualifications and Professional Development QRIS Comments Center-basedFCCASOST Leadership Level Program adm. needs more education but less experience Requires more education and experience Program adm. needs more education but less experience GCC: QRIS requires an administrator whose duties are primarily supervisory to have a BA. Supervisory Level Program staff need more education and experience Requires more education but less experience Site coordinator needs more education and experience GCC: QRIS requires that 50% of staff to have BA degrees. Independent Level Similar education for non-BA but less experience Similar education and experience for non-BA N/A- positions below site coordinator not addressed in QRIS GCC: QRIS requires all program staff to have HS and 3 credits in ECE and 50% of staff to have BA degrees. Novice Level Program staff need more education and experience Requires more education and experience GCC/FCC: QRIS requires all educators to have a HS diploma or GED. Beginning/Entry Level Program staff need more education and experience Requires more education and experience GCC/FCC: QRIS requires all educators to have a HS diploma or GED.

Career Ladder Survey 8 EEC and BTWIC built an on-line survey on Survey Monkey. Focus group participants and educators in the Professional Qualifications Registry were asked to complete the survey between 2/11/11 and 3/7/11. A link to the survey was posted on EEC’s website with the draft Career Ladder. ●439 individuals responded to the survey ●96% (301) of respondents indicated general approval of the Ladder

Career Ladder Survey Results 9 N = 319 *Other program types specified included: Coordinated Community and Family Engagement Grantee, Head Start, Early Head Start, multi-type agency, etc.

Career Ladder Survey Results 10 *Other positions specified included: educational coordinator, Education/Disabilities Manager, Director/Lead Teacher, 0-5 Supervisory, Assistant Director, Project Facilitator, Health Manager/Enrollment Specialist, etc. N = 319

Career Ladder Survey Results 11 N = 167 Survey Respondents Location

Career Ladder: Beginning (Entry) Level 12

Career Ladder: Beginning (Entry) Level 13 N = 439 *74 respondents added comments on this level.

Career Ladder: Novice Level 14

Career Ladder: Novice Level 15 N = 375 *79 respondents added comments on this level

Career Ladder: Independent Level 16

Career Ladder: Independent Level 17 N = 353 *73 respondents added comments on this level

Career Ladder: Supervisory Level 18

Survey Results: Supervisory Level 19 N = 348 *77 respondents added comments on this level

Career Ladder: Leadership Level 20

Survey Results : Leadership Level 21 N = 343 *54 respondents added comments on this level

Career Ladder Survey Results 22

Career Ladder Survey Results 23 N = 320

Career Ladder Survey — Comments “ I appreciate the effort that went into creating the Career Ladder…I love that Early Childhood Educators are including Family Childcare in this effort…” “I liked that there are many levels which I would hope would inspire individual growth…” “Another layer to make running a program more time-consuming.” “The draft ladder made it very clear as to what is expected of me. It also made me feel as if climbing is a realistic possibility.” “I like that it will finally give people a clear path to advance in the field, clear expectations. I would like to see supervisors/directors have training in mentoring and to make sure that directors have the skills to provide quality guidance…” “I think this is a well thought out plan and will benefit centers; however, I do not comprehend how a career ladder affects a family child care home with one provider.” 24

Career Ladder Survey — Questions The most commonly asked questions were: Will compensation be used as an incentive to utilize the ladder? Asked by 14 different respondents Will there be assistance for pursuing higher education (grant, time off, etc.) or professional development? Asked by 12 different respondents How can I, a family child care provider, use the ladder? Asked by 9 different respondents 25

Career Ladder - A Resource and Reference EEC is not mandating the use of this Career Ladder by early education and OST programs; many programs already have a ladder that meets their needs. This ladder is: A resource across EEC’s mixed delivery system that: Articulates how increasing responsibility aligns with greater knowledge and skills (competency) and professional advancement; Establishes a common starting point for work on more refined pathways like a career lattice; Provides a frame to address compensation and other broad issues that affect our entire workforce. A reference that programs and educators can use to : Develop a career ladder that is specific to their program; Assess and improve a ladder that already exists; Map intentional professional growth for educators; Plan professional development for different levels of responsibility; Aid supervisors and directors as they guide and mentor staff. 26

Development Timeline October 2010 Developed an initial career ladder for internal review November – December 2010 Convened two external focus groups to provide feedback on the initial career ladder Revised ladder to incorporate focus group recommendations January - February 2011 Presented ladder to Planning and Evaluation Committee Launched online survey of educators in the Professional Qualifications Registry March - April 2011 Analyzed survey results Updated Planning and Evaluation Committee May 2011 Present to EEC Board 27