Mary Beth Bruder, Ph.D. University of Connecticut Vicki Stayton, Ph.D. Western Kentucky University Cristina Mogro-Wilson

1. . Personnel Preparation in Early Intervention and Early Childhood Special Education: An Overview of Credentialing, Training and Technical Assistance, and Provider Perspectives Mary Beth Bruder, Ph.D. University of Connecticut Vicki Stayton, Ph.D. Western Kentucky University Cristina Mogro-Wilson, Ph.D. University of Connecticut Barbara J. Smith, Ph.D. University of Colorado at Denver Sylvia Dietrich, Ph.D. Western Kentucky University

2. The Center to Inform Personnel Preparation and Practice in Early Intervention and Preschool Education Information gathered will be utilized to identify critical gaps in current knowledge and design and conduct a program of research at the national, state, institutional and direct provider level to address these gaps. This program of research and policy formulation will yield information vital to developing policies and practices at all levels of government, including institutions of higher education. A five-year project established in January, 2003 and funded by the Office of Special Education Programs.

3. The Center’s Goals • To compile a comprehensive database of current licensure and certification standards for all EI/ECSE personnel. • To develop a comprehensive profile of current training programs for all types of personnel at the institutional, state, and national levels. • To describe the current and projected supply and demand for personnel. • To design and conduct a program of research to identify critical gaps in current knowledge regarding personnel preparation. • To develop and disseminate recommendations regarding personnel preparation policy and practice based on research findings.

4. The Center’s Purpose The purpose of this Center is to collect, synthesize and analyze information related to: • certification and licensure requirements for personnel working with infants, toddlers, and preschoolers who have special needs and their families, • the quality of training programs that prepare these professionals, and • the supply and demand of professionals representing all disciplines who provide both ECSE and EI services.

5. The Center’s Projects • Study I: The National Landscape of Early Intervention and Early Childhood Special Education • Study II: The Higher Education Survey for Early Intervention and Early Childhood Special Education Personnel Preparation • Study III: The Analysis of Federally Funded Doctoral Programs in Early Childhood Special Education • Study IV: The Impact of Credentials on Early Intervention Personnel Preparation (Credentialing Part C) • Study V: Analysis of State Licensure/Certification Requirements for Early Childhood Special Educators (Credentialing 619) • Study VI: Training and Technical Assistance Survey of Part C & 619 Coordinators • Study VII: Confidence and Competence of 619/Part C Service Providers

6. Three Research Strands Research Strand I: Preservice/ Higher Education Research Strand II: Personnel Standards Research Strand III: Inservice/ Ongoing Training

7. Research Strand I: Preservice/Higher Education

8. Research Strand II:Personnel Standards

9. Research Strand III:Inservice/ Ongoing Training

10. Overview of Today’s Presentation • Study VI: Training and Technical Assistance Survey of Part C & 619 Coordinators • Study VII: Confidence and Competence of 619/Part C Service Providers • Study V: Analysis of State Licensure/Certification Requirements for Early Childhood Special Educators (Credentialing 619)

11. Study VI: Training and Technical Assistance Survey of Part C & 619 Coordinators

12. Background: Study VI Training and Technical Assistance Survey of Part C & 619 Coordinators The status of state-level training and technical assistance (TA) systems for early intervention/early childhood providers has not been systematically collected or organized. The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the current personnel preparation systems for EI/ECSE professionals in each state. Systems that provide and maintain effective and comprehensive personnel preparation and development will serve as models for national standards.

13. Methodology • Part C and 619 coordinators were contacted to complete the survey via phone with trained interviewers. • Survey consists of 31 discrete and open-ended questions about funding, delivery methods, content, needs assessment, quality assurance, and other areas pertaining to training and TA. • Target sample was all 50 states, D.C., Virgin Islands & Puerto Rico • Part C (n=51) • 619 (n=45)

14. Definition of a Training System A systematic, sustainable approach to professional development that has: • dedicated resources such as an agency budget line-item; • staffing; • a dedicated agency that is responsible for the provision of the training; • policies or procedures for determining professional development expectations; • has training content; • quality assurance; • identifies and measures outcomes; • provides on-going, needs based professional development that is provided over-time; • a structure for the delivery of content (training modules, etc.), and • has work-place applicability.

15. Definition of Technical Assistance A system of technical assistance include all components as applied to TA: • dedicated resources such as an agency budget line-item; • staffing; • a dedicated agency that is responsible for the provision of the TA; • policies or procedures for determining professional development expectations; • has TA content; • quality assurance; • identifies and measures outcomes; • has work-place applicability; • provides ongoing TA; and • individualized professional development and problem-solving services to assist individuals, programs, and agencies in improving their services, management, policies, and/or outcomes.

16. Training and Technical Assistance by State:Part C • When asked, 39 states reported having a training system • Based on the definition of training applied by research staff to survey answers: 20 states (39%) had a training system • When asked, 43 states reported having a technical assistance system • Based on the definition of technical assistance applied by research staff to survey answers: 12 states (23%) had a technical assistance system

17. Part C: States with No Training System • 31 states did not have a training system based on the definition • 23 states did not have quality assurance measures • 21 states did not identify and measure outcomes of the training • 8 did not have policies to identify professional development needs

18. Part C: States with No TA System • 39 states did not have a technical assistance system based on the definition • 30 states did not have procedures for identifying and measuring technical assistance outcomes • 23 states did not have quality assurance measures in place to monitor their technical assistance systems

19. Training and Technical Assistance by State:Section 619 • When asked 35 reported having a training system • Based on the training system definition applied by research staff to survey questions 23 states (58%) had a training system • When asked, 23 reported having a technical assistance system • Based on the technical assistance system definition applied by research staff to survey questions 20 states (42%) had a technical assistance system

20. Section 619: States with No Training System • 22 states did not have a training system based on the definition • 13 states did not meet the qualifications of a training system because they did not have methods of identifying and measuring outcomes • 11 states did not have quality assurance measures in place to monitor their training systems • 7 states did not provide trainings overtime

21. Section 619: States with No TA System • 25 states did not have a technical assistance system based on the definition • 17 of the states did not meet the qualifications of a system because they lacked procedures for identifying and measuring technical assistance outcomes. • 17 states did not have quality assurance measures in place to monitor their technical assistance system • 12 states lacked policies to identify technical assistance needs within their technical assistance system.

22. Conclusions • Findings indicate the organizational structures within states vary greatly. • Systems tend to be accessible throughout the states and target multiple disciplines. • The most commonly offered training topics include Federal Regulations and agency-specific policies and procedures, transition, inclusion, child and family outcome measurements, and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. • The majority of training is provided through workshops and conferences; however, a growing number of states are using or developing distance learning methods. • Determining training/TA needs, evaluation, and quality assurance pose challenges for states. • Results indicate that there is a need for greater systemization of these processes.

23. Study VII:Competence & Confidence of Early Interventionist/Early Childhood Special Educators

24. Background • The purpose of this study was to conduct research on the level of confidence and competence of personnel working with infants and toddlers with special needs and their families.

25. Methodology • State coordinators of service providers were contacted and asked to forward the link to the online survey to service providers working with children ages birth to 5 with disabilities. • Approximately 27,700 e-mails were sent to direct providers • A total of 1,819 individuals completed the survey • Providers working with children birth to three: 1,084 in 44 states • Providers working with children three to five: 735 in 38 states • The survey consists of 47 questions to assess the competence and confidence of service providers in the following areas: • Family-Centered Practice • Assessment and Evaluation • IFSP Indicators • Instructional Practice • Natural Learning Environmental • Collaboration and Teaming • Early Literacy Learning

26. Factor Analysis • A preliminary exploration of the Competence and Confidence survey was performed using the principal component analysis (PCA) procedure. • All survey items were considered, with the exception of those related to early language and literacy. • Four principal component analyses were run on six items each. • Three of the four scales produced single factor solutions: competence and confidence regarding process items and competence regarding intervention items. • A single factor second order solution representing confidence regarding intervention items was produced. • Each of the four scales had good internal consistency, with Carmines Theta ranging from 0.6266 to 0.7952

27. Survey Participant Characteristics Providers Three to Five • Sample Size: n = 735 • Demographics: • female (97%) • white (94%) • Age: • 13% < 30 yrs. • 25% 31 ≤ 40 yrs. • 28% 41 ≤ 50 yrs. • 33% > 51 yrs • Educational Attainment: • High School or AA 1% • BA 26% • MA 70% • PhD 3% Providers Birth to Three • Sample Size: n = 1,084 • Demographics: • female (98%) • white (93%) • Age: • 14% < 30 yrs. • 26% 31 ≤ 40 yrs. • 30% 41 ≤ 50 yrs. • 31% > 51 yrs • Educational Attainment: • BA 33% • High School or AA 1% • MA 63% • PhD 3%

28. Survey Participant Characteristics • Most practitioners (80%) report not getting the training they need to work with children with disabilities through higher education programs. • Only 50% of respondents report being required by their state to complete specialized training to work with children above and beyond their professional licensure/certification requirements.

29. Method of Training

30. Survey Participant Characteristics Type of licensure or certification • Providers birth to three: Education 53%, therapy 40%, and other 22% • Providers three to five: Education 84%, therapy 22%, and other 8%

31. Overview: Providers Birth to Five

32. Family-Centered Practice % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

33. Assessment & Evaluation % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

34. IFSP/IEP % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

35. Instructional Practices % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

36. Natural Learning Environments % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

37. Collaboration & Teaming % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

38. Early Literacy Learning % Reporting Almost always & All of the time First 2 items represent competence, last 2 items confidence

39. Conclusions • A more comprehensive training model for personnel working with young children with disabilities • Using training methods that we know work for adult learners • Despite reported training needs, practitioners show many areas of strength in supporting children with disabilities and their families: • Family-Centered Practices • Assessment & Evaluation • Collaboration & Teaming • Instructional Practices

40. Study V: Analysis of State Licensure/Certification Requirements for Early Childhood Special Educators

41. State Certification Requirements for Early Childhood Special Educators Research Questions • What are the certification requirements for Early childhood Special Educators? • What factors influence the type of certification that is developed? • How is the content of certification developed? • What are the facilitators and barriers to developing and implementing certification? • How do state’s certification requirements compare to national personnel standards?

42. Certification Definitions • Certification – the set of regulated requirements that lead to initial preparation in ECSE • Endorsement – the set of regulated requirements that are in addition to the requirements for a specific certification (e.g., ECE, SPE) • Blended ECE and ECSE – the set of regulated requirements that lead to initial preparation in both ECE and ECSE through a single certification

43. Methodology • Web searches • Telephone interviews

44. Sample • Part B 619 coordinators • 50 states • District of Columbia • Response rate - Telephone interviews (n=37, 73%) - Certification tables (n=38, 75%)

45. State’s Participating

46. Certification Models – States with Single Certification Routes (n=26, 68%)

47. Age Ranges – States with Single Certification Routes (n=26, 68%)

48. Content Requirements– States with Single Certification Routes (n=26, 68%)

49. Certification Models – States with Multiple Certification Routes (n=12, 32%)

50. Certification Models – States with Multiple Certification Routes (Cont.)