Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation
Volume 2, Number 1, February 2012, 621-721
Formatted: Font: 8 pt
Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 0.19"
Formatted: Font: 8 pt
Creating an Accountability System for a Deeply Constructivist
Graduate Program: The Case of Idaho State University’s Early
Childhood Blended Certificate Program
Formatted: Font: 8 pt
Formatted
Shelly Counsell
University of Memphis
Idaho State University’s (ISU) Early Childhood (EC) Blended Certificate Program embodied a constructivist
approach that shifted learning and instruction away from the traditional transmission model toward a more
active learner-centered approach to flexibly serve diverse populations within inclusive settings. ISU’s
Blended Certificate believed this approach best prepared undergraduate and graduate early childhood majors
to address and satisfy the learning and developmental needs of the full continuum of diverse populations
within natural (inclusive) settings. Completion of the EC Blended Certificate Program included an intensive
internship, case study and defense, and a comprehensive examination that were used to demonstrate EC
candidates achieved mastery that in turn, reflected upon the EC program’s overall success. Between the
school years 2008-2010, five of the eight early childhood master candidates (63%) who successfully defended
case studies and graduated from the Early Childhood Blended Certificate Master’s Program agreed to
complete an exit interview. Graduates’ written testimonials revealed whether completing the masters program
in general, and conducting a comprehensive case study, specifically: (a) improved and enhanced their
knowledge, skills, and ability to effectively design teaching practice and intervention to satisfy the learning
and developmental needs of the full range of learners (including children with disabilities) and whether (b)
graduates viewed themselves as proponents and advocates for early childhood inclusion.
Rationale for the Early Childhood
Teacher Licensure in Idaho
When well planned, intentionally implemented,
culturally relevant, challenging curricula are provided
consistently, young children clearly benefit. A high
quality curriculum for young children is more than a
list of skills to be mastered. Similarly, the importance
of professional preparation for early childhood teachers
far exceeds any list of competencies to be assessed or
college course list to complete. Instead, a well-designed
early childhood program develops the necessary
Correspondence:
professional knowledge, skills and dispositions in a
community of learners, making sense of readings,
observations, field experiences, and group projects
through their interactions with others.
Early childhood teacher preparation, as described
by the National Association for the Education of Young
Children (NAEYC) (2012) needs to provide candidates
with ongoing opportunities to (a) make connections
with prior life experiences and new leaning; (b) apply
foundational concepts from general education coursework to early childhood practice; (c) self-assess and advocate for themselves as students and as professionals;
(d) strengthen skills in written and verbal com-
Shelly Counsell, Instruction and Curriculum Leadership, College of Education, Health and Human
Sciences, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152.
Email: shelly.counsell@gmail.com
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation
721
Volume 2, Number 1, February 2012, 621-
Formatted
Creating an Accountability System
munication; (e) learn to identify and use professional
resources; and (f) make connections between college
skills and lifelong professional practice. The early
childhood education community and professional
preparation programs face new challenges especially
with regard to the increased diversity of children and
families from culturally and linguistically diverse
communities, the growing numbers of children with
disabilities, children whose development indicates
advanced or gifted needs, and other special needs.
Persistent inequities and gaps beginning in early
childhood among ethnic groups with lowsocioeconomic status have resulted in increasing
demands for publicly funded pre-kindergarten
programs. This in turn places a new emphasis on preK3 curriculum alignment; more high quality, specialized
professional development for early childhood teachers;
partnerships between states, universities, community
colleges, quality rating systems and schools; and more
highly qualified teachers in pre-kindergarten and early
primary grades who have completed higher education
degree programs specialized in early childhood
preparation (Bueno, Darling-Hammond & Gonzales,
2010; Haynes & Levin, 2009;).
The Idaho Early Children (EC) Blended Certificate
Program was developed specifically to certify and
prepare early childhood educators to work with the full
range of young children ideally within inclusive
settings. This paper provides an overview of the
graduate EC Blended Certificate Program at ISU that
specifically adopted a deeply constructivist instructtional approach used by early childhood majors to
promote and support young children’s learning and
development. An early childhood internship, case study
(and defense), and comprehensive examination were
the three key assessments used to evaluate candidates’
achievement as well as the program’s overall success.
Idaho State University’s EC Blended
Certificate Program
Idaho early childhood education and special
education communities in the 1990s protested the
inadequacy of the early childhood preparation and
certification process that would maximize the longterm educational outcomes. A consortium of Idaho
early childhood teacher educators and other early
childhood professionals successfully initiated a new
state initial licensure certificate blending the fields of
Creating an Accountability System
63
early child-hood education and early childhood special
education. The EC Blended Certificate (birth through
grade three) was added to Idaho’s certification process
and approved by the State in 2004. Idaho currently
requires the completion of the EC Blended Certificate
for school personnel working in school district
preschool programs serving children with disabilities.
The EC Blended Certificate was based on the
efficacy of interdisciplinary, blended programs that
emphasize collaboration and team based approaches
(Miller & Stayton, 1998). Well-orchestrated interdisciplinary teacher preparation is equally beneficial to
all children. Among the positive characteristics of such
teacher preparation programs are interdisciplinary team
involvement in program development; curriculum
foundations reflection of the Division of Early
Childhood (DEC) (Sandall, Hemmeter, Smith, &
McLean, (2005), NAEYC (Bredekamp & Copple,
(1997), and state standards; and specific field
experiences focusing on the full range of development.
A committee that consisted of EC faculty, EC
community professionals, and one special education
faculty member designed the EC program assessment
plan and the three program options. Prior to 2012,
Idaho State University EC candidates could select from
three initial certification program options. Majors could
choose to complete the Idaho Blended Early Childhood
Education/Early
Childhood
Special
Education
certificate coursework at either the undergraduate or
graduate level. Education majors could also pursue
Idaho’s standard K-8 certificate, which resulted in
specialty preparation for working with young children
in kindergarten and primary grades. The EC assessment
design was strongly influenced by the College of
Education’s core assessment design. The EC program
committee worked to develop an authentic assessment
program, capitalizing on existing assessments that were
compatible with the EC standards.
The EC blended certificate program at ISU
integrated state and national policy as well as
professional positions advanced by NAEYC and Idaho
state standards needed to prepare educators to work
with children in preschool and primary classroom
settings. The early childhood program extended and
elaborated on the College of Education’s conceptual
framework as it related to young children and their
families specifically according to ten core program
standards required by the state standards: (a)
knowledge of subject matter, (b) knowledge of human
development and learning, (c) modifying instruction for
Formatted: Right: 0.04"
62
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation64
Educator Preparation
individual needs, (d) multiple instructional strategies,
(e) classroom motivation and management skills, (f)
communication skills, (g) instructional planning skills,
(h) assessment of child learning, (i) professional
commitment and responsibility, and (j) building
partnerships with colleagues, parents, and community
members.
All exiting undergraduate and graduate EC majors
with a blended certificate received instruction and
experiences related to the necessary knowledge, skills,
and expertise beyond the professional education core to
successfully adapt and satisfy the learning and
developmental needs of the full range of young
children (birth to third grade). To an equal extent, this
program prepared teacher candidates to meet federal
IDEA Part C regulations (Sandall et al., 2005) by
providing early intervention services for infants and
toddlers in natural environments to the maximum
extent appropriate.
Early Childhood Program’s Mission
The EC program’s stated mission at ISU was “to
prepare early childhood educators to understand and
believe that educational opportunities and experiences
must be structured and designed in ways that
accommodate and support young children’s unique
developmental characteristics and learning needs.” To
achieve the stated mission, the EC program sought to
provide early childhood graduates with content and
field experiences that reflected current research
evidence regarding developmentally appropriate
practice, constructivism, inclusion, disabilities, cultural
and linguistic diversity, and brain research. The
program was designed to develop graduate candidates
with the essential knowledge, abilities, and dispositions
needed to fully educate and support the rights of all
children (regardless of ability) to participate actively in
natural early childhood settings.
Current research, public policy recommendations
and standards, and social trends at the time of the
program’s inception were used to inform the content
and learner outcomes for the early childhood program
at Idaho State University. ISU’s early childhood
education program adopted constructivist philosophical
and theoretical principles of learning and instruction
that empowered learners (both young children and
college students) to actively and critically construct
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in
their own knowledge. This meant that teacher
candidates must be prepared with the capability to
establish and facilitate learning conditions that
empower children to construct and transform their own
knowledge and understanding as they learn about, and
make sense of, their world. This kind of teacher
preparation was exemplified throughout the early
childhood coursework and practicum experiences.
Early Childhood
Coursework
Constructivist
Graduate
The same principles of inquiry and constructivist
practice afforded young children were likewise central
in the training and preparation of undergraduate and
graduate early childhood (EC) majors at ISU. Preparing
EC majors to plan, create, and facilitate learning
activities and contexts that support young children’s
active construction of knowledge meant that the EC
coursework and practicum experiences must likewise
provide opportunities for EC majors to actively engage
in personal inquiry, dialectic discourse, and
autonomous reflection on authentic (meaningful and
purposeful) learning experiences as well.
According to Brooks and Brooks (1999),
autonomy, inquiry, and dialogue are essential elements
of constructivist teaching. In the content area of
science, for example, the National Research Council
(2007) insists that the long-term goal of teacher
preparation and professional development is to develop
educators who understand science meaningfully not
only as a body of knowledge but also from the learner’s
perspective (as purposeful work with problems to
figure out). In the case of science education,
professional development asserts, “teachers cannot be
expected to design and implement science learning
opportunities and experimentation for learners if they
have no firsthand experience engaging in scientific
activities, investigations, or experimentation as science
learners” (Counsell, 2011). Just as competent science
educators must begin as competent science learners,
competent constructivist educators must begin as
competent constructivist learners. Through the
constructivist teaching-learning process developed at
ISU, all constructivist learners participating in the EC
blended Blended Ccertificate Pprogram (young
children enrolled at ISU’s Early Childhood Partnership
School and ISU undergraduate and graduate EC
Creating an Accountability System
majors) were empowered with opportunities to
critically examine information needed to construct
understanding and meanings according to personal
points of view in light of their peers’ multiple
perspectives within the dynamic social learning
community. EC candidates’ firsthand experiences with
constructing their own knowledge and beliefs as
learners during the program form the essential
foundation EC candidates will later draw upon, and
refer to, as constructivist educators.
Reading assignments were carefully selected to
generate insights and stimulate questions regarding
various topics, issues, and themes surrounding early
childhood education and intervention. A significant
portion of every class meeting was dedicated to
dynamic dialogue initiated by student- and instructorinitiated questions, concerns, and dilemmas. The
majority of graduate students were employed in
preschool special education settings. Hence,
coursework and field experiences were developed and
individualized to enhance students’ background
experiences and educational strengths and areas of
improvement.
Early Childhood Constructivist
Practicum Experiences
Graduate
The EC Blended Certificate graduate program at
ISU was heavily field-based during the graduate
teaching internship. EC majors (graduate and
undergraduate) completed in-depth authentic field
experiences in ISU’s Early Childhood Partnership
School (ECPS) in conjunction with nearly every early
childhood course. The ECPS was the brainchild and
direct result of hard work, dedication, and commitment
by Dr. Sally Peña, the EC program coordinator and
ECPS school director. Dr. Peña recognized and
understood that preparing EC undergraduate and
graduate majors as deeply constructivist educators
required a demonstration constructivist laboratory
school where candidates could observe and actively
engage in constructivist practice. The ECPS provided
undergraduate EC majors with the opportunity to
observe and work with the same young children and
constructivist teachers (who were graduates of the
program) over extended time in a consistent setting. As
candidates advanced through the coursework, they
assumed increasingly complex responsibility for
curricular and program planning and instruction.
The program embraced a constructivist theory base
Creating an Accountability System
65
that was central to the candidates’ coursework and field
experiences. Learning experiences and discussions
were designed to support candidates’ construction of
understanding and depth over time. Throughout the
duration of their course assignments and field
experiences, EC majors were encouraged to (a)
abandon the transmission approach to teaching and
learning in favor of a constructivist approach; (b)
promote young children’s construction of knowledge
within social learning contexts; (c) design and
implement learner-centered curriculum including playoriented and functional routine-based interventions and
activities; (d) identify, structure, and scaffold learning
and instruction according to children’s individual zone
of proximal development (ZPD); (e) utilize authentic
assessments (including the Ounce Scale and Early
Childhood Teacher Work Sample) to guide and
facilitate instruction and monitor children’s progress;
(f) promote and support young children’s access to
natural (inclusive) settings; (g) participate in
collaboration and team-based approaches; and (h)
incorporate current brain research and evidence-based
practice to support instruction.
Housed in the College of Education, the school
operated under the auspices of the EC program and
Pocatello School District #25. It included a school
district-sponsored combination grade K-2 classroom
and five classrooms for young children (birth to
kindergarten-entry age). EC candidates also completed
field experiences in community programs, including the
Health and Welfare Infant Toddler Program, School
District #25 classrooms at Lincoln Early Intervention
Center, and other surrounding elementary schools and
districts in southeast Idaho.
Idaho has only 19 NAEYC accredited early
childhood programs statewide. The 5 birth-5 age
classroom programs at the EC Partnership School
represented 1 of the 19 EC programs nationally
accredited by the NAEYC in Idaho. Idaho’s child-toadult staff ratios for infants in child care are double
those recommended by NAEYC, and group size is not
currently legislated. The National Association for Child
Care Resource and Referral Association (2008) rates
Idaho at the bottom (52nd class size) among states,
including Washington, DC, and the Department of
Defense. In light of Idaho’s current status in early
childhood education, it is difficult to discern or quantify
the availability of quality early childhood programs for
young children and families. There are few clear
indicators of quality even among licensed child care
Formatted: Right: 0.04"
62
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation66
Educator Preparation
centers. The ECPS provided an exemplary early
childhood constructivist experience for both children
living in the Pocatello area and EC majors at ISU.
Idaho is a sparsely populated state with an
underdeveloped economy and limited tax base. The
limited tax base has resulted in direct consequences for
Idaho’s public education system, ranking 50th in perpupil expenditure, with only Puerto Rico and Utah
spending less (U.S. Department of Education, 2007).
Although Idaho ranks 3rd highest in the nation for the
percentage of children under the age of 18 years, it has
noNO state-funded preschool or infant-toddler
programs for children without disabilities. Idaho has
the second lowest income eligibility level for child care
subsidies in the country (National Center for Children
in Poverty, 2009). In Idaho, an estimated 64,473
children (15.8%) live in poverty (U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 2008). Yet
according to the NIEER’sthe State of Preschool 2009
report, 93% of 3-year-olds and 85% of 4-year-olds in
Idaho have noNO preschool experience (National
Institute for Early Education Research, 2009).
The ECPS served a diverse population of children
including children of low-income college students,
children with disabilities, and children of international
students, many of whom were English Language
Learners. Many ISU students would not have been able
to attend college and their children would not have the
opportunity to participate in an EC program without the
ECPS.
EC Blended Certificate Program
Assessment Plan
The EC Bblended Ccertificate Pprogram at Idaho
State was developed explicitly as an EC constructivist
teacher preparation program. Education candidates who
enrolled in the EC Bblended Ccertificate master’s
Graduate Pprogram at ISU were largely raised in Idaho
and had attended Idaho public schools. Idaho public
schools are traditional in practice and this meant that
none of the EC candidates at ISU had experienced
constructivist practice as learners in public education.
Many of the EC master’s students were already
working in some capacity within the field of early
childhood education. Some candidates had an
elementary or special education certification but lacked
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in
the early childhood and intervention coursework
needed to complete the EC blended certification.
Candidates were most interested in improving and
sharpening their knowledge and skills to better serve
the full range of young children in early childhood
programs. Very few candidates were interested in
pursuing a doctorate at a later date. To better serve the
most pressing need to increase, improve, and enhance
early childhood educators’ ability to satisfy the learning
and developmental needs of the full range of learners,
the early childhoodEC graduate Bblended Ccertificate
Graduate Pprogram at ISU embraced an all inclusive
approach that included an internship, case study paper
and defense, and a comprehensive examination.
Since the EC Blended Certificate Program at ISU
was conceptualized as a deeply constructivist program,
all readings, coursework, and field experiences
embraced the approach to help candidates construct
their understanding and application of constructivist
practice as constructivist learners, and later, to support
and advance young children’s learning and
development as constructivist educators. The EC
graduate students’ completion of the EC graduate
coursework, drafting a Statement of Informed Beliefs,
and interning in an in-depth field experience either in
an infant/toddler setting, preschool, or primary grade
classroom collectively prepared and supported
candidate’s ability to work with children representing
the full range of development and diversity (including
socio-economic status, language, culture, race, and
disability).
The early childhood program’s assessment design
was strongly influenced by Idaho State’s College of
Education’s core assessment design. Multiple
assessments were used to demonstrate whether
candidates met all standards at either exemplary or
proficient levels, suggesting mastery of knowledge and
skills needed for successful teaching and working with
young children and families.
The Idaho State Board of Education requires that
all candidates recommended for State of Idaho teaching
certificates meet qualifying scores on the Praxis II
Subject Area Tests in their teaching major. These are
achievement tests that assess subject matter knowledge
and principles of teaching and learning. All EC
graduate candidates at Idaho State had to complete the
0021 Education of Young Children and the 0690
Preschool/Early
Childhood
Special
Education
assessments. The Statement of Informed Beliefs, the
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Not Highlight
Creating an Accountability System
internship portfolio, the case study and defense, and
comprehensive examination likewise served as
important assessments used to determine both learner
and program outcomes and whether educational goals
were satisfied for certification.
Statement of Informed Beliefs
Every EC candidate completed a philosophy
portfolio. The portfolio contained an Informed Belief
Statement in which each candidate documented his or
her emerging understanding and beliefs about teaching
and learning in early childhood programs (birth to
grade 3). As EC graduate students progressed through
the M.Ed Blended Certificate Program, they updated
and revised their individual statements in a spiraling
fashion to reflect the ongoing insights students gained
as they continued to learn new material and expanded
upon their conceptual knowledge and understanding.
EC candidates explained their personal philosophical
and theoretical beliefs and implications of early
childhood teaching and learning regarding how
students envision the basic goal of education, role of
the child, the role of adults, locus of control,
recommended teaching/learning techniques, approach
to guidance, an analysis of the potential positive and
negative aspects to their approach, and an evaluation of
related issues. Candidates supported and documented
their Informed Beliefs Statement with a short literature
review that should be evident as a guiding framework
throughout the student’s internship portfolio.
Early Childhood Internship Portfolio
The early childhood internship in the Blended
Certificate Program was designed as an in-depth field
experience to support candidate learning and served as
a formal documentation of graduate students’ outcome
performance as they planned, prepared, organized, and
implemented early constructivist practice and
intervention as well as monitored and managed student
learning for a small group of children. Candidates
completed internships based on their prior experiences
and individual plans of study. A minimum 150 hours of
practicum experience in an internship site allowed
candidates ample opportunity to demonstrate the
required competencies.
As a formative assessment, the internship
documented
candidates’
ability
to
develop
constructivist instructional practice and intervention
Creating an Accountability System
67
plans that (a) explained the learning context; (b)
identified targeted learning goals and procedures; (c)
included an elaborate, in-depth plan with video
documentation; (d) portfolio assessment of a group of
children (using a work sampling system); and (e)
established partnerships with parents, colleagues, and
ancillary personnel. An internship that took place in an
infant or toddler setting also required the completion of
a daily routine matrix used to embed Individual Family
Service Plan (IFSP) goals into daily caregiving
routines. Candidates were assessed using a performance
rubric. Since most EC graduate students had completed
a bachelor’s degree in either elementary or special
education, graduate candidates were challenged to
rethink and expand upon their former understanding of
early learning, instruction, and developmentally
appropriate practice from an educational constructivist
viewpoint.
Early Childhood Case Study
Graduate college programs generally envision the
Master’s thesis as practice for the PhD thesis. PhDlevel research is too hard to embark upon without some
kind of formal preparation. The essential requirement
of a Master’s thesis is that the candidate demonstrates
full mastery and understanding in their field of study.
The outcome does not require the candidate to
contribute to, or expand upon, their field of study or
that it result in a publication.
The early childhood case study was an extensive,
elaborate investigation and examination of one young
child with disabilities that included the child’s medical
and developmental history, family background,
assessments,
diagnosis,
placement,
IFSP
or
Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals and
objectives, planned instruction and intervention,
monitored progress, and final recommendations.
Through preparation and presentation of the case study,
candidates demonstrated knowledge, abilities, and
dispositions in all areas of early childhood education
and intervention. The frame of time covered by each
case study varied according to each candidate’s access
to, and professional work with, the targeted child and
family. In some instances, the candidate arranged to
work with an identified child in conjunction with the
internship. In other situations, the candidate was the
child’s teacher, developmental specialist, or early
interventionist and worked with the child and family on
a regular basis.
Formatted: Right: 0.04"
62
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation68
Educator Preparation
The preparation, presentation, and formal defense
of the case study served as an important formative
assessment evaluating both the EC candidate and EC
program itself. The case study and defense
demonstrated the candidate’s ability to satisfy college
and state standards required as essential knowledge,
abilities, and dispositions early childhood educators
must master to be considered highly qualified education
professionals. Each candidate’s demonstrated mastery
was likewise indicative of the EC Blended Certificate
Program’s ability to successfully prepare competent EC
educators.
Early Childhood Comprehensive Examination
During the final semester of graduate work,
candidates completed a comprehensive examination
that broadly covers all coursework and program
standards. Parts of the comprehensive examination are
were tailored especially to the candidate, while other
parts of the examination are were included on every
examination. At a minimum, each comprehensive
examination covereds systems for providing early
intervention services, family systems and coordination,
assessment, children’s play and learning, activity-based
intervention. The candidates’ committee chair and a
second early childhood committee member graded
comprehensive examinations. A satisfactory performance was required to exit the program. Satisfactory
performance wasis defined by consensus between the
committee chair and a second committee member.
Early Childhood Blended Certificate
Accountability Data
Between the school years 2008-2010, five of the
eight early childhood master candidates (63%) who
successfully defended case studies and graduated from
the Early Childhood Blended Certificate Master’s
Program agreed to complete an exit survey. This survey
included 27 open-ended questions intended to reveal
graduates’ views, beliefs, and experiences regarding
their experience completing the EC Blended Certificate
Graduate Program in general and their views and
commitment to inclusion in early childhood settings
specifically. Participants reported spending 1-2 hours to
complete the questionnaire electronically.
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in
Participants’ Educational
Teaching Backgrounds
Preparation
and
The diverse educational backgrounds of the five
early childhood graduates who agreed to were
representative of the diverse educational and teaching
backgrounds of early childhood candidates in the
master’s program at ISU. Participants reported the
following BA degrees: one elementary/early childhood
emphasis (earned at Arizona State University), one
health education/psychology minor (earned at ISU),
one human development and family studies degree
(earned at the University of Utah), and two elementary
education degrees (one earned at ISU and the other
earned at Brigham Young University).
Four of the exit surveys were completed during the
fall semester 2010 and one exit survey was completed
in the spring 2011. Years of teaching and service in the
field of early childhood ranged from 5 to 14 years. All
graduate participants were employed in either the
private or public sector in Idaho. Work assignments
included one first grade teacher, one developmental
public preschool teacher, one public developmental
preschool/ kindergarten teacher, a Head Start children
services specialist, and a private family services
behavior analyst.
Inclusion Beliefs and Experiences
Early childhood legislation identifies the need for
early intervention services to be “provided to the
maximum extent appropriate in natural environments”
(IDEA 1997; Individuals with Disabilities Education
Improvement Act, 2004). Natural environments include
home and community settings that provide the
opportunity to participate in naturally occurring
activities for all young children, with and without
disabilities, to the greatest extent possible. As such,
natural environments refer to settings that are “natural
or normal for child’s age peers who have no
disabilities” [US Code of Federal Regulations
303.12(4)(b)].
Early childhood educators should embrace their
commitment to, and expectation that, all children can
learn, and participate in, all learning activities. “An
accessible curriculum,” according to The Division of
Early Childhood (DEC), is one in which “all aspects of
Comment [SC1]: Is space needed between
these lines?
Creating an Accountability System
the curriculum (i.e., the environment, the goals, the
content, the instructional methods and interactions, the
assessments, and the toys/materials) invite active
participation of all children, regardless of disability or
special needs” (2007, p. 4). Universal Design for
Learning (UDL) places accessibility for all students at
the forefront of curriculum design. UDL, as described
by Rose and Meyer (2002), “…underscores the need
for inherently flexible, customizable content,
assignments, and activities” (p. 18).
Inclusion beliefs prior to the graduate program.
In an effort to discern whether M.Ed. blended
certificate graduates’ attitudes and beliefs changed as a
result of the blended certificate program, participants
were asked to describe their beliefs about inclusion
prior to completing the blended certificate program.
Based on participant responses, three of the five
participants reported that they believed children with
disabilities should be included within the classroom,
although one participant admitted to not having a clear
vision about how to accomplish it while another
participant was equally open to the notion that children
may also need to be pulled out frequently.
One participant insisted that inclusion never
occurred to her as either an issue or a practice, simply
because young children with disabilities were
automatically included in the general education
program due to the limited resources and options
available in her small, rural district. Only one
participant expressed fear toward having children with
special needs in her classroom. She openly admitted, “I
didn’t know what to expect from children with
disabilities or how to teach them.”
Transformed beliefs about inclusion. When
asked whether participants’ views toward inclusion
changed after completing the Blended Certificate
Program, only two participants admitted to significantly
transforming their views toward inclusion. The other
three participants indicated that they had always
supported the idea of inclusion for young children with
disabilities. On the other hand, all five participants
indicated that the EC Blended Certificate Program
increased their overall competence as early childhood
educators, better preparing them to successfully meet
the diverse learning needs of all children within
inclusive settings. Three participants suggested
specifically that varying instruction, strategies, and
materials to meet individual learning and
Creating an Accountability System
69
developmental needs are practices that all highly
qualified teachers should automatically implement on a
daily basis. These participants concluded that inclusive
settings simply broaden the range of learning rates and
needs experienced within the increasingly diverse
learning community and the subsequent intervention
approaches and strategies needed.
Inclusion rewards and obstacles. In regard to
noting the most significant rewards or benefits of
inclusive settings, all participants commented that the
greatest reward for each of them was the satisfaction
for each of them was witnessing the learning and
developmental gains made by children with disabilities.
Additionally, one participant commented on the open
acceptance of children with disabilities by peers
without disabilities, creating positive social-emotional
outcomes for children with and without disabilities.
Another participant commented specifically on the
increased empowerment experienced by parents who
have children with disabilities. Changing attitudes of
other teachers in one participant’s building was another
reward that she attributed to her efforts to promote
inclusion at her school. She noted, “They saw that
inclusion IS possible and that the accommodations that
were made did not disrupt the entire class.”
When asked what are the greatest obstacles to
achieving successful inclusion, three participants
overwhelmingly commented on limited resources and
supports. One participant added that previously held
beliefs toward inclusion that serve to maintain the
status quo was the greatest obstacle suggesting,
“change is hard.” Only one participant indicated that
she had not encountered any obstacles, insisting, “The
program is set up as an inclusive classroom and that is
the only option.” Hence, it is not a matter of choice
because at her school, there are no other options.
Case Study Rationale and Benefits
In an effort to explore graduates’ views concerning
the opportunity to complete a case study or a thesis
paper, participants’ responses were unanimous. All five
participants described completing a case study during
the EC Blended Certificate Program as a meaningful,
authentic experience with real life applications and real
world implications for young children, families, and
programs. As one participant summarized the
difference, she explained, “A thesis would have
provided an in-depth study of one topic, but the case
Formatted: Right: 0.04"
62
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation70
Educator Preparation
study provided an in-depth, real life study of the many
challenges a child with special needs faces.” However,
another participant felt that the case study based
exclusively on one child is a disadvantage in
comparison to a thesis topic that could have broader
implications. One participant actually completed a
thesis paper for his first master’s degree prior to the
blended certificate and insisted he did not learn as
much from his thesis experience because it lacked real
life application, unlike the case study experience.
Just as participants reported that the firsthand
experiences working with a child and family as they
completed the case study paper was this approach’s
greatest advantage, the participants likewise identified
these experiences as the greatest reward in completing
their case study experience. Two participants noted that
their work with families and service providers during
their case studies and providing important information
to parents was particularly rewarding to them. Only one
participant commented that her discussions with
colleagues who completed master’s degrees at other
education institutions revealed her workload to be
much greater and more intensive than what her
colleagues experienced elsewhere. She insisted,
“However, after looking back at what I accomplished
by completing a case study, I feel I am a better person
for doing it. I feel that I truly earned my degree because
of the work that I did” in contrast to the colleagues she
knew in other EC master’s programs.
What Idaho Legislators Need to Know
Finally, participants were asked to identify topics
and themes related to early childhood education and
inclusion that they would most want their state
legislators and representatives to understand and
appreciate. While two participants reiterated the
importance of providing adequate funding to support
quality early childhood education and inclusive
settings, all five participants agreed that quality early
childhood education and intervention in diverse settings
is critical and equally beneficial to all children and
families. Two participants further insisted that by
making diversity a way of life, inclusion is no longer
such a “big deal.” In fact, there will no longer be a need
to consciously think about and make the point to live
inclusively, because as one participant stated it simply,
“that is just the way it is” - and should be – when we
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in
grant community membership to everyone within
diverse settings.
Conclusion
Based on the responses provided by the early
childhood M.Ed. graduates who completed the exit
survey, all respondents valued and appreciated the
authentic, real life application of the case study
experience as a critical part of their EC graduate degree
program at Idaho State University. The participants
overwhelmingly viewed the EC Blended Certificate
Program in general, and their case study experiences
specifically, as essential to their achieved competence
as early childhood educators. All graduate participants
insisted that the EC Blended Certificate Program
provided the necessary preparation and training needed
to successfully provide high quality early childhood
experiences for the full range of young children
(including children with disabilities) and their families
within diverse, EC natural environments in public and
private settings. Only one participant considered the
case study for focus on one child exclusively as a
possible limitation, focusing the candidate’s research
and intervention on one child’s diagnosis and learning
needs in contrast to multiple needs and diagnoses. In
contrast, another participant wished all of her general
education colleagues at her elementary school were
required to complete the EC Blended Certificate
Program.
All participants professed their commitment to
inclusion., Eeach participant recognized the learning
and developmental benefits that result in natural
environments for all learners as long as adequate
instruction and intervention are provided. All
participants likewise reported that their completion of
the Early Childhood Blended Certificate Program
increased their knowledge, skills, and abilities needed
to successfully meet the learning and developmental
needs of all learners within inclusive settings. As one
participant summed it up, “Blended is the way to go
regardless of the setting someone wants to work in –
life changes and having the blended information will
only help.”
The Early Childhood Blended Certificate Program
at Idaho State University sought to prepare EC majors
to use deeply constructivist practice, theory,
Creating an Accountability System
knowledge, and skills and ability needed to later
implement high quality early childhood education
experiences for the full range of learners within
inclusive settings. The EC internship, case study and
defense, and comprehensive examination were the key
assessments used to demonstrate each candidate’s
mastery of the targeted knowledge and skills as well as
the program’s overall success in preparing EC majors
to work with the full range of young children. By doing
so, the EC Blended Certificate Program prepared a
generation of early childhood educators who would
advocate for all children’s access to high quality
educational programs within natural environments—
not as a privilege but as a right—as the best known way
to further ensure demographic living and social justice
for all young children and families.
This article represents a final tribute to the hard
work and dedication of the EC faculty, staff,
community professionals, and students committed to
improving the lives of the full range of young children
and families in Southeast Idaho. Due to the current
economic downturn and the resulting state-level budget
cuts nationwide, the Dean in the College of Education
at Idaho State University decided to the cut the undergraduate and graduate EC Blended Certificate Program.
The EC program was on thea smaller programs (based
on student enrollment) in the College of Education with
just two full-time faculty. The program is in a two-year
phase out and the last remaining undergraduate and
graduate candidates are scheduled to complete their EC
coursework in the Spring 2013. The ECPS is likewise
in the process of being phased out and is slated to be
replaced with multiple K-1 classrooms as an “overflow
facility” largely operated by the local school district.
The fate of the Idaho State University high quality
early childhood preparation program for educators is a
lesson to be learned nationwide. Clearly, it is not
enough for policy makers, legislators, business leaders,
and community members to mandate and require that
higher education institutions provide training programs
to adequately prepare educators to work with the full
range of young children and families. All decision
makers including university and local school district
administrators must understand, value, and embrace the
vision of clinically-based education teacher education
preparation programs. Quality teacher preparation
programs likewise require allocation of necessary funds
and resources needed to support its mission, guarantee
its maximum implementation, and long-term success.
Without long-term commitment, investment, and
Creating an Accountability System
71
support from all stakeholders at all levels, dreams will
continue to be lost, and possibilities will go unrealized,
for our must vulnerable citizens – our nation’s children.
References
Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood
programs. Washington DC: National Association for
the Education of Young Children.
Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1999). The case
for constructivist classrooms. Alexandra, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Bueno, M., Darling-Hammond, L., & Gonzales, D.
(2010). A matter of degrees: Preparing teaches for the
pre-K classrooms. PEW Center on the States,
Education Reform Series.
Counsell, S. (2011). Becoming “science experimentors” – Tenets of quality professional development
and how they can reinvent early science learning
experiences. Science and Children, 49(2), 52-56.
Division of Early Childhood. (2007). Promoting
positive outcomes for children with disabilities:
Recommendations for curriculum, assessment, and
program evaluation. Missoula, MT: Author.
Haynes, M., & Levin, J. (2009). Promoting quality
in pre-K-grade 3 classrooms: Findings and results
from NASBE’s early childhood education network.
Arlington, VA: National Association of State Boards of
Education (NASBE) Issues in Brief.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
of 1997, PL 105-17, 20 U.S.C. §1400.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, PL 108-446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400.
Miller, P. S., & Stayton, V. D. (1998). Blended
interdisciplinary teacher preparation in early education
and intervention: A national study. Topics in Early
Childhood Special Education, 18(1), 49-58.
NAEYC (2012). 2012 NAEYC standards for initial
& advanced early childhood professional preparation
programs: For use by the associate, baccalaureate and
graduate degree programs. Washington, DC: National
Association for the Education of Young Children
Professional Preparation Standards.
National Association for Child Care Resource and
Referral Association (2008). NACCRRA’s ranking of
state child care center standards and oversight.
Retrieved October 18, 2009 from
Formatted: Right: 0.04"
62
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in Educator Preparation72
Educator Preparation
53http://www.naccrraa.org/policy/
docs/scorecard/
Scorecared.pdf
National Center for Children on Poverty 2009 p
65National Center for Children in Poverty (2009).
Idaho Early Childhood Profile. Downloaded October 7
from: http://www.nccp.org/profiles/ID_profile_16.html
National Institute of Early Education Research
(2009). The State of Preschool 2009 State Preschool
Yearbook. Rutgers: Graduate School of Education.
National Research Council (2007). Taking science
to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K8. In A. Duschl, H.A. Schweingruber, and A.W.
Shouse (Eds.). Center for Education, Division of
Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education.
Washington, DC: The National Academic Press.
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every
student in the Digital Age: Universal design for
learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Sandall, S., Hemmeter, L. S., Smith, B. J., &
McLean, M. E. (2005). DEC recommended practices:
A comprehensive guide for practical application.
Missoula, MT: Division for Early Childhood.
State of Preschool Report 2009 p 65
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the
Census (2008). Estimates of the resident population by
selected age groups for the United States and Puerto
Rico: July 1, 2008, American Survey, Table B17001.
U.S. Department of Commerce: Bureau of the Census.
U.S. Department of Education (2007). Children’s
budget report: A detailed analysis of spending on lowincome children’s education. (ED426145) Washington,
DC: U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from
www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/ recordDetail
Author
Shelly Counsell is Assistant Professor of Early
Childhood Education at the University of Memphis.
Her research interests include early physical science,
high-stakes testing, disability studies, diversity, social
justice, and critical theory.
Journal of Assessment and Accountability in
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.25"
Formatted: Not Highlight
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Formatted: Default Paragraph Font, Font:
11 pt
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Comment [SC2]: This is the reference for
the State of Preschool 2009