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
2

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.
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
3
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.”






4
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.



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.

5
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.
The ladder may eventually be aligned with these systems.
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:





6
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.
5 Levels of Responsibility
Levels:
Leadership
Supervisory
Independent
Novice
Beginner/Entry
Each Level Includes:
Responsibilities
Education
Experience
In-service Training
Continuing Education
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.
7
Continuing Education: Professional development that advances
an educator’s professional growth with the intent of helping the
educator move up the ladder.
Career Ladder Comparison with Regulations
Career Ladder
Levels of Responsibility
Leadership Level
Supervisory Level
Independent Level
Director I or II needs
less education and
experience
Lead teacher needs
less education and
experience
Novice Level
Teacher needs less
education and
experience
Same as Teacher
Beginning/Entry Level
Same as Assistant

8
GCC
EEC Regulations
(Minimum qualifications)
FCC
SACC
Licensees need less
education and
experience
Licensee for 10
children needs less
education and
experience
Licensee for 8 children
needs less education
Program adm. needs
less education and
experience
Site coordinator needs
less education and
experience
Group leader needs
less education and
experience
Licensee for 6 children Assistant leader needs
needs less experience less education and
experience
Regular asst. needs
Same as Assistant
less experience
leader
Education and experience in the Career Ladder exceed the
minimum requirements in the Regulations.
Career Ladder Comparison with QRIS
Career Ladder
Levels of
Responsibility
Leadership Level
Program adm. needs
more education but
less experience
Requires more
education and
experience
Supervisory Level
Program staff
need more education
and experience
Similar education for
non-BA but less
experience
Requires more
education but less
experience
Similar education and
experience for non-BA
Program staff
need more education
and experience
Program staff
need more education
and experience
Requires more
education and
experience
Requires more
education and
experience
Independent
Level
Novice Level
Beginning/Entry
Level



9
QRIS Standards (Level 2)
Workforce Qualifications and Professional Development
Center-based
FCC
ASOST

QRIS Comments
Program adm. needs
more education but
less experience
GCC: QRIS requires an
administrator whose duties
are primarily supervisory to
have a BA.
Site coordinator
GCC: QRIS requires that 50%
needs more education of staff to have BA degrees.
and experience
GCC: QRIS requires all
program staff to have HS and
3 credits in ECE and 50% of
staff to have BA degrees.
N/A- positions below
GCC/FCC: QRIS requires all
site coordinator not
educators to have a HS
addressed in QRIS
diploma or GED.
GCC/FCC: QRIS requires all
educators to have a HS
diploma or GED.
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.
Career Ladder: Beginning (Entry) Level
10
Career Ladder: Novice Level
11
Career Ladder: Independent Level
12
Career Ladder: Supervisory Level
13
Career Ladder: Leadership Level
14
Career Ladder Survey

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.

Respondents were asked if they:
 Strongly Disagree
 Disagree
 Agree
 Strongly Agree
with the Responsibilities, Education, Experience, In-service training,
& Continuing Education required for each of the ladder’s 5 levels.

They were also asked their position and program type, education,
and how they would use the ladder.
● 439 individuals responded to the survey
● 96% (301) of respondents indicated general
approval of the Ladder
15
Career Ladder Survey—Comments
Respondents also were given the opportunity to comment on
each level of the ladder.
16

16% - 20% commented on the levels

In general, respondents who selected “strongly disagree” or
“disagree” did not comment

Comments provided at the Beginning and Novice levels
focused on the requirement of GED or High School Diploma

Comments provided at the Supervisory and Leaderships
levels focused more on the requirements for in-service and
continuing education requirements
Career Ladder Survey—Comments

“I appreciate the effort that went into creating the Career Ladder…I
love that Early Childhood Educators are including Family Child Care
in this effort…”
17

“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…”

“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 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.”

“Another layer to make running a program more time-consuming.”
Career Ladder Survey—Questions
The most commonly asked questions were:
18

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
How Survey Respondents Would Use the Career Ladder
Respondents were also asked how they would use the
Career Ladder:
19

56% - To identify where I am on the ladder

51% - To plan my own professional development

50% - To plan professional development for my staff

47% - To coach/mentor other educators

15% - Would not use the Career Ladder
How EEC Would Use the Career Ladder
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:





20
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.
Professional Qualifications Registry
Update
21
Pending
8,720
23%
77%
Active
29,060
22
Professional Development: Workforce
23
Source: PQ Registry Data as of 4/14/2011.
Number of Licensed Providers/Programs with Completed
Registry Entries
9000
8,540
8000
7000
6000
5000
# of Providers
4000
# of Providers with
Registry entries
3000
*Not all the staff in
these program are
in the PQ Registry.
3,106
2,955
1,870
2000
1000
0
Family Child Care
24
60%
35%
Large Group and School Age
Source: PQ Registry Data as of 3/31/2011.
Source: PQ Registry Data as of 5/3/2011.
Race and Ethnicity
Ethnicity
Refused
11%
Hispanic
14%
American Indian/
Alaskan Native
0%
Asian/ Pacific Islander
3%
Black/ African
American
7%
Native Hawaiian/
Other Pacific
0%
White
65%
Source: PQ Registry Data as of 5/3/2011.
27
Source: PQ Registry Data as of 5/3/2011.
PQ Registry: Increasing Participation and Next Steps
EEC’s regulations* require all educators to register annually.
Increasing participation:
 Continuing to make the Registry easier to use;
 Providing more technical assistance through licensing and EPS
Partnerships;
 Requiring that educators be registered to participate in professional
development;
 Requiring that providers participating in initiatives like QRIS and UPK
have their staff registered;
 Citing programs that haven’t complied with this requirement.
Next Steps:
 Reminder emails to educators and providers and including reminders
in routine paper correspondence;
 Developing a renewal process for educators already in the Registry;
 Making it easier for licensors and EPS grantees to verify registration;
 Simplifying the way salary data is reported;
 Generating regular reports about the early education and OST
workforce.
28
*606 CMR 7.09(4)
Career Ladder Survey Results
Data Appendix
29
Career Ladder Survey Results
Survey Respondents Location
30%
Region 1: Western MA
27%
Region 2: Central MA
25%
Region 3: Northeast MA
20%
19%
17%
15%
13%
Region 4: Metro MA
Region 5: Southeast MA
13%
12%
Region 6: Metro Boston
10%
5%
0%
Responses
N = 167
30
Career Ladder Survey Results
Survey Respondents Primary Role
Director
FCC Educator
40%
Other*
36%
35%
Lead Teacher
Teacher
30%
Site Coordinator
25%
Assistant Teacher
FCC System Employee
20%
Group Leader
16% 16%
15%
10%
Higher Education Employee
13%
Community Agency Employee
8%
Government Employee
5%
4%
2%
FCC Assistant
1%
1%
0%
1%
1%
1% 0.3%0.3%
Assistant Group Leader
N = 319
31
*Other positions specified included: educational coordinator, Education/Disabilities Manager, Director/Lead
Teacher, 0-5 Supervisory, Assistant Director, Project Facilitator, Health Manager/Enrollment Specialist, etc.
Career Ladder Survey Comments
32
Career Ladder Survey Results
Survey Respondents Current Program Type
Family Child Care
60%
Center-based
Program (I/T, PreK,
SA)
After-School/ Out of
School Time Program
52%
50%
Public Preschool
40%
Early Intervention
30%
FCC System
20%
Community Agency
17%
11%
9%
10%
3%
0%
33
Government Agency
4%
1%
Institution of Higher
Education
2%
1%
1%
N = 319
*Other program types specified included: Coordinated Community and Family Engagement Grantee, Head
Start, Early Head Start, multi-type agency, etc.
Career Ladder: Beginning (Entry) Level
Beginning (Entry) Level Survey Results
Continuing Education is
Appropriate
10%
In-Service Training is
Appropriate
10%
87%
89%
Education and Experience Are
Appropriate
16%
Responsibilities Fit My
Program
17%
83%
81%
9%
Responsibilities Are Realistic
91%
0%
20%
40%
Strongly Disagree / Disagree
60%
80%
Agree / Strongly Agree
N = 439
34
100%
*74 respondents added comments on this level.
Career Ladder: Novice Level
Novice Level Survey Results
15%
Continuing Education is
Appropriate
83%
9%
In-Service Training is
Appropriate
89%
13%
Education and Experience
Are Appropriate
87%
15%
Responsibilities Fit My
Program
82%
8%
Responsibilities Are
Realistic
92%
0%
50%
Strongly Disagree / Disagree
100%
Agree / Strongly Agree
N = 375
35
*79 respondents added comments on this level
Career Ladder: Independent Level
Independent Level Survey Results
19%
Continuing Education is
Appropriate
80%
10%
In-Service Training is
Appropriate
89%
17%
Education and Experience
Are Appropriate
82%
12%
Responsibilities Fit My
Program
86%
10%
Responsibilities Are Realistic
90%
0%
50%
Strongly Disagree / Disagree
100%
Agree / Strongly Agree
N = 353
36
*73 respondents added comments on this level
Survey Results: Supervisory Level
Supervisory Level Survey Results
19%
Continuing Education is
Appropriate
81%
10%
In-Service Training is
Appropriate
90%
18%
Education and Experience
Are Appropriate
80%
13%
Responsibilities Fit My
Program
85%
7%
Responsibilities Are
Realistic
93%
0%
20%
40%
Strongly Disagree / Disagree
60%
80%
Agree / Strongly Agree
N = 348
37
*77 respondents added comments on this level
100%
Survey Results : Leadership Level
Leadership Level Survey Results
12%
Continuing Education is
Appropriate
87%
9%
In-Service Training is
Appropriate
90%
16%
Education and Experience
Are Appropriate
84%
15%
Responsibilities Fit My
Program
82%
8%
Responsibilities Are Realistic
92%
0%
20%
40%
Strongly Disagree / Disagree
60%
80%
Agree / Strongly Agree
N = 343
38
*54 respondents added comments on this level
100%
How Survey Respondents Would Use Ladder
60%
56%
51%
50%
50%
47%
40%
30%
20%
15%
10%
0%
To plan my own
professional
development
39
To plan
To identify where To coach/ mentor I would not use
professional
I am on the
other educators the Career Ladder
development for
ladder
my staff
N = 320