Scaling high quality: An implementation study of Boston’s Universal Pre-K expansion to community-based programs

IF 3.1 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Christina Weiland , Paola Guerrero Rosada , Anne Taylor , Louisa Penfold , Rachel Kushner , Catherine Snow , Yuzhu Xia , Meghan McCormick
{"title":"Scaling high quality: An implementation study of Boston’s Universal Pre-K expansion to community-based programs","authors":"Christina Weiland ,&nbsp;Paola Guerrero Rosada ,&nbsp;Anne Taylor ,&nbsp;Louisa Penfold ,&nbsp;Rachel Kushner ,&nbsp;Catherine Snow ,&nbsp;Yuzhu Xia ,&nbsp;Meghan McCormick","doi":"10.1016/j.ecresq.2025.08.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Domain-specific, evidence-based curricula and job-embedded coaching have been called a “best bet” for improving instructional quality in public prekindergarten programs. However, implementation science studies that offer lessons for scaling this approach, including identifying potential stumbling blocks and how to address new demands on teachers’ working conditions, are relatively scarce. We addressed this gap in the literature via a mixed-methods descriptive study of the first three years of Boston’s Universal Pre-K (UPK) expansion into classrooms in community-based organizations (CBOs; from 2019 to 2022). Teachers in 28 classrooms in 22 CBOs were trained to implement evidence-based language, literacy, and math-focused curricula and received a comprehensive set of professional development supports including job-embedded coaching. We leveraged classroom observations, teacher surveys, teacher interviews, and coach interviews to describe implementation levels, barriers, and facilitators. Findings show teachers were generally positive about the supports they received and implemented the curriculum with fidelity. However, some dimensions of instructional quality declined in year 3. We identified four specific barriers (fitting all components in, inconsistent teacher planning time, teacher dispositions toward math, and COVID-19 disruptions) and two facilitators (strong professional development and strong teacher-coach relationships) that offer actionable lessons for Boston and beyond.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48348,"journal":{"name":"Early Childhood Research Quarterly","volume":"74 ","pages":"Pages 11-25"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Early Childhood Research Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885200625000766","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Domain-specific, evidence-based curricula and job-embedded coaching have been called a “best bet” for improving instructional quality in public prekindergarten programs. However, implementation science studies that offer lessons for scaling this approach, including identifying potential stumbling blocks and how to address new demands on teachers’ working conditions, are relatively scarce. We addressed this gap in the literature via a mixed-methods descriptive study of the first three years of Boston’s Universal Pre-K (UPK) expansion into classrooms in community-based organizations (CBOs; from 2019 to 2022). Teachers in 28 classrooms in 22 CBOs were trained to implement evidence-based language, literacy, and math-focused curricula and received a comprehensive set of professional development supports including job-embedded coaching. We leveraged classroom observations, teacher surveys, teacher interviews, and coach interviews to describe implementation levels, barriers, and facilitators. Findings show teachers were generally positive about the supports they received and implemented the curriculum with fidelity. However, some dimensions of instructional quality declined in year 3. We identified four specific barriers (fitting all components in, inconsistent teacher planning time, teacher dispositions toward math, and COVID-19 disruptions) and two facilitators (strong professional development and strong teacher-coach relationships) that offer actionable lessons for Boston and beyond.
扩展高质量:波士顿全民学前教育扩展到社区项目的实施研究
针对特定领域、以证据为基础的课程和嵌入工作的辅导被称为提高公立学前教育项目教学质量的“最佳选择”。然而,为扩大这种方法提供经验教训的实施科学研究相对较少,这些研究包括确定潜在的障碍以及如何解决对教师工作条件的新要求。我们通过一项混合方法的描述性研究来解决文献中的这一差距,该研究是对波士顿全民学前教育(UPK)扩展到社区组织(cbo;2019年至2022年)。对22个cbo的28个教室的教师进行了培训,以实施以证据为基础的语言、识字和数学课程,并接受了包括工作嵌入式指导在内的一套全面的专业发展支持。我们利用课堂观察、教师调查、教师访谈和教练访谈来描述实施水平、障碍和促进因素。调查结果显示,教师普遍对他们得到的支持持积极态度,并忠实地实施了课程。然而,教学质量的某些维度在第三年有所下降。我们确定了四个具体的障碍(将所有组件纳入,不一致的教师规划时间,教师对数学的倾向以及COVID-19的中断)和两个促进因素(强大的专业发展和强大的教师-教练关系),为波士顿及其他地区提供了可操作的课程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
8.10%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: For over twenty years, Early Childhood Research Quarterly (ECRQ) has influenced the field of early childhood education and development through the publication of empirical research that meets the highest standards of scholarly and practical significance. ECRQ publishes predominantly empirical research (quantitative or qualitative methods) on issues of interest to early childhood development, theory, and educational practice (Birth through 8 years of age). The journal also occasionally publishes practitioner and/or policy perspectives, book reviews, and significant reviews of research. As an applied journal, we are interested in work that has social, policy, and educational relevance and implications and work that strengthens links between research and practice.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信