Back to List

Compare
Print Share

TA Consultation and Coaching: Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale – ECERS-3

Category

Early Care and Education

Child's Age

3-4 years, 4-5 years

Participant

ECE Owner/Operator, ECE Teachers

Languages

English, Spanish

Brief Description

Technical Assistance (TA) on Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-3) supports program quality improvement efforts in early childhood (3 through 5 years of age) programs. The Third Edition of the ECERS (ECERS-3) is a major revision that introduces innovations in both the content and administration of the scale while retaining the continuity of the two principal characteristics of the ECERS, namely its comprehensive or global definition of quality and the reliance on observation as the primary source of information on which to base assessment of classroom quality. TA- Consultation and Coaching provides targeted and customized support for ECE professionals that help them to develop or strengthen their processes, knowledge, and/or implementation, while building relationships with professionals in the field. Consultation specifically facilitates the assessment and resolution of an issue-specific concern—a program-/organizational-, staff-, or child-/family-related issue. Coaching is designed to build capacity for specific professional dispositions, skills, and behaviors and is focused on goal-setting and achievement for an individual or group.

Expected Impact

  • Improved ECE quality as a result of regular supportive interactions between a TA provider and Childcare Provider

Core Components for Model Fidelity

  • Technical Assistants (TAs): ECERS-3 TAs engage in a process to build knowledge and skill of teachers using the ECERS-3 scale that consists of 35 items organized into 6 subscales:
    • Space and Furnishings
    • Personal Care Routines
    • Language and Literacy
    • Learning Activities
    • Interaction
    • Program Structure
  • Services:  TAs are encouraged to engage in the following cycle of activities with participating providers:
    • Preparation - the initial set of activities that technical assistance providers use to prepare staff to engage in planning for technical assistance. Practices include needs assessment, practitioner decision-making, visioning, readiness for change, and organizational capacity.
    • Plan - the written documentation of professional development activities and sequence that a technical assistance provider facilitates with their learner. This would include an action plan for program administration and plans to support classroom personnel. Practices include objectives and goals, intervention practices, fit assessment, theory of change, TA resources, and practitioner roles and responsibilities.
    • Implementation – the provision of technical assistance, including technical assistance provider credibility, professional development, coaching & mentoring, consultation, and provider support/feedback.
    • Evaluation - the practices used by technical assistance providers to understand what changes have been made as a result of their work. Evaluation supports understanding if goals have been achieved and if plans were implemented with fidelity. Practices include process evaluation, outcome evaluation, fidelity of use of intervention practices, fidelity of use of technical assistance practices, and lessons learned.
    • Sustainability – the plan of activities to maintain changes once formal technical assistance activities have been completed. Practices include capacity-sustaining activities, continuous quality improvement, ongoing technical assistance provider support and follow-up activities. 

Core components based on research of technical assistance models & frameworks: https://ecpcta.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2810/2019/11/Final-Combined-TA.pdf.

Languages Materials are Available in

English, Spanish

Delivery Mode

There is a strong preference for in-person consultation and coaching, but hybrid options are a reasonable response to environmental factors.

Dosage

Consultation: Dosage may vary greatly, with minimum of two contacts with professional or classroom. If engaging with a single professional/classroom on a regular basis, TAs, may transition the relationship to a coaching relationship. 

Coaching: relationship building, observation, and feedback over a series of encounters in duration of 6–12 months typically. 

Ideally, consultation evolves into coaching or be continued support after a coaching relationship and cycle has been completed.

Staffing Requirements

TAs must complete the Art and Science of TA training. Please contact Dedee Ephraim at dephraim@childcareresourcesinc.org for information on this training.  

It is strongly recommended that TAs also complete North Carolina TA Level 11, TA Endorsement, and training in Practice Based Coaching.

NCPC is currently developing requirements related to the Framework for the North Carolina Technical Assistance Practitioner Competencies. We encourage TAs to work towards mastery in these, as we determine the minimum requirements for FY 2026 and onward.

The ERS Institute is the only organization that offers training courses on the Environment Rating Scales to certification reliability, we highly encourage TAs to complete this level of training (Institute information | ERS Institute) and achieve reliability.

For implementation of the 3rd edition, NCRLAP currently offers an introductory training, with a fuller suite of trainings to come in early 2025. While we encourage ERSI training to reliability for implementation of TA for 3rd edition ERS scales, we are excited to continue to work with NCRLAP to develop minimum training requirements based on their available catalog of trainings on the 3rd edition scales.

Training for Model Fidelity

The Environment Rating Scales Institute (ERSI) offers required training courses on the Environment Rating Scales. https://www.ersi.info/index.html

Contact Information

Environment Rating Scale Institute (ERSI)

Vanessa McCullough: Training Coordinator; vmccullough.ersi@gmail.com, 919-338-2639

Cost Estimates

 Varies based on local staffing costs.

Purpose Service Code (PSC)

3104 - NC Child Care Resource and Referral Services

3125 - Quality Child Care

Program Identifier (PID)

TA Consultation and Coaching- Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale – ECERS-3

Minimal Outputs for NCPC Reporting

FY 24-25:

  • Number of child care staff receiving TA
  • Number of child care facilities receiving TA

Minimal Outcomes for NCPC Reporting

FY 24-25: 

  • Improved ECE program environment

Minimal Measures for NCPC Reporting

FY 24-25:

  •  ECERS-3

NCPC Evidence Categorization

Evidence Informed

Research Summary

Technical Assistance (TA) is an array of services (off and on site, varying in duration, products, and processes) to childcare program staff for the purpose of equipping the early childhood workforce with knowledge, skills, and attitudes to provide/improve high quality experiences and environments for young children. TA is offered through services including targeted guidance, training,1 consultation,2 coaching, planning, modeling, and support.3 Assessments and trainings supported by TA include, but are not limited to, ITERS,4 ECERS,5 FCCRS,6 CLASS,7 PAS,8 BAS,9 POEMS,10 the Pyramid Model,11 and those training and supports for Licensure,12 NAEYC Professional Development standards,13 and IECMH,14 among others. Outcomes for TA include improved access to high quality care,15 improved ECE program environment,16 improved provider and/or director knowledge,17 enhanced program quality,18 improved teacher/child interactions,19 and increase in practice of healthy behaviors,20 among others.

  1. ^  See Le et al. (2016).
  2. ^ See Denton & Hasbrouck (2009). 
  3. ^ See Scarparolo & Hammond (2018). 
  4. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), & Rentzou (2017).
  5. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Neitzel et al. (2019), & Rentzou (2017).
  6. ^ See Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), & Kelton et al. (2013).
  7. ^ See Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), & Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.).
  8. ^ See Shore et al. (2021).
  9. ^ See De Haan et al. (2020) & Masterson et al. (2019).
  10. ^ See Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), & Muela et al. (2019).
  11. ^ See Fox et al. (2021), Hemmeter et al. (2021), & Hemmeter et al. (2022).
  12. ^ See Boyd-Swan & Herbst (2018), Hegde et al. (2022), Moats (2019), & Piasta et al. (2020).
  13. ^ See National Association for the Education of Young Children, National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (2011).
  14. ^ See Morelan et al.(2022), & Safyer (2019).
  15. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019), Masterson et al. (2019).
  16. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019), & Masterson et al. (2019).
  17. ^ See Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), & Masterson et al. (2019).
  18. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019), Masterson et al. (2019), Shore et al. (2021), De Haan et al. (2020), Masterson et al. (2019), Fox et al.(2021), Hemmeter et al. (2021), Hemmeter et al. (2022), Hegde et al. (2022), Moats (2019), & Piasta et al. (2020). 
  19. ^ See Buckley et al. (2020), Neitzel et al. (2019), Rentzou (2017), Eckhardt & Egert (2020), Han et al. (2021), Kelton et al. (2013), Jamison et al. (2014), Tonge et al. (2019), Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.), Fox et al. (2021), Hemmeter et al. (2021), & Hemmeter et al. (2022).
  20. ^ See Cosco et al. (2014), LeMasters & Vandermaas-Peeler (2021), Muela et al. (2019).

Researched Population

  • Early care and education professionals

Boyd-Swan, C., & Herbst, C. M. (2018). The demand for teacher characteristics in the market for child care: evidence from a field experiment. Journal of Public Economics, 159, 183-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.02.006

Buckley, L., Martin, S., & Curtin, M. (2020). A multidisciplinary community level approach to improving quality in early years' settings. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 18(4), 433-447. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X20951239  

Case-Study Santa Clara (n.d.) Teachstone.

Cosco, N. G., Moore, R. C., & Smith, W. R. (2014). Childcare outdoor renovation as a built environment health promotion strategy: evaluating the preventing obesity by design intervention. American Journal of Health Promotion, 28(3_suppl), 32. https://doi.org/10.4278/ajhp.130430-QUAN-208

de Haan, E., Molyn, J., & Nilsson, V. O. (2020). New findings on the effectiveness of the coaching relationship: time to think differently about active ingredients? Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 72(3). https://www.doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000175

Denton, C. A., & Hasbrouck, J. (2009). A description of instructional coaching and its relationship to consultation. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 19(2), 150–150. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/10474410802463296

Early Childhood Personnel Center. (2019). Research on Technical Assistance Models & Frameworks. https://ecpcta.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2810/2019/11/Final-Combined-TA.pdf

Eckhardt, A. G., & Egert, F. (2020). Predictors for the quality of family child care: a meta-analysis. Children and Youth Services Review, 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105205

Ehri, L. C., & Flugman, B. (2018). Mentoring teachers in systematic phonics instruction: effectiveness of an intensive year-long program for kindergarten through 3rd grade teachers and their students. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 31(2), 425–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9792-7

Fox, L., Strain, P. S., & Dunlap, G. (2021). Preventing the use of preschool suspension and expulsion: implementing the pyramid model. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 65(4), 312–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988X.2021.1937026 

Han, M., Buell, M., Hallam, R., & Hooper, A. (2021). An intensive professional development in family child care: a promising approach. International Journal of Early Years Education, 29(2), 167-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2021.1914558

Hegde, A. V., Vestal, A. R., Whited, J., Lambert, R. G., Norris, A., & Taylor, H. (2022). A Collaborative Approach Towards Mentoring and Evaluation to Support Beginning NC Pre-K Teachers Within Non-Public School Settings: Early Educator Support (EES) Program – A Model of Support and Professional Development for Teachers. In B. Zugelder & M. L'Esperance (Eds.), Handbook of Research on the Educator Continuum and Development of Teachers (pp. 381-408). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-3848-0.ch019

Hemmeter, M. L., Barton, E., Fox, L., Vatland, C., Henry, G., Pham, L., Horth, K., Taylor, A., Binder, D. P., von der Embse, M., & Veguilla, M. (2022). Program-wide implementation of the pyramid model: supporting fidelity at the program and classroom levels. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 59, 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2021.10.003

Hemmeter, M. L., Fox, L., Snyder, P., Algina, J., Hardy, J. K., Bishop, C., & Veguilla, M. (2021). Corollary child outcomes from the pyramid model professional development intervention efficacy trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 54, 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.08.004

Jamison, K. R., Cabell, S. Q., LoCasale-Crouch, J., Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2014). CLASS–Infant: An Observational Measure for Assessing Teacher–Infant Interactions in Center-Based Child Care. Early Education and Development, 25(4), 553-553. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2013.822239

Kelton, R. E., Talan, T. N., & Bloom, P. J. (2013). Alternative pathways in family child care quality rating and improvement systems. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 15(2).  

Le, L. T., Anthony, B. J., Bronheim, S. M., Holland, C. M., & Perry, D. F. (2016). A technical assistance model for guiding service and systems change. The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 43(3), 380–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-014-9439-2

LeMasters, A. C., & Vandermaas-Peeler, M. (2021). Exploring outdoor play: a mixed-methods study of the quality of preschool play environments and teacher perceptions of risky play. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 23(4), 1-13. http://doi.org/10.1080/14729679.2021.1925564

Masterson, M., Abel, M., Talan, T., & Bella, J. (2019). Building on whole leadership: energizing and strengthening your early childhood program. Gryphon House. Retrieved August 4, 2022.  

Moats, L. (2019). Teaching spelling: an opportunity to unveil the logic of language. Perspectives on Language and Literacy, 45(3), 17–20.  

Morelen, D., Najm, J., Wolff, M., & Kelly, D. (2022). Taking care of the caregivers: The moderating role of reflective supervision in the relationship between COVID-19 stress and the mental and professional well-being of the IECMH workforce. Infant Mental Health Journal, 43(1), 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.21956

Muela, A., Larrea, I., Miranda, N., & Barandiaran, A. (2019). Improving the quality of preschool outdoor environments: getting children involved. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 27(3), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2019.1600808

National Association for the Education of Young Children, National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (2011). Early childhood education professional development: Training and technical assistance glossary. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. https://www.naeyc.org/glossarytraining_ta.pdf

Neitzel, J., Early, D., Sideris, J., LaForrett, D., Abel, M. B., Soli, M., Davidson, D. L., Haboush-Deloye, A., Hestenes, L. L., Jenson, D., Johnson, C., Kalas, J., Mamrak, A., Masterson, M. L., Mims, S. U., Oya, P., Philson, B., Showalter, M., Warner-Richter, M., & Kortright Wood, J. (2019). A comparative analysis of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale–Revised and Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, Third Edition. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 17(4), 408–422. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X19873015

Neuman, S. B., & Cunningham, L. (2009). The impact of professional development and coaching on early language and literacy instructional practices. American Educational Research Journal, 46(2), 532–566. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831208328088  

Piasta, S. B., Farley, K. S., Mauck, S. A., Ramirez, P. S., Schachter, R. E., O'Connell, A. A., Justice, L. M., Spear, C. F., & Weber-Mayrer, M. (2020). At-scale, state-sponsored language and literacy professional development: impacts on early childhood classroom practices and children's outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(2), 329–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000380  

Rentzou, K. (2017). Using rating scales to evaluate quality early childhood education and care: reliability issues. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 25(5), 667-681. https://www.doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2017.1356599

Safyer, M. (2019). 76.3 Infant/early childhood mental health (IECMH). Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 58(10), 109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2019.07.567

Scarparolo, G. E., & Hammond, L. S. (2018). The effect of a professional development model on early childhood educators’ direct teaching of beginning reading. Professional Development in Education, 44(4), 492–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2017.1372303 

Schachter, R. E., Gerde, H. K., & Hatton-Bowers, H. (2019). Guidelines for selecting professional development for early childhood teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(4), 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00942-8

Shore, R. A., Lambert, R. G., & Shue, P. L. (2021). An evaluation of leadership professional development for early childhood directors. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 20(4), 690–703. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2020.1734629  

Telford, R. M., Olive, L. S., & Telford, R. D. (2021). A peer coach intervention in childcare centres enhances early childhood physical activity: The Active Early Learning (AEL) cluster randomised controlled trial. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-021-01101-2  

Tonge, K. L., Jones, R. A., & Okely, A. D. (2019). Quality interactions in early childhood education and care center outdoor environments. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-018-0913-y

Visnjic Jevtic, A. & Rogulj, E. (2022), “Should we get support or just guidelines?” (self) assessment on mentoring of early childhood education students. International Journal of Mentoring and Coaching in Education, 11(3), 262-273. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMCE-03-2021-0048

Weatherby-Fell, N., Duchesne, S., & Neilsen-Hewett, C. (2019). Preparing and supporting early childhood pre-service teachers in their professional journey. Australian Educational Researcher, 46(4), 621–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-019-00340-4



Local Partnerships Currently Implementing

Local Partnerships in purple have adopted TA Consultation and Coaching: Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale – ECERS-3. Local Partnership contact information can be found here.