Evidence for community action: addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland

Rosemary Geddes, Lisa Woolfson, Stephanie McNicol, Josephine Booth, Tara Shivaji, John Frank

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background
Currently there are few means in Scotland by which geographical and socioeconomic status (SES) inequalities in child development can be measured, nor the impact of early years policies and programmes on child development be assessed at regional or national level. Our aims were: to pilot an internationally validated tool, the Early Development Instrument (EDI), to assess global development in Scottish children at school entry; and to feed results back to communities allowing local stakeholders to reflect on the effectiveness of early years’ support services and programmes, and plan further interventions that address inequalities.

Methods
Phase 1 was piloted with 14 Primary 1 teachers assessing a cohort of 154 children in one education district, following which the instrument was adapted for the Scottish context (Scottish Early Development Instrument: SEDI). Phase 2 was then carried out using the SEDI, and analysing data from a larger sample of 1090 participants comprising all Primary 1 children within this school district, evaluated by 68 teachers. The mean scores in each of the five developmental domains were linked to SES based on postcode categories. Results for geographic areas were mapped using GIS mapping.

Findings
Results suggested that the SEDI displayed adequate psychometric and discriminatory properties and is appropriate for use across Scotland. Children in the lowest SES quintiles were 2-3 times more likely than children in the most affluent quintile to score low in at least one developmental domain. Even in the most affluent quintile though, 17% of children were ‘developmentally vulnerable’, suggesting that those in need cannot be identified by SES alone.

Discussion
The SEDI offers a feasible means of providing communities with a holistic overview of school readiness for targeting early years’ interventions. During the next phase local community groups will utilise SEDI findings for local decision-making around services and resources.
Proposed statements for debate:
(1) Should practitioners (from health, education, social services etc) be provided with assistance to interpret findings from scientific studies?
(2) Are there risks with providing this type of information about inequalities in child development to communities and local stakeholders?

Conference

ConferenceHolland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science
CountryNetherlands
CityHolland
Period1/04/13 → …

Fingerprint

Scotland
Social Class
Child Development
Social Work
Health Education
Psychometrics
Community Participation
Decision Making
Education

Keywords

  • community action
  • inequality
  • early development

Cite this

Geddes, R., Woolfson, L., McNicol, S., Booth, J., Shivaji, T., & Frank, J. (2013). Evidence for community action: addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland. Paper presented at Holland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science, Holland, Netherlands.
Geddes, Rosemary ; Woolfson, Lisa ; McNicol, Stephanie ; Booth, Josephine ; Shivaji, Tara ; Frank, John. / Evidence for community action : addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland. Paper presented at Holland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science, Holland, Netherlands.
@conference{24fa4da764e7450481950d4b3e618798,
title = "Evidence for community action: addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland",
abstract = "BackgroundCurrently there are few means in Scotland by which geographical and socioeconomic status (SES) inequalities in child development can be measured, nor the impact of early years policies and programmes on child development be assessed at regional or national level. Our aims were: to pilot an internationally validated tool, the Early Development Instrument (EDI), to assess global development in Scottish children at school entry; and to feed results back to communities allowing local stakeholders to reflect on the effectiveness of early years’ support services and programmes, and plan further interventions that address inequalities. MethodsPhase 1 was piloted with 14 Primary 1 teachers assessing a cohort of 154 children in one education district, following which the instrument was adapted for the Scottish context (Scottish Early Development Instrument: SEDI). Phase 2 was then carried out using the SEDI, and analysing data from a larger sample of 1090 participants comprising all Primary 1 children within this school district, evaluated by 68 teachers. The mean scores in each of the five developmental domains were linked to SES based on postcode categories. Results for geographic areas were mapped using GIS mapping. FindingsResults suggested that the SEDI displayed adequate psychometric and discriminatory properties and is appropriate for use across Scotland. Children in the lowest SES quintiles were 2-3 times more likely than children in the most affluent quintile to score low in at least one developmental domain. Even in the most affluent quintile though, 17{\%} of children were ‘developmentally vulnerable’, suggesting that those in need cannot be identified by SES alone. DiscussionThe SEDI offers a feasible means of providing communities with a holistic overview of school readiness for targeting early years’ interventions. During the next phase local community groups will utilise SEDI findings for local decision-making around services and resources. Proposed statements for debate:(1) Should practitioners (from health, education, social services etc) be provided with assistance to interpret findings from scientific studies? (2) Are there risks with providing this type of information about inequalities in child development to communities and local stakeholders?",
keywords = "community action, inequality, early development",
author = "Rosemary Geddes and Lisa Woolfson and Stephanie McNicol and Josephine Booth and Tara Shivaji and John Frank",
year = "2013",
month = "4",
day = "23",
language = "English",
note = "Holland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science ; Conference date: 01-04-2013",

}

Geddes, R, Woolfson, L, McNicol, S, Booth, J, Shivaji, T & Frank, J 2013, 'Evidence for community action: addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland' Paper presented at Holland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science, Holland, Netherlands, 1/04/13, .

Evidence for community action : addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland. / Geddes, Rosemary; Woolfson, Lisa; McNicol, Stephanie; Booth, Josephine; Shivaji, Tara; Frank, John.

2013. Paper presented at Holland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science, Holland, Netherlands.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

TY - CONF

T1 - Evidence for community action

T2 - addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland

AU - Geddes, Rosemary

AU - Woolfson, Lisa

AU - McNicol, Stephanie

AU - Booth, Josephine

AU - Shivaji, Tara

AU - Frank, John

PY - 2013/4/23

Y1 - 2013/4/23

N2 - BackgroundCurrently there are few means in Scotland by which geographical and socioeconomic status (SES) inequalities in child development can be measured, nor the impact of early years policies and programmes on child development be assessed at regional or national level. Our aims were: to pilot an internationally validated tool, the Early Development Instrument (EDI), to assess global development in Scottish children at school entry; and to feed results back to communities allowing local stakeholders to reflect on the effectiveness of early years’ support services and programmes, and plan further interventions that address inequalities. MethodsPhase 1 was piloted with 14 Primary 1 teachers assessing a cohort of 154 children in one education district, following which the instrument was adapted for the Scottish context (Scottish Early Development Instrument: SEDI). Phase 2 was then carried out using the SEDI, and analysing data from a larger sample of 1090 participants comprising all Primary 1 children within this school district, evaluated by 68 teachers. The mean scores in each of the five developmental domains were linked to SES based on postcode categories. Results for geographic areas were mapped using GIS mapping. FindingsResults suggested that the SEDI displayed adequate psychometric and discriminatory properties and is appropriate for use across Scotland. Children in the lowest SES quintiles were 2-3 times more likely than children in the most affluent quintile to score low in at least one developmental domain. Even in the most affluent quintile though, 17% of children were ‘developmentally vulnerable’, suggesting that those in need cannot be identified by SES alone. DiscussionThe SEDI offers a feasible means of providing communities with a holistic overview of school readiness for targeting early years’ interventions. During the next phase local community groups will utilise SEDI findings for local decision-making around services and resources. Proposed statements for debate:(1) Should practitioners (from health, education, social services etc) be provided with assistance to interpret findings from scientific studies? (2) Are there risks with providing this type of information about inequalities in child development to communities and local stakeholders?

AB - BackgroundCurrently there are few means in Scotland by which geographical and socioeconomic status (SES) inequalities in child development can be measured, nor the impact of early years policies and programmes on child development be assessed at regional or national level. Our aims were: to pilot an internationally validated tool, the Early Development Instrument (EDI), to assess global development in Scottish children at school entry; and to feed results back to communities allowing local stakeholders to reflect on the effectiveness of early years’ support services and programmes, and plan further interventions that address inequalities. MethodsPhase 1 was piloted with 14 Primary 1 teachers assessing a cohort of 154 children in one education district, following which the instrument was adapted for the Scottish context (Scottish Early Development Instrument: SEDI). Phase 2 was then carried out using the SEDI, and analysing data from a larger sample of 1090 participants comprising all Primary 1 children within this school district, evaluated by 68 teachers. The mean scores in each of the five developmental domains were linked to SES based on postcode categories. Results for geographic areas were mapped using GIS mapping. FindingsResults suggested that the SEDI displayed adequate psychometric and discriminatory properties and is appropriate for use across Scotland. Children in the lowest SES quintiles were 2-3 times more likely than children in the most affluent quintile to score low in at least one developmental domain. Even in the most affluent quintile though, 17% of children were ‘developmentally vulnerable’, suggesting that those in need cannot be identified by SES alone. DiscussionThe SEDI offers a feasible means of providing communities with a holistic overview of school readiness for targeting early years’ interventions. During the next phase local community groups will utilise SEDI findings for local decision-making around services and resources. Proposed statements for debate:(1) Should practitioners (from health, education, social services etc) be provided with assistance to interpret findings from scientific studies? (2) Are there risks with providing this type of information about inequalities in child development to communities and local stakeholders?

KW - community action

KW - inequality

KW - early development

UR - https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/d7ec81d8-e752-4b14-ac18-1a3933ce3169_parallelsession13.pdf

M3 - Paper

ER -

Geddes R, Woolfson L, McNicol S, Booth J, Shivaji T, Frank J. Evidence for community action: addressing inequality with the early development instrument in Scotland. 2013. Paper presented at Holland Fuse Conference: How to get practice into science, Holland, Netherlands.