As school divisions begin this unprecedented school year, we understand that teachers are taxed with many new responsibilities. Teachers are having to learn and follow many new protocols and, in some cases, reinvent how they usually teach. These, and several other factors, create a great deal of extra work and can elevate feelings of stress. Understandably, division leaders are looking for ways to reduce their teacher's workload and alleviate their stress. As a result, some divisions may be considering one or perhaps both of the following scenarios for their division’s upcoming EYE-TA assessments:
- Extending the length of the assessment window, that is, extending the number of weeks teachers will have to collect EYE-TA data.
- Pushing forward the assessment start date to a date later than is typical for their division.
This document aims to provide division leaders with the knowledge to support an informed decision about their upcoming EYE-TA implementation. While recommendations are provided, the EYE team will pivot to meet each division's unique needs. Our team is ready to support whatever assessment start date and whatever length of assessment window you determine will best meet your teachers’ and children's needs.
Extending the length of the assessment window
Typically, an EYE- TA assessment window of three weeks is recommended. However, given these extraordinary circumstances, we understand that some divisions may wish to extend their assessment window so that their teachers have more time to collect data. Our recommendation is for divisions to keep their assessment window open for three weeks and up to a maximum of six weeks.
Divisions who choose to leave their assessment windows open longer than six weeks may find considerable variation among schools when they finish collecting their EYE-TA data.
For example, consider a scenario where a division chooses to keep their assessment window open for ten weeks. Teachers in School A finish collecting data in week 2 while teachers in School B do not finish collecting data until week 10.
Suppose the results suggest that School A has more children who are vulnerable compared with School B. The differences between the schools in their results could be partially attributed to School B children having an additional eight weeks to develop their skills. If the EYE-TA data were used to allocate educational assistants' resources, for example, School A may appear to have more vulnerable children than School B because of its earlier completion date.
Should a division wish to extend its assessment window by more than six weeks, it would be prudent to engage our EYE team in a discussion to ensure the division is accurately interpreting its EYE-TA results.
Pushing Forward the assessment start date
Typically, school divisions start their EYE-TA at the same time every year, give or take a few weeks. However, we understand that some divisions may be considering pushing their typical assessment start date to later in the school year. We would support this decision and suggest that a division who wishes to push its assessment start date forward a few weeks, or perhaps even a month, will not need to re-evaluate the EYE-TA interpretation of its year-over-year (i.e., trend) results.
A purpose of the EYE-TA trend data is to provide divisions with information about changes in their children’s vulnerability as they enter and leave kindergarten. Divisions who wish to push their assessment start date forward more than two months should consider the implications for interpreting their EYE-TA trend data
For example, consider a division that pushes their assessment start date forward by three months – from a typical assessment start date of October 15 to a new assessment start date of January 15. As you know, the children assessed in January will have had more time to mature and develop skills compared to children who were assessed in October. Therefore, the EYE-TA trend data may 'look like' there were significantly lower vulnerability levels for that year. However, this would not be a valid interpretation of their EYE-TA trend data.
Should a division wish to push its assessment start date forward by more than two months, we would like the division leaders to engage our EYE team to ensure an accurate interpretation of their EYE-TA trend data.
This document covers a few uses to consider when altering your assessment start date or length of the assessment window. Some of the EYE-TA data uses are not affected substantially by extending the length of the assessment window or delaying the assessment start date. The use of the EYE-TA to guide teachers' planning of classroom activities or increasing teachers' repertoire of high-yield teaching strategies are two examples. Thus, we encourage divisions to carefully consider the ways they use their EYE-TA results. It would be wise for divisions to reflect on the possible impact should they choose to alter their typical EYE-TA implementation timelines significantly.
Please do not hesitate to reach out to our EYE-TA team to discuss further any questions you have about the information in this document or anything EYE related.