You are on page 1of 8

Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

The Environmental Rating Scale (Early Childhood)

The ERS, or Environmental Rating Scale, is a tool developed by Thelma Harms that is

used to assess the basic standards for safety and well - being that an early childhood program

provides based on the established environment. In the Early Childhood Environment Rating

Scale, third edition, it says that the two major characteristics of the ECERS (Early Childhood

Environment Rating Scale) is to identify the “global definition of quality and the reliance on

observation as the primary source of information on which to base assessment of classroom

quality” (Harms, Clifford, &Cryer, 2015, p.1). It is broken up into six subscales such as Learning

Activities and Interactions, that have indicators used to guide the observation (Harms et al.,

2015).

Observation Process

For our observation, we observed room 213 in the Clarke Building of Brigham Young

University – Idaho Campus. Our observations took place between October 17th and October

29th. The observations were done during the morning class between the hours of 8:45 AM –

10:15 AM. Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu coordinated to both observe separately for the

majority of the scoring and then later compile the findings.

Tiffany spent two hours and fifteen minutes in the booth (an hour on two separate

occasions, and fifteen minutes on another occasion). One hour was done on 24th, another hour

was done on the 26th and fifteen minutes was done on the 29th.

Ashley spent two and a half hours’ in the booth. (an hour on two separate occasions,

and thirty minutes on another occasion). One hour was done on the 17 th, another hour was

done on the 24th, and thirty minutes was done on the 26th.
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

After making observations, they compiled their findings and examined the room set up

during a meeting of forty-five minutes on October 29th. During this meeting, they discussed

which of the final numbers to use and how to improve the environment of their room based off

of the results.

Summary of Area Scores

The final average of the scores gave the program an overall rating of 5.68 out of 7. For

Space and Furnishings, the score was a 5.14. Personal Care Routines was a 7. Language and

Literacy was a 6.2. Learning activities was a 4.3. Interaction was a 7. Program Structure was a

6.67.

ECERS - October 2018


7

0
Space and Personal Care Language and Learning Interaction Program Overall Score
Furnishings Routines Literacy Activities Structure

Strengths

Personal Care Routines and Interactions were strengths that both had a score of 7. For

Personal Care, the children washed their hands when they first arrived in the classroom, after
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

they played with any form of dirt or sand inside, or outside, after they used the restroom, after

they wiped their noses, and before snack.

For snack, the children were allowed to choose what and when they wanted to eat, as

snack was offered for about 50 minutes throughout the day. The teacher had a rag that the

children could use to clean up any messes and the teacher encouraged them to pass the serving

dishes to each other. No children were observed to have accidents and many children used the

restroom with the assistance of a teacher.

Interactions was rated so highly because the staff appeared involved with the children.

When a child was upset, a teacher assisted in calming the child. The staff were alert, and

focused on the children in the room. When a child became upset about sharing her toys, a

teacher talked her through finding a solution. The staff did not become upset when they saw

misbehavior and were never observed to raise their voice or use severe discipline.

Program Structure was also a strength with a score of a 6.67. Routines were followed

throughout the day and teachers gave a verbal and visual (showed the number of minutes on

their fingers) countdown to clean –up. The staff played music during the transitions to cue the

children. Teachers gave instructions to the children during clean-up to help the children stay

engaged. The reason this area did not have a score of 7, was that the teachers did not show

room awareness (when a teacher scans the classroom). This was only observed during the

transitions. Most staff only seemed to be aware of the children who were right in front of them.

Language and Literacy, with a score of 6.2 was also a strength. The staff helped children

expand their vocabulary and explained the meaning of certain words. In large group, a teacher

introduced the word “harvesting” and what it meant to harvest apples. The staff showed
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

interest and enjoyment in the books. Children and staff were often found together in the

reading area during the observation. The reason this area did not score a full 7, was because

the teacher did not use the books informally with the children and the books were not used to

help answer any questions or provide information that the children were curious about.

Areas of Improvement

A number of individual items had a score of 4 or less.

Space and Furnishings:

Indoor space was given a score of 4. The only indicator that was marked down was 5.3

because ventilation could not be controlled. There were no fans and no windows or doors

which could be opened for air flow.

Furnishings for care, play, and learning was given a 4. Children have to share lockers

because there are only 18 of them, and the class has 20 children.

Space for privacy was given a 3. There was not an area that was intentionally designed

for 1 -2 children to have privacy. Although the book area was used as a private area for more

children, the teachers did not stop interruptions made in the quiet area. There were children

often playing with other things and making noise in this area. It was not intentionally made for

privacy.

Child related display also scored a 4. For indicators 5.2 and 7.1, no displays were put up

that related to the current topics or interests in the classroom. For 7.4 there were no three –

dimensional pieces of artwork displayed in the classroom.

Learning Activities:
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

Becoming familiar with print was a 4. No visible print was seen during the duration of

the observation. There also were not any pictures with print to explain the pictures. (5.1 and

7.2).

Art received a 4. Because not all categories had a material represented for 5.1. There

were no materials that could be used for 3D artwork, or tools.

Music and movement scored a 1. The classroom did not have any music/movement

experiences (1.1). There was nothing musical except for when a teacher would play a song for a

transition and that was only for 1 -2 minutes.

Nature and Science also scored a 2. 15 nature/science materials were not clearly

accessible (5.1) and staff were not initiating these kind of activities (7.1).

Understanding written numbers was given a score of 1. There were no numbers visible

in the classroom at any point during the observation (1.1 and 1.2).

Promoting acceptance and diversity was the last low score, and it scored a 3. There were

not enough examples of positive diversity, especially because there were no pictures in the

classroom (5.2).

ECERS IMPROVEMENT PLAN


October 28th,
2018
Lab 1
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

Assessment Subscale Specific Indicators Explanation Plan for


Area and Specific Within This Item Improvement
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

Item in Need of
Improvement
Learning Activities: No music and/or There was no music A music area will be
Music and movement or movement set up near the
Instruments experiences for activities provided dramatic play area. A
children throughout free play. small shelf will have
There were times noise makers,
At least 3 music during transition, or tambourines, and
materials accessible opening and closing symbols. This will
to the children for at circle where a song provide at least 3
least 25 minutes of was played, but no music materials, and
the observation musical instruments allow for music and
were out. movement
experiences for the
children. To
document progress
with this goal we will
take pictures and
videos of the children
using the
instruments.
Learning Activities: At least 5 No nature/science We will make a
Nature/ Science developmentally materials were clearly defined
appropriate available except for nature/science
nature/science the pet fish that stays interest center. This
materials from at in our classroom. will be where
least 2 categories are children can see
accessible for at least living things, like
25 minutes of the plants, natural things,
observation like bugs and insects
in plastic, and rocks.
At least 15 Tools like magnify
nature/science glasses and tweezers
materials, some from will also be set out.
each of the 5 listed To keep children’s
categories, are interest, we will swap
accessible in a clearly out materials every
defined couple of weeks. To
nature/science document the
interest center. progress of this goal
we will take pictures
of the set up, and the
children using the
materials. We will
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

also use materials


that the children find
in their outdoor play.

Learning Activities: No print numbers in There were no print The numbers 1 -10
Understanding display materials are numbers visible at will be printed and
written numbers accompanied by any time of the laminated, and hung
pictures that show observations. No at the child’s level so
what the number pictures to show that they can see the
means. what the number print. Pictures below
means either. the numbers will help
No obvious print the children to know
numbers found in the what the number
classroom toys or means and allow
materials accessible them to use 1 to 1
to children. correspondence. To
document the
progress of this goal,
we will take pictures
of the print we put
into the room.
Ashley Sawyer and Tiffany Wu

References

Harms, T., Clifford, R. M., & Cryer, D. (2015). Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, third

edition (ECERS-3). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

You might also like