[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-585618-105":59,"doc-detail-585618-en":134},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":127,"head_meta":129,"extra_data":131,"updated_unix":133},105,"en","a-window-on-early-childhood-administrative-practices-2010-2021","A Window on Early Childhood Administrative Practices: 2010-2021","","A Window on Early Childhood Administrative Practices: 2010-2021 analyzes administrative practices in center-based early care and education across a large national sample. Using the Program Administration Scale (PAS), the study examines leadership and management indicators from PAS assessments collected during assessor certification for 693 programs across 31 states and the District of Columbia (2010–2021 context). Results show average PAS item scores with strengths concentrated in family support, facilities management, risk management, professional development, and technology use, while many programs fall below minimal quality in compensation, benefits, communications, evaluation, and strategic planning.",{"@graph":69,"@context":126},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/a-window-on-early-childhood-administrative-practices-2010-2021/585618/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/a-window-on-early-childhood-administrative-practices-2010-2021/585618.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Alex Sinclair","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":19},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118,122],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What tool does the study use to measure administrative practices?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It uses the Program Administration Scale (PAS), which measures leadership and management practices through items clustered in subscales.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How were the PAS assessments collected for this analysis?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"PAS assessments were conducted by certified PAS assessors, following reliability testing and two assessments within three months, with reviewed results by PAS national anchors.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What areas are identified as program strengths?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Strengths include staff professional development support by administrators, well-managed facilities routines and space, certain risk management practices, strong family support and involvement, and effective technology resources and use.",{"name":123,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":124},"Which areas need improvement according to the findings?",{"text":125,"@type":113},"Many programs score below minimal quality in compensation and benefits, internal communications, program evaluation, strategic planning, and across the staff qualification roles within that subscale.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":128,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":130,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":132,"site_id":62},585618,1793128546,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":135},{"doc_id":132,"user_id":136,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":19,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":19,"language":143,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":144,"faqs":145,"seo_title":146,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":147,"read_time":52,"preview_page_count":4},1099523882182,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","SUMMER  \n2021  \nResearch Notes  \nA Window on Early Childhood Administrative Practices: 2010-2021  \nOver the past decade, researchers, policy makers, and practitioners have increasingly come to recognize the importance of quality in early care and education. Along with this recognition is compelling evidence that sound administrative practices help ensure highquality learning opportunities for young children. 1, 2, 3 Since its first publication in 2004, the Program Administration Scale: Measuring Early Childhood Leadership and Management (PAS) has been used across the country to reliably measure and improve center-based leadership and management practices. In 2011, the second edition of the PAS was published and included updated national norms and refinements reflecting best practices in early childhood program administration.4 Data collected by the McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership since 2011 are examined here to provide the most current picture of the administrative practices of a large, national sample of center-based programs.  \nSAMPLE AND METHODOLOGY  \nThe PAS includes 25 items clustered in 10 subscales, which measure both leadership and management practices of center-based early care and education programs.4 Each item is scored on a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 representing inadequate quality, 3 representing minimal quality, 5 representing good quality, and 7 representing excellent quality in administrative practices. Items are comprised of 2 to 5 indicator strands. Each indicator is aligned with the 1-7 Likert scale and rated as either Yes or No based on the program’s ability to meet the indicator criteria.  \nThe PAS assessments included in this analysis were conducted by certified PAS assessors. To become certified, PAS assessors must first achieve reliability (a score of at least 86%) on a test conducted after four days of training on the tool. Next, they must conduct two PAS assessments within three months of reliability training. The completed assessments are reviewed by PAS national anchors for consistency, accuracy, and completeness. The data for this study consisted of approved PAS assessments collected during the certification process from 693 center-based early care and education programs representing 31 states and the District of Columbia.  \nFINDINGS  \nThe average PAS item score for this sample was calculated at 3.40, with a standard deviation of 1.12. Mean individual items' scores ranged from 1.61 (Benefits) to 6.44 (Community Outreach). Overall, the results of the data analysis suggest that most programs do not have well-developed administrative practices in place to  \nsupport program sustainability and long-term quality. Table 1 provides the means and standard deviations for all item scores as well as the average PAS item score.As noted in the table, the majority of programs scored between the good and excellentrange on Family Support and Involvement and Technological Resources, but most scored below minimal quality for Compensation, Benefits, Internal Communications, Program Evaluation, Strategic Planning, as well as all four roles contained within the Staff Qualifications subscale (Administrator, LeadTeacher, Teacher, and AssistantTeacher/Aide).  \nOUTCOMES  \nWHAT ARE THE STRENGTHS OF PROGRAMS?  \nTo better explore aggregated strengths, data were examined at the indicator level toseein which areas programs demonstrated practices at the level of quality consistent with administrative effectiveness and program sustainability. Specifically, we looked at indicators where at least 75% of the programs received a positive (Yes) rating at the 5 or good level of quality. Out of 316 total PAS indicators, only 16 in the sample met this criterion. Program strengths are summarized below:  \n􀂃 Administrators understand the importance of professional development (PD) and support their staff by allocating time and resources for PD. Fully 87% of programs provided on-site or paid for off-site staff development for all","cbCaiiC5tL6uaxxS","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiiC5tL6uaxxS","pdf",127064,"English","# Sample and Methodology\n## Findings\n## Outcomes\n### Strengths of Programs\n### Areas in Need of Improvement","[{\"question\":\"What tool does the study use to measure administrative practices?\",\"answer\":\"It uses the Program Administration Scale (PAS), which measures leadership and management practices through items clustered in subscales.\"},{\"question\":\"How were the PAS assessments collected for this analysis?\",\"answer\":\"PAS assessments were conducted by certified PAS assessors, following reliability testing and two assessments within three months, with reviewed results by PAS national anchors.\"},{\"question\":\"What areas are identified as program strengths?\",\"answer\":\"Strengths include staff professional development support by administrators, well-managed facilities routines and space, certain risk management practices, strong family support and involvement, and effective technology resources and use.\"},{\"question\":\"Which areas need improvement according to the findings?\",\"answer\":\"Many programs score below minimal quality in compensation and benefits, internal communications, program evaluation, strategic planning, and across the staff qualification roles within that subscale.\"}]","A Window on Early Childhood Administrative Practices: 2010-2021 | PDF",1792055297]