ITERS Observation and Reflection
ITERS Observation and Reflection
The objective of the activity is to observe a toddler in a classroom for a maximum of 10 hours in order to complete the Infant/Toddler Environment Rating Scale or ITERS. In this activity a male toddler with permission from the parent was asked to stay in a classroom for a minimum of 1 hour with 15 minutes interval giving a total of 10 hours as needed for the observation period. The standard element observed in the learning environment encompasses a goal of ensuring that the toddler can move freely in the classroom area in order for the child to explore the environment. The child was not restricted in a stationary position or on a high chair. The goal of the activity is to observe the personal care routine subdomain in which the focus is safety practices. The action plan for the activity includes preparing a health and safety checklist that was posted in the classroom. The checklist encompasses items such as emergency procedures during accident, emergency contact numbers, climbing areas are clear of obstacles, etc. The toddler assistant will need to accomplish the checklist every hour to determine if there were hazards identified while the toddler is exploring the classroom.
Another aspect of the observation under the personal care routine subscale includes nap/rest, which determines if appropriate furnishing was provided to secure the toddler while at rest such as a crib or cots/mats. The meals and snacks routine was also observed for sanitation whether hand washing was performed, appropriate tools was used such as utensils, highchair and table whether they where sanitized. Toileting was also observed where the diapering procedure was determined whether proper disposal, sanitation, sanitation, and use of appropriate cleaning agent were utilized. Other areas in the health and safety practices was also observed such as proper hand washing before play or after touching objects that are perceived as untidy while the safety practices observed presence of safety hazards.
All of the aforementioned areas were observed for the 10-hour period and the subscale under the personal care routine returned with an average score of 20. The score was relatively high, which means that the described areas in the personal care routine matched the desired outcome in the checklist provided as guideline for the toddler assistant (Halle et al., 2010). The findings from the observation revealed that the more the care providers are following the safety guidelines; the toddler becomes more aware of the practices that encompass safety. For example, in the meal and snack routine, the assistant engaged the toddler in hand washing activity for the morning snack. At first, the toddler was confused about the water in the basin and does not know what it is for. However, when the toddler care assistant introduced the toddler to hand washing, it appears that the child has learned its purpose. As a result, in the following mealtime, the toddler is already aware that the first step before eating to wash hands, which became apparent in the succeeding meal periods.
One of the important aspects observed under the personal care routine subdomain is the ability of the toddler to learn the basics of greeting and departing (Bisceglia et al., 2009). In the performed observation, the parents of the toddler was advised to drop the child outside of the classroom and the toddler care assistant ask the child to say “bye, see you later” to the parents. At first, it appears that this area of learning is very difficult particularly for the toddler considering that at the toddler age, the child is still very attached to the parents and departing is not common. However, in between the periodic interval, the child is able to greet the parents again and the same process of departing was exercised in the succeeding hours. It was observed that the more the child practice the basics of greetings and departing, they become more accustomed to the routines of being away from the parents for a short period. This entailed easier departing when the parents had to go away for another hour.
Based on the findings and the performed observations while accomplishing the ITERS rating scale, the personal routine subscale still has room for improvements in order to make long lasting changes in the childcare practices (Harms, 2010). For instance, the items in personal routine subscale contain four levels of quality indicators such as inadequate, minimal, good, and excellent. However, the quality is determined by what was observed in the classroom and plans for improvements were mainly based on the observation findings. In this regard, optimum decision for improvement can be more effective if the scale requirements were scrutinized trough comparison of the observation reports and not relying on one observation alone. In some cases, the reported observation indicates that the classroom practices did not meet the ERS requirements or came back with a score of 5 or lower. The details projected by the single observation will become the basis of improvement plans. However, certain factors had to be considered why the ITERS returned with a very low score. Factors such as not having enough materials in the classroom can affect the ITERS outcome.
However, this can be addressed by conducting a cross reference of the reported observations prior to making improvement plans. For example, if one observation as indicated a very low score, a secondary, and last observation attempt should be made. The next step is to consolidate the average scores of the three observations to determine patterns of consistencies and discrepancies between the report details. Another important areas to improve in ITERS personal care routine subscale are the lack of variation in the health and safety practices items. There is a perceived limitation on the observable practices indicated in the rating scale guidelines. The real-world health and safety practices particularly for a toddler should not be limited to whether the child does the hand washing or practiced their greetings and departure. When talking about safety, it should also include both the external environment as a factor.
References
Bisceglia, R., Perlman, M., Schaack, D., & Jenkins, J. (2009). Examining the psychometric properties of the Infant–Toddler Environment Rating Scale-Revised Edition in a high-stakes context. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 24(2), 121-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.02.001
Halle, T., Whittaker, J., & Anderson, R. (2010). Quality in Early Childhood Care and Education Settings: A Compendium of Measures. Washington, D.C.: Administration for Children and Families. Retrieved from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/opre/complete_compendium_full.pdf
Harms, T. (2010). making long-lasting changes with the Environment Rating Scales. Exchange Magazine, 12-16. Retrieved from http://www.elcmdm.org/Knowledge%20Center/reports/ERS-%20Making%20Lasting%20Changes%20-%20Dr%20Harms%20-%20Jan%202010.pdf
