Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Program Quality topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
EEC panel debates use of CLASS observations as part of a broader program‑quality toolkit
Summary
Staff told the Data Advisory Commission they plan to use CLASS observations to measure baseline classroom interactions and monitor change, while commissioners and providers urged using multiple measures and avoiding punitive uses of CLASS.
State early‑education staff told the Department of Early Education and Care Data Advisory Commission that CLASS classroom observations will be used to establish baseline measures of adult‑child interactions and to monitor change over time, but commissioners and provider representatives urged the agency to use multiple tools and guard against punitive uses of observation data.
Ashley White, research director at EEC, and Jocelyn (program quality lead) framed the agency’s approach as a three‑part strategy built on educator credentialing, strong licensing standards and continuous quality improvement supports. "We're building out a system that both defines the skills that we would want to see, but also provides accessible pathways for educators to grow over time," Ashley White said.
Staff described CLASS as a commonly used observational measure focused on emotional support, classroom organization and instructional support. Sarah Volkena, who leads parts of EEC’s quality work, said the agency plans to pilot CLASS at greater scale among providers participating in CCFA contracts and to share CLASS data back with participating educators to support continuous improvement. She also said EEC is partnering on a multiyear Boston University TCPRP research grant and is planning a midyear provider survey (June–July) to gather broader input.
Several commission members raised reservations. Michelle warned that "CLASS is a tool that can ... have a stick attached," arguing observational scores can be used punitively and harm educators if tied to sanctions. Others said CLASS is imperfect for out‑of‑school‑time programs and stressed the need for alternate or complementary tools. Staff acknowledged the limitations and described the agency’s intent to use CLASS as one tool among several: "It could potentially just be a starting place and not the only and exclusive tool that we're using to to understand program quality," Sarah Volkena said.
Panelists also discussed workforce credentialing and access. One participant cautioned that college‑based credential pathways often require FAFSA and documentation that can exclude immigrant educators; staff replied the credential system will include multiple pathways (including CDA recognition and agency training) and that they are working to fund community‑college access.
Adrian Murphy of EEC’s data analytics team highlighted existing administrative sources — LEAD for licensing data, CC3 applications, program surveys and CLASS observations — and noted a recent LEAD change: a new data element programs complete when they close that captures closure reasons to inform program stability analysis.
Commissioners asked staff to continue exploring alternative tools, to think about how to present enrollment as a percentage of licensed capacity, and to keep the commission engaged with pilot results and the planned midyear surveys. Staff said the work will continue and that future meetings will include deeper dives into metric development and public reporting.
