Up Front and Center: reflecting on leadership approaches to current cultural issues and topics

This document may be printed, photocopied, and disseminated freely with attribution. All content is the property of the McCormick Center for Early Childhood Leadership.

Living in times of complex divisions demands that early childhood education (ECE) leaders have a clear foundation of strong principles and best practices for the children, families, and staff in our programs. Current political and cultural clashes inevitably filter into our programs – whether we like it or not. As citizens, as neighbors, and as families in our communities, we are impacted by the larger dynamics happening in our nation and world.


Considering our individual academic history and professional growth, it’s time to gather all lessons learned and put them into action. Begin by focusing on your leadership skills by reaffirming the foundational principles and considerations at the core of ECE practices. These will include research, proven practices, reliable trends, and trustworthy information sources. That’s a lot to take in! We want to confront uneasy situations and difficult conversations with a strong, strength-based approach.


Daily, we confront complex topics and issues. How can we address political differences in an election year? How do we respond to concerns about wars in corners of the world? How do we bridge religious differences between the families and staff? How do we best honor particular holidays and celebrations shared by the children and families? Is AI going to take over my job? All these will require knowing the emotional context of individuals, families, and the communities we live and work in.


These complex dynamics call for incredible tact, intentional strategies, understanding, and resolve. As you deliberate on a path forward, begin with open conversations with the families and the staff at the center. Be honest in your initial approach: “I need your comments and ideas on how to best address this issue and ideas for some next steps.” Always start with what is best for the children, how to engage families in meaningful ways, and how to professionally uplift the staff at the center.


As with any challenging situation, know and use your strengths to address it – whether with your family members, co-workers, neighbors, folks at places of worship, etc. Each response and action will be a reflection of our persona. That complexity reflects our image, personality, attitudes, abilities, and knowledge base. Our response will be a combination of verbal communication and our physical and non-verbal language styles. As much as we try to manage our communication, our facial and body expressions tell more!


Grow a strategic backbone! As much as we try to avoid confrontations at any cost, there are many times the “me” as a leader needs to step up. Remember, EVERYONE is looking at you to resolve a difficult situation. The introvert in us may need to muster extra power to counter a loud argument. For the extrovert in us, it may mean toning down our rush of words and arm waving. In other words, step up for introverts; step back for extroverts. Either approach requires quiet confidence, a sense of control, and a path toward a mutual resolution. Fire up the strength and will with words and actions highlighting confidence in understanding and best approaches.


As leaders, we are (mostly) in control. You can control your words and actions within your proximity. You cannot control situations outside your range. An example from the COVID epidemic was the use of masks at a supermarket: you could control wearing a mask, but you could not control others who did not wear a mask. In our ECE world, for example, you can control staff using their phones for personal calls or scrolling while supervising children during outdoor play. But you will not have control over how they react when confronted by the center’s policy and the consequences of No Phones rules. A difficult conversation will ensue, but be confident you are doing the right thing based on principles, solid practices, and core values.


How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice! To strengthen that backbone when confrontations make you uneasy, rehearse disagreeing or confronting with people you trust. Because you need to feel psychologically safe, try getting comfortable by role-playing with a trusted friend: “I disagree with that,” “We have standards that are mandatory in this workplace,” and “That behavior is unacceptable in front of children.” Practice, practice, practice. Build the muscles that a backbone requires.


Are we all on the same page? ECE leaders understand that there will be differences along with common similarities as part of a large learning community. Always affirm the organizational values of the program – a set of aspirational goals that are the common ground for all. These values are regularly affirmed as well as revisited and updated as needed. Some are at the core of a program, while others reflect current trends and research.


Discussion of values is an integral part of professional development. For example, do we all share the same beliefs about play? Are parents “always right?” Does the staff feel respected in their various roles? And much more! In tangible ways, values are vital in fostering a meaningful purpose for the work at hand and the catalyst for authentic relationships among all. We may not all be on the same page, but we all know the foundational values of our organization.


As a Leader – teacher, supervisor, director – gather a baseline of understanding and knowledge about issues and topics. Dust up a sense of curiosity and inquiry by reading, asking others, listening to a podcast, or speaking with a trusted source. In other words, as you face a difficult conversation – know your stuff! Use the many current ECE strategies on reflection, intentionality, mindfulness, and coaching to ease into a discussion by citing facts and policies along with describing emotions. And turn these discussions into “learning conversations.” Most importantly – listen! Ask open-ended questions, get clarifications, do follow-up when needed, and mutually seek possible solutions.


As we ponder the times we live in, build an armor of courage and hope. With so much of our work, it is about individual relationships with others who will be similar to us as well as different from us. We don’t all have to be best friends, but we can affirm civility, understanding, and kindness. Always be ready to agree and disagree. At the core of all relationships, start with respect embedded in trust. The common good of our learning communities provides hope and optimism for these times and the ones just ahead.


Luis A. Hernandez, Early Childhood Education Specialist, brings solid expertise based on his work history in Head Start, Pre-K programs, colleges and universities. His expertise includes early literacy, dual language learners, adult learning practices, and ECE management and leadership topics. As a regular presenter and keynote speaker at national, state, and local conferences, Luis is highly regarded for his motivational and energizing presentations. In addition, Luis is an author. His book, “Learning from Bumps on the Road,” focuses on leadership topics and is a compilation of presentations and conversations with three fantastic leaders in the field. Mr. Hernandez is active in a number of organizations that support children and family interests.

By McCormick Center May 13, 2025
Leaders, policymakers, and systems developers seek to improve early childhood programs through data-driven decision-making. Data can be useful for informing continuous quality improvement efforts at the classroom and program level and for creating support for workforce development at the system level. Early childhood program leaders use assessments to help them understand their programs’ strengths and to draw attention to where supports are needed.  Assessment data is particularly useful in understanding the complexity of organizational climate and the organizational conditions that lead to successful outcomes for children and families. Several tools are available for program leaders to assess organizational structures, processes, and workplace conditions, including: Preschool Program Quality Assessment (PQA) 1 Program Administration Scale (PAS) 2 Child Care Worker Job Stress Inventory (ECWJSI) 3 Early Childhood Job Satisfaction Survey (ECJSS) 4 Early Childhood Work Environment Survey (ECWES) 5 Supportive Environmental Quality Underlying Adult Learning (SEQUAL) 6 The Early Education Essentials is a recently developed tool to examine program conditions that affect early childhood education instructional and emotional quality. It is patterned after the Five Essentials Framework, 7 which is widely used to measure instructional supports in K-12 schools. The Early Education Essentials measures six dimensions of quality in early childhood programs: Effective instructional leaders Collaborative teachers Supportive environment Ambitious instruction Involved families Parent voice A recently published validation study for the Early Education Essentials 8 demonstrates that it is a valid and reliable instrument that can be used to assess early childhood programs to improve teaching and learning outcomes. METHODOLOGY For this validation study, two sets of surveys were administered in one Midwestern city; one for teachers/staff in early childhood settings and one for parents/guardians of preschool-aged children. A stratified random sampling method was used to select sites with an oversampling for the percentage of children who spoke Spanish. The teacher surveys included 164 items within 26 scales and were made available online for a three-month period in the public schools. In community-based sites, data collectors administered the surveys to staff. Data collectors also administered the parent surveys in all sites. The parent survey was shorter, with 54 items within nine scales. Rasch analyses was used to combine items into scales. In addition to the surveys, administrative data were analyzed regarding school attendance. Classroom observational assessments were performed to measure teacher-child interactions. The Classroom Assessment Scoring System TM (CLASS) 9 was used to assess the interactions. Early Education Essentials surveys were analyzed from 81 early childhood program sites (41 school-based programs and 40 community-based programs), serving 3- and 4-year old children. Only publicly funded programs (e.g., state-funded preschool and/or Head Start) were included in the study. The average enrollment for the programs was 109 (sd = 64); 91% of the children were from minority backgrounds; and 38% came from non-English speaking homes. Of the 746 teacher surveys collected, 451 (61%) were from school-based sites and 294 (39%) were from community-based sites. There were 2,464 parent surveys collected (59% school; 41% community). About one-third of the parent surveys were conducted in Spanish. Data were analyzed to determine reliability, internal validity, group differences, and sensitivity across sites. Child outcome results were used to examine if positive scores on the surveys were related to desirable outcomes for children (attendance and teacher-child interactions). Hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) was used to compute average site-level CLASS scores to account for the shared variance among classrooms within the same school. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to group the scales. RESULTS The surveys performed well in the measurement characteristics of scale reliability, internal validity, differential item functioning, and sensitivity across sites . Reliability was measured for 25 scales with Rasch Person Reliability scores ranging from .73 to .92; with only two scales falling below the preferred .80 threshold. The Rasch analysis also provided assessment of internal validity showing that 97% of the items fell in an acceptable range of >0.7 to <1.3 (infit mean squares). The Teacher/Staff survey could detect differences across sites, however the Parent Survey was less effective in detecting differences across sites. Differential item functioning (DIF) was used to compare if individual responses differed for school- versus community-based settings and primary language (English versus Spanish speakers). Results showed that 18 scales had no or only one large DIF on the Teacher/Staff Survey related to setting. There were no large DIFs found related to setting on the Parent Survey and only one scale that had more than one large DIF related to primary language. The authors decided to leave the large DIF items in the scale because the number of large DIFs were minimal and they fit well with the various groups. The factor analysis aligned closely with the five essentials in the K-12 model . However, researchers also identified a sixth factor—parent voice—which factored differently from involved families on the Parent Survey. Therefore, the Early Education Essentials have an additional dimension in contrast to the K-12 Five Essentials Framework. Outcomes related to CLASS scores were found for two of the six essential supports . Positive associations were found for Effective Instructional Leaders and Collaborative Teachers and all three of the CLASS domains (Emotional Support, Classroom Organization, and Instructional Support). Significant associations with CLASS scores were not found for the Supportive Environment, Involved Families, or Parent Voice essentials. Ambitious Instruction was not associated with any of the three domains of the CLASS scores. Table 1. HLM Coefficients Relating Essential Scores to CLASS Scores (Model 1) shows the results of the analysis showing these associations. Outcomes related to student attendance were found for four of the six essential supports . Effective Instructional Leaders, Collaborative Teachers, Supportive Environment, and Involved Families were positively associated with student attendance. Ambitious Instruction and Parent Voice were not found to be associated with student attendance. The authors are continuing to examine and improve the tool to better measure developmentally appropriate instruction and to adapt the Parent Survey so that it will perform across sites. There are a few limitations to this study that should be considered. Since the research is based on correlations, the direction of the relationship between factors and organizational conditions is not evident. It is unknown whether the Early Education Essentials survey is detecting factors that affect outcomes (e.g., engaged families or positive teacher-child interactions) or whether the organizational conditions predict these outcomes. This study was limited to one large city and a specific set of early childhood education settings. It has not been tested with early childhood centers that do not receive Head Start or state pre-K funding. DISCUSSION The Early Education Essentials survey expands the capacity of early childhood program leaders, policymakers, systems developers, and researchers to assess organizational conditions that specifically affect instructional quality. It is likely to be a useful tool for administrators seeking to evaluate the effects of their pedagogical leadership—one of the three domains of whole leadership. 10 When used with additional measures to assess whole leadership—administrative leadership, leadership essentials, as well as pedagogical leadership—stakeholders will be able to understand the organizational conditions and supports that positively impact child and family outcomes. Many quality initiatives focus on assessment at the classroom level, but examining quality with a wider lens at the site level expands the opportunity for sustainable change and improvement. The availability of valid and reliable instruments to assess the organizational structures, processes, and conditions within early childhood programs is necessary for data-driven improvement of programs as well as systems development and applied research. Findings from this validation study confirm that strong instructional leadership and teacher collaboration are good predictors of effective teaching and learning practices, evidenced in supportive teacher-child interactions and student attendance. 11 This evidence is an important contribution to the growing body of knowledge to inform embedded continuous quality improvement efforts. It also suggests that leadership to support teacher collaboration like professional learning communities (PLCs) and communities of practice (CoPs) may have an effect on outcomes for children. This study raises questions for future research. The addition of the “parent voice” essential support should be further explored. If parent voice is an essential support why was it not related to CLASS scores or student attendance? With the introduction of the Early Education Essentials survey to the existing battery of program assessment tools (PQA, PAS, ECWJSI, ECWES, ECJSS and SEQUAL), a concurrent validity study is needed to determine how these tools are related and how they can best be used to examine early childhood leadership from a whole leadership perspective. ENDNOTES 1 High/Scope Educational Research Foundation, 2003 2 Talan & Bloom, 2011 3 Curbow, Spratt, Ungaretti, McDonnell, & Breckler, 2000 4 Bloom, 2016 5 Bloom, 2016 6 Whitebook & Ryan, 2012 7 Bryk, Sebring, Allensworth, Luppescu, & Easton, 2010 8 Ehrlich, Pacchiano, Stein, Wagner, Park, Frank, et al., 2018 9 Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008 10 Abel, Talan, & Masterson, 2017 11 Bloom, 2016; Lower & Cassidy, 2007 REFERENCES Abel, M. B., Talan, T. N., & Masterson, M. (2017, Jan/Feb). Whole leadership: A framework for early childhood programs. Exchange(19460406), 39(233), 22-25. Bloom, P. J. (2016). Measuring work attitudes in early childhood settings: Technical manual for the Early Childhood Job Satisfaction Survey (ECJSS) and the Early Childhood Work Environment Survey (ECWES), (3rd ed.). Lake Forest, IL: New Horizons. Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Curbow, B., Spratt, K., Ungaretti, A., McDonnell, K., & Breckler, S. (2000). Development of the Child Care Worker Job Stress Inventory. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 515-536. DOI: 10.1016/S0885-2006(01)00068-0 Ehrlich, S. B., Pacchiano, D., Stein, A. G., Wagner, M. R., Park, S., Frank, E., et al., (in press). Early Education Essentials: Validation of a new survey tool of early education organizational conditions. Early Education and Development. High/Scope Educational Research Foundation (2003). Preschool Program Quality Assessment, 2nd Edition (PQA) administration manual. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press. Lower, J. K. & Cassidy, D. J. (2007). Child care work environments: The relationship with learning environments. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 22(2), 189-204. DOI: 10.1080/02568540709594621 Pianta, R. C., La Paro, K. M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Talan, T. N., & Bloom, P. J. (2011). Program Administration Scale: Measuring early childhood leadership and management (2 nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Whitebook, M., & Ryan, S. (2012). Supportive Environmental Quality Underlying Adult Learning (SEQUAL). Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California.
Show More