Trainer Criteria

Trainer Criteria - posted 11/01/2007
(Development in Progress)

In an effort to continue to build a comprehensive training approval system that increases the consistency of training content and trainer qualifications across the state, the Registry has been charged with the task of creating a second set of training approval criteria for trainers. What this means is that, in the future, in addition to meeting the established training approval criteria for CONTENT, trainers will also be required to meet pre-determined TRAINER criteria (based on the education and experience of the trainer). This criterion will be developed over the course of the next several years.

Workgroup Convened - posted 7/21/2008
Creating and implementing criteria for trainers is a rather large undertaking that has been an important and ongoing discussion at the Registry and among the Registry Advisory Committee. In December 2005, the Advisory Committee began examining national trends related to trainer criteria, reviewed many states' systems, participated in ongoing dialogue with members of the National Registry Alliance and formed a specialized workgroup to begin looking at the process in Nevada. This workgroup has meet 5 times since then and is now at the point of being able to take some preliminary steps forward in this process.
Guiding Principles
Based on the literature reviewed, The Registry Advisory Committee believes that:
1.	There is a correlation between the education level of the trainer and the quality of training.
		Fiend, Ph.D., Richard (2002). 13 Indicators of Quality Child Care: Research Update. Pennsylvania State University, National Resource Center for Health and Safety in Child Care, University of Colorado.
2.	Providers who receive higher quality training will provide better quality care and education to young children.
		Barnett, W. Steven (December 2004). Better Teachers, Better Preschools: Student Achievement Linked to Teacher Qualifications. Rutgers State University of New Jersey, National Institute for Early Education Research: www.nieer.org
The guiding principles serve as a roadmap for the development of trainer criteria.

Purpose of Creating Trainer Criteria
The purpose of implementing criteria for trainers is two-fold and is based on the premise that consistent standards for trainers promote high quality training and guide early childhood professionals in choosing training opportunities. More specifically,
From a Trainer’s Perspective:
	Approval criteria holds trainers to higher standards, helps to highlight a trainer’s specialization and unique skills, supports the professional growth of trainers, and increases the number of qualified trainers in Nevada.
From a Practitioner’s Perspective:
	Approval criteria helps to support higher quality in trainings, consistency in trainings, helps ECE professionals make more informed decisions about the training/trainers they select, and increases the quality of care and education for all young children in Nevada.

National Trends
All components of the trainer approval system are based on current research, knowledge and best practice recognized by the Early Care and Education profession. The workgroup has identified several national trends that are relevant to the development of trainer criteria and are important considerations as our state proceeds with this process:
		Many states across the country have trainer approval systems which are based on tiers or levels within their systems. Levels are designed to capture an individual’s experience as a trainer, experience in the early childhood field, and education in ECE.
		Training approval systems across the nation are heavily embedded in Adult Learning Principles. Though there isn’t a definitive list of basic principles of adult education, there is a great deal of agreement about what constitutes good practice in the education and training of adults. The use of sound practices of adult learning encourages participants to seek and use knowledge. Training is most effective when adults are involved in the planning of the training and when there is a basic understanding of the following:
			Adults learn best when new information validates and builds on their prior knowledge and experience.
			Adults are more motivated to learn if they are active participants in the learning process and viewed as a partner with the trainer in the learning experience.
			Adults are concerned with actual practice and want to apply their learning to present/personal situations where opportunities for learning are rooted in a problem-solving context.
			Adults benefit from training designed to contribute to their self-esteem and personal, as well as professional growth.

Proposed Stages of Development
Realizing the enormity of this task and weighing it against forecasted and unanticipated short and long term affects, the workgroup has developed a careful and conservative approach to the implementation of trainer criteria. The following is a draft plan that is dependent on Registry resources and overall statewide objectives and directives. This strategy can change at the discretion of The Nevada Registry, the Registry Advisory Committee and/or the Trainer Criteria Workgroup.
Step 1: Trainer Survey
	Through a partnership with the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, a survey will be conducted to all ECE trainers in order to create a profile of who currently provides training in Nevada. The survey will collect demographic information, assess a trainer’s familiarity with Adult Learning Principles, identify their current training practices and determine the professional development needs of trainers.

Step 2: Online Orientation on Adult Learning Principles
	The workgroup believes strongly that in order to be effective, trainers must possess knowledge of basic adult learning principles and the ability to implement said principles. An online orientation that provides an overview of adult learning principles will be developed. Once developed, all registered ECE trainers will be required to complete the online orientation within a designated timeframe. Trainers choosing not to complete the training will not be able to submit requests for training approval.

Step 3: Creation and Implementation of Levels
	Currently, the workgroup is reviewing 3 proposed Trainer Levels. The exact levels and criterion have not been determined but it is anticipated that the proposed levels will be modeled closely after the framework of New Mexico and New Jersey systems.

Step 4: Creation and Implementation of Evaluation and Quality Assurance System
	Evaluation of training quality is an important component to the training approval system. The Registry plans to have a strong evaluation process and quality assurance system in place in the future. This process could include such components as participant evaluations, periodic observations of and follow-up with trainers, online surveys of training participants, and more.

Please stay tuned for more details as this process develops.