Work Group Meeting, Thursday, May 29, 2025, 11:00 to 12:00 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Daphen Alsiyao, Jessica Lowery Clark, Amber Pierce, Gerri Mattson, Theresa Stacker, Dan Tetreault; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Overview
  • Grounding Question: “What are strategies to promote literacy over the summer?”
  • Group members shared stories and concerns related to third-grade testing and literacy readiness, emphasizing the emotional and systemic impact of end-of-grade exams on students and families. Common themes included:
    • The stress of standardized testing on young children.
    • The privilege of coming to school “ready to learn.”
    • How testing culture intersects with literacy disparities and family supports.
    • A shared desire for portfolio-based or more holistic assessments.
• Grounding and Level Setting
  • Priority: Expand awareness of training and professional development resources related to early literacy.
  • A brief recap was shared of the group’s progress over the year:
    • Early literacy training survey (Fall 2024)
    • 10 key informant interviews (Winter–Spring 2025)
    • Completed summary slide deck combining themes and lessons learned
• Group Engagement Over the Summer and for 2025-2026
  • Members discussed taking a summer pause in meetings.
  • The group agreed to pause in June and July and reconvene Thursday, August 28, 2025, at 11:00 am.
  • Interest in continued membership was expressed. Members were encouraged to consider ongoing participation and co-leadership roles for the coming year.
• Begin Drafting Factsheet 
  • Purpose of the Factsheet (Emerging Consensus):
    • Raise awareness of gaps in literacy-specific professional development
    • Support advocacy for training access and investments
    • Highlight lessons learned from surveys and interviews
    • Frame a call to action for organizations and professionals serving families and children
  • Target Audience (Initial Discussion):
    • Early childhood educators and family support professionals (primary)
    • Potential secondary audiences discussed: local leaders, funders, and agency staff
  • Key Takeaways:
    • One factsheet may not suit all audiences; the group may pursue multiple formats (e.g., educator-focused version, executive summary).
  • Suggestions to start with an educator-focused version.
  • The fact sheet should emphasize real-world application, clarity, and alignment with the group’s original purpose.
• Survey and Key Informant Interview Slide Deck
  • Ashley presented a draft 28-slide summary of findings.
  • Members expressed appreciation and emphasized the need to provide feedback before sharing with key informants.
  • Deadline for slide deck feedback: Friday, June 20, 2025.
  • An agreement to potentially create an outline for the fact sheet during the August meeting using insights from the deck.
• Next Steps
  • Over Summer:
    • Members will review and provide feedback on the slide deck.
    • Members are invited to contribute ideas to the Teams slide deck for shaping the fact sheet content and format.
  • August Meeting Goals:
    • Begin drafting a fact sheet using a working outline (e.g., issue, solutions, call to action).
    • Identify examples or standout messages from the slide deck for use in the fact sheet.
• Closing
  • The group will pause in June and July and reconvene Thursday, August 28, 2025, at 11:00 am on Microsoft Teams. Members were thanked for their contributions, expertise, and time throughout the year.

Work Group Meeting, Thursday, April 24, 2025, 11:00 to 12:00 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Daphne Alsiyao, Mary Mathew, Gerri Mattson, Theresa Roedersheimer, Dan Tetreault; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Overview
  • The grounding question was, “What concerns do you have about recent or upcoming changes at the federal, state, or local level?”
    • Primary concern: Widespread uncertainty and lack of clear information at multiple levels.
  • Sources of hope:
    • The dedication of colleagues.
    • The strength of community and collective effort across early childhood sectors.
• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The priority is expanding awareness of early literacy training and professional development resources.
  • Reviewed current efforts to map existing training and professional development opportunities related to early literacy across North Carolina
    • Fall 2024: Survey conducted on early literacy training.
    • Winter–Spring 2025: 10 key informant interviews completed.
    • A slide deck summarizing themes and insights from the interviews was shared and discussed.
• Key Informant Interviews
  • Emerging Themes
    • Gaps in literacy-specific professional development, particularly outside formal systems.
    • Limited coordination among agencies and programs.
    • Resource limitations, including staffing and funding constraints.
    • Strong demand for flexible, accessible, and scalable training models.
    • Inadequate inclusion of multilingual learners and underserved communities.
    • Encouraging signs of collaborative local models.
  • Lessons Learned
    • Training must be integrated into daily practice and not overly time intensive.
    • Cross-system and cross-role collaboration is valued.
    • Building a culture of literacy should be an overarching goal.
    • Many group members reported a strong desire for self-paced, online tools, coaching, and practical examples.
  • Challenges:
    • Limited access to training for many childcare staff and smaller partnerships.
    • Misalignment between educator expectations and actual field capacity.
    • Few early literacy-specific statewide or regional events.
    • Training options are sometimes broad but lack depth.
  • Promising Practices and Resources:
    • LETRs training: widely used but not universally accessible.
    • Core Conference in Charlotte: well-received local effort.
    • Campaign for Grade-Level Reading models in other states were cited as inspiring.
    • Existing trainings: Raising A Reader, Triple P, Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library (noted for funding limitations), and active reading via CCR&R.
• Discussion and Next Steps
  • Proposed Action Steps:
    • Develop a statewide fact sheet or report combining survey and interview findings:
    • To be used for advocacy, awareness-building, and securing resources.
    • Could include presentation slides and key messages.
  • Share findings with:
    • Key informants (as follow-up and appreciation).
    • Smart Start’s early literacy peer group.
    • Campaign for Grade-Level Reading network.
  • Explore the feasibility of a statewide summit or track:
    • Smart Start Conference 2026 could include a dedicated early literacy track or panel.
    • Group members discussed influencing session planning and co-creating content.
    • Recognition that capacity and funding are ongoing barriers.
  • Consider the development of advocacy tools:
    • Possibilities include infographics, video spotlights featuring families or providers, and case studies.
    • Suggestions were made to gather examples of existing fact sheets or tools from allied organizations and campaigns.
• Closing
  • The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 29, 2025, from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm, via Microsoft Teams.
  • Group members agreed to:
    • Finalize and circulate the updated slide deck and summary.
    • Begin outlining a draft fact sheet.
    • Discuss continuing group engagement over the summer.
    • Consider aligning with Smart Start’s conference planning for 2026.

Work Group Meeting, Thursday, March 27, 2025, 11:00 to 12:00 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Daphne Alsiyao, Jessica Lowery Clark, Iheoma Iruka, Mary Mathew, Theresa Roedersheimer, Kristi Snuggs; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Overview
  • The grounding question was,  “What keeps you motivated and passionate about early literacy work?”
• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The priority is expanding awareness of early literacy training and professional development resources.
  • Reviewed current efforts to map existing training and professional development opportunities related to early literacy across North Carolina.
  • Recognized staffing challenges and regional variability in training availability.
• Key Informant Interviews
  • Interview progress update:
    • Multiple key informant interviews have been completed with Smart Start leaders, early childhood educators, and family support professionals.
    • Some interviews are still in progress; completion requested by April 11, 2025.
    • Ongoing compilation of interview notes and preliminary thematic analysis underway.
    • Initial draft summary slides and resource maps created to visualize regional participation and gaps.
  • Lessons Learned/ Emerging Themes:
    • Limited Training Opportunities: Many counties, particularly rural ones, have few formal early literacy training opportunities for childcare providers.
  • Barriers Identified:
    • Lack of staff capacity to deliver or participate in additional training.
    • Competing training demands (compliance-related vs. quality-focused).
    • High turnover among early educators reduces continuity and investment in advanced training.
  • Existing Resources Cited:
    • Raising a Reader programs.
    • Reach Out and Read (limited availability).
    • LETRS Training (primarily for NC Pre-K, not widely available to private childcare providers).
    • Active Reading Curriculum (Charlotte area) seen as a model that could expand.
  • Training Gaps:
    • Practical, hands-on strategies (e.g., vocabulary development, shared reading practices).
    • Need for cross-sector collaboration with groups like DPI.
  • Interest in Family Engagement:
    • Strong desire for resources that help early educators strengthen parent engagement in literacy activities.
  • Comments on QRS Modernization:
    • The group discussed how potential changes to QRIS (Quality Rating Improvement System) could create additional resource needs and potential impacts on early literacy focus.
  • Next Steps for Interviews:
    • All interview notes are due by Friday, April 11, 2025.
    • Summary report and draft recommendations will tentatively be shared ahead of the next meeting for group feedback.
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • Product Development Discussion
    • The group discussed creating a summarized map and recommendations based on interview and survey findings.
    • Potential uses:
      • Identify and advocate for priority funding areas.
      • Support cross-organizational collaboration.
        • Raise awareness of available resources and training gaps.
    • Discussion included concerns about ensuring actionable outcomes and determining dissemination strategies.
• Action Steps
  • Finalize key informant interviews.
  • Complete draft summary of findings (survey + interviews).
  • Identify priority recommendations.
  • Explore potential audiences and partners for sharing results (DPI, DCDEE, funders, early literacy stakeholders).
  • Consider resource availability for the next implementation steps.
• Closing
  • The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, April 24, 2025, from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm, via Microsoft Teams.
  • The group expressed gratitude for collaborative efforts.
  • Acknowledgement of the ongoing challenges in the early childhood education landscape and the importance of collective work in advancing early literacy.

Work Group Meeting, Thursday, February 27, 2025, 11:00 to 12:00 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Jessica Lowery Clark, Gerri Mattson, Amber Pierce, Theresa Roedersheimer, Andrina Scott, Kristi Snuggs, Dan Tetreault

• Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Overview
  • The group discussed upcoming activities related to Reading Across America Day and the importance of literacy events.
• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The priority is expanding awareness of early literacy training and professional development resources.
  • Discussion emphasized the need for simple, actionable strategies that educators can use daily to support early literacy without overwhelming them with too much additional training.
• Literacy Training and Professional Development Programs
  • NC CGLR Community Program Crosswalk- Theresa Roedersheimer
    • Over the past two years, the North Carolina Campaign for Grade Level Reading (NC CGLR) has been collaborating with twelve different communities to engage families, teachers, and the broader community on the importance of early literacy and ways to support it.
    • The crosswalk outlines the various programs that these communities are offering to families and educators. While most of these programs are focused on families, there are also opportunities to explore the programs being implemented in greater depth.
    • The crosswalk illustrates a need for the CGLRs to be aware of other programs within their communities.
  • DCDEE Data Request- NC Pre-K LETRs Programs- Dan Tetreault/ Gerri Mattson
    • DCDEE data shows the number of NC Pre-K funded sites by county.
    • The spreadsheet provided lists LEA schools with at least one preschool classroom.
    • There will be overlap between the two lists, as many public pre-K classrooms are funded by NC Pre-K and included in the DCDEE data.
    • These should be considered sites where lead teachers have participated in the LERTS for Early Childhood Educators training, not sites with LETRS.
    • LETRS is a training program focused on literacy development, not a curriculum, and does not provide curriculum materials.
  • Review of Early Literacy and Professional Development Program Draft List
    • The group acknowledged the existence of various literacy training programs.
    • There was a recognition that many of these programs lack practical, usable strategies that educators can implement immediately.
• Key Informant Interviews
  • Lessons learned from interviews conducted so far included the following:
    • Community efforts need to be understood to expand awareness. Interviews showed the importance of assessing current initiatives, which will be discussed further in the next meeting.
    • Assessing existing efforts through interviews highlighted the need to understand current resources and practices to avoid duplication and align future work.
    • Clear communication of resources to educators is essential. Interviews revealed that educators need easily accessible information on available resources.
    • Early educators are the primary audience for addressing needs. Interviews emphasized focusing on those directly involved in early childhood education, like childcare and Pre-K professionals.
    • Training timing is a major concern. Interviews pointed out that educators struggle to find time for professional development, highlighting the need for flexible, bite-sized training.
    • Program implementation locations must be identified. Interviews stressed the importance of knowing where programs are active to target support and training where needed.
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • Complete key informant interviews and share responses with the work group.
  • Identify other people and/or agencies for key informant interviews.
• Closing
  • The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March 27, 2025, from 11:00 am to 12:00 pm, via Microsoft Teams.

Work Group Meeting, Thursday, January 23, 2025, 11:00 to 12:00 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Mary Mathew, Gerri Mattson, Amber Pierce, Theresa Roedersheimer, Kristi Snuggs; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Early Literacy Programs and Data Collection
  • Gerri Mattson requested data on NC Pre-K programs with LETRs training.
  • Daphne Alsiyao had shared that there are 83 literacy activities funded with Smart Start funds across the state. Programs and number of local partnerships include Book Babies (2), Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library (41), Motheread/ Fatheread (14), and Raising a Reader (26).
  • Discussed online literacy resources and curriculums. Gerri Mattson shared several online resources for early literacy training and the group discussed if there was an opportunity to explore online options.
• Key Informant Interviews
  • Reviewed and refined questions for key informant interviews. Added background information and definition of early literacy training and professional development.
  • Considered inclusion of questions about online resources in interviews.
  • Mecklenburg County has begun using the Heggerty Pre-K Curriculum. The group was not familiar with this curriculum.
  • Discussed potential interviewees from various organizations. Decided to move forward with piloting the key information interview questions.
  • Assigned work group members to conduct interviews. Refer to key informant interview list document for additional information.
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • Complete the pilot key informant interviews and share notes by Tuesday, February 25, 2025.
  • Gerri Mattson to contact about recommendations for National Campaign for National Grade Level Reading contacts.
  • Gerri Mattson and Ashley Rink find out about contacting Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) in state child are agency.
  • Mary Mathew and Kristi Snuggs were asked to review the list of literacy training and professional development programs from the survey and remove ones that are not actual programs for staff in early learning environments.
• Closing
  • The next work group meeting will be on Thursday, February 27, 2025, from 11:00 to 12:00 pm on Microsoft Teams.

Work Group Meeting, Monday, December 2, 2024, 3:30 to 4:30 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Mary Mathew, Gerri Mattson, Amber Pierce, Theresa Roedersheimer, Kristi Snuggs, Dan Tetreault; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Welcome, Introductions, and Agenda Overview
  • The result from Healthy North Carolina 2030 for Indicator 6: Third Grade Reading Proficiency was reviewed, “All children in North Carolina can discover the joy of reading at an early age and are supported in the home, school, and community to be lifelong readers.”
• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The work group’s priority for 2023-2024 was to, “Expand awareness of training and professional development resources related to early literacy.”
  • The identified action step for this priority was to map current efforts regarding training and professional development related to literacy.
• Action Planning- Early Literacy Training and Professional Development Survey
  • Survey Results and Key Informant Interview Review
    • Survey received responses from almost 70 people across 30 counties.
    • Decision to proceed with key informant interviews instead of reopening survey.
    • Plan to pursue an intern for conducting interviews.
    • Discussion on developing interview questions. 
  • Mapping Early Literacy Programs
    • A draft document was shared with the early literacy training and professional development programs from the survey results.
    • Discussion on the variety of programs listed, some not specifically related to literacy.
    • Consideration of adding audience information for each program.
    • Discussion on whether to focus on community-based or higher education programs.
  • Identifying Key Informants
    • Suggestion to reach out to Smart Start partnerships. 
    • Discussion on involving regional Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&R) agencies.
    • Consideration of including Read Charlotte and the Maternal, Infant and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) Program. 
    • Proposal to involve library representatives. 
  • Mapping LETRS Program
    • Discussion on mapping the LETRS (Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling) program.
    • LETRS training available in every school district and NC Pre-K classrooms.
    • Consideration of distinguishing between public and private implementations on the map.
    • Discussion on potential analysis of number of children impacted compared to third grade reading levels.
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • Next steps include finalizing the key informant interview questions and identifying interviewees.
• Closing
  • A Doodle Poll will be shared to schedule the next work group meeting in January 2025.

Work Group Meeting, Wednesday, November 6, 2024, 10:00 to 11:00 am, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Daphne Alsiyao, Gerri Mattson, Theresa Roedersheimer, Kristi Snuggs, Corretta Walker; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The work group’s priority for 2023-2024 was to, “Expand awareness of training and professional development resources related to early literacy.”
  • The identified action step for this priority was to map current efforts regarding training and professional development related to literacy.
• Action Planning- Early Literacy Training and Professional Development Survey
  • Re-Opening the survey
    • The group decided not to reopen the survey and felt the results would be similar unless the survey was revamped. If the survey was revamped, then more counties could be targeted. 
  • Key informant interviews
    • The group was in favor of conducting key informant interviews and including state and local agencies. The length of the interviews would be about 45 minutes.
    • Discussed what the group is wanting to understand related to early literacy training and professional development. Questions considered for the interviews included:
      • What early literacy training and professional development programs are offered in your community, and where (county and city)? 
      • Who (which organization) is offering the programs?
      • Who is the audience? Who is reached?
      • What are the needs or gaps in early literacy training and professional development in your community?
      • What is the training about?
      • What is available?
      • What early literacy training and professional development are available in your county?
      • Other topics: phonics, vocabulary, if they were part of a peer learning community (PLC), and if they had a trainer onsite.
    • Considered aligning questions with the Science of Reading and NC Foundations.
    • Reviewed the Early Care and Education Professional Development: Training and Technical Assistance Glossary.
    • Discussed different types of professional development, such as peer learning communities and mentoring.
    • Additional considerations included cultural and language aspects in early literacy training and identifying gaps and needs to map early literacy training efforts.
    • Discussed potentially having interns to assist with key informant interviews.
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • Next steps include finalizing the key informant interview questions, selecting interviewees, and exploring opportunities for interns to conduct the interviews.
• Closing
  • The next work group meeting will be on Monday, December 2, 2024, from 3:30 to 4:30 pm on Microsoft Teams.

Work Group Meeting, Monday, September 23, 2024, 3:00 to 4:00 pm, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Jessica Lowery Clark, Micere Keels, Mary Mathew, Gerri Mattson, Tracee Moore, Theresa Roedersheimer, Kristi Snuggs; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The work group’s priority for 2023-2024 was to, “Expand awareness of training and professional development resources related to early literacy.”
  • The identified action step for this priority was to map current efforts regarding training and professional development related to literacy.
• Action Planning- Early Literacy Training and Professional Development Survey
  • The group reviewed and reflected on the survey data. Reactions to the survey data included:
    • Awareness of professional development opportunities exists.
    • Wonderschool is a resource site, not a training program.
    • Teaching Strategies offers various training options.
    • Many responses were general, lacking specific training details.
    • Education on literacy and professional development training is needed.
    • Some shared programs that promote literacy but do not provide training.
    • Childcare providers often receive literacy training through Early Head Start and schools.
    • Literacy training for families is mainly offered by Head Start and libraries.
    • The group found the survey insights interesting and valuable.
    • Pathways has addressed housing and other factors affecting early literacy.
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • The group is open to resending the survey and updating some questions based on the available training and professional development for early literacy.
  • Concerns were raised that if the survey were resent, the responses might be similar due to a lack of available early literacy training.
  • There was interest in gathering data from more counties; the initial survey included responses from 30 counties.
  • Next steps include summarizing the survey results to identify what qualifies as early literacy training and professional development and conducting targeted key informant interviews with education professionals to pinpoint what is missing and should be included.
• Closing
  • Identify potential candidates for key informant interviews and share suggestions for those who can provide insights on gaps in early literacy training and professional development.
  • At the next work group meeting, the group will plan to further discuss the idea of conducting key informant interviews and next steps.

Work Group Meeting, Tuesday, August 27, 2024, 10:00 to 11:00 am, Microsoft Teams

Attendees: Jessica Lowery Clark, Sheila Hoyle, Micere Keels, Mary Mathew, Gerri Mattson, Amber Pierce; Staff: Ashley Rink

• Grounding and Level Setting
  • The result from Healthy North Carolina 2030 for Indicator 6: Third Grade Reading Proficiency was reviewed, “All children in North Carolina can discover the joy of reading at an early age and are supported in the home, school, and community to be lifelong readers.”
  • The work group’s priority for 2023-2024 was to, “Expand awareness of training and professional development resources related to early literacy.”
  • The action step the work group had identified for this priority was to map current efforts regarding training and professional development related to literacy.
• Action Planning- Early Literacy Training and Professional Development Survey
  • The purpose of the survey was to gather community feedback to help with action planning. The questions are asking about training and professional development related to early literacy for early childhood educators and family support professionals. A total of 63 responses were received. The survey included 12 questions.
  • The group reviewed and reflected on the survey data. Initial reactions to the survey data included:
    • How familiar people are with the Science of Reading for Pre-K and earlier.
    • Insights into perceptions of early literacy training and professional development, including distinctions between training, intervention, and activities.
    • What early literacy training is incorporated into higher education for early educators.
    • Some lesser-known programs from the survey included: Raising a Reader (for families via pediatricians), NC FELD (North Carolina Foundations for Early Learning and Development), and Mind in the Making (for professionals and families).
    • Creative Curriculum is one of the most popular NC Pre-K curriculums.  Other approved programs from the Pre-K guidelines to be shared.
    • Dolly Parton Imagination Library (DPIL) does not have parent training and support outside the books.
    • Add to the question about early literacy and professional development: "Please specify the exact name of the professional development or training opportunity."
• Next Steps for Work Group
  • Review the tracking spreadsheet to check where the survey was shared and sent.
  • Review the survey data from the slides before the next meeting.
  • Consider how the data could be used (raise awareness, gather more information, identify gaps, etc.)
  • Think about recommendations for potential revisions to the survey questions, if the survey is re-opened.
• Closing
  • The work group will continue to meet monthly. 
  • At the next meeting the group will continue to reflect on the data and decide if the survey will be re-opened, targeting other places. The group recognized that the survey was shared during the summer.
  • Suggestions for targeted outreach to additional organizations were the Smart Start Network, licensing consultants, Child Care Resource & Referral (CCR&R), CCR&R Council.