Understanding EDI Results
Understanding EDI Results
Embedded Files
How to Interpret EDI Data
How to Interpret EDI Data
All data collection tools are limited and there is no tool that can tell the full story of a neighborhood and its children. The EDI is no exception and we fully recognize its potential limitations. Many factors could lead to differences in EDI outcomes between neighborhoods, student groups, and years. We encourage you to consider factors such as access to high quality early learning, health and family supports, and affordable housing that may impact these results. In addition to these factors, we understand the possibility that implicit bias may have affected EDI results. We also recognize that the EDI's English-centric literacy questions may not fully measure the language achievements of our dual language learners.
As a unique, neighborhood-level measure, The EDI is meant to spark more robust conversations on how to leverage data to best serve family and community priorities. The EDI data can provide us with insight into how community investments in Oakland relate to the developmental outcomes observed for children and help us identify potential service gaps as well as the areas where investments appear to be working.
EDI Domains
EDI Domains
The Early Development Instrument (EDI) looks at five holistic domains. These domains focus not only on academic success, but also the social and emotional development children need to thrive and be ready for school. To see the subdomains and questions that make up each of these domains, click here.
Physical health and well-being measures students’ physical readiness for schoolwork, physical independence, and gross and fine motor skills. Examples of questions teachers are asked: Can the child hold a pencil? Is the child underweight or overweight?
Social competence measures students’ overall social competence with peers, respect and responsibility, approaches to learning, and readiness to explore new things. Examples of questions teachers are asked: Does the child share with others? Is the child self-confident?
Emotional maturity measures students’ prosocial and helping behavior, anxious and fearful behavior, aggressive behavior, and hyperactive and inattentive behavior. Examples of questions teachers are asked: Is the child able to concentrate? Would the child help someone who is hurt or upset?
The language and cognitive development domain measures students’ basic literacy skills, interest in literacy/numeracy and memory, advanced literacy skills, and basic numeracy skills. Examples of questions teachers are asked: Is the child interested in reading and writing? Can the child tell a short story?
Communications skills and general knowledge measures students’ understanding of verbal communications and ability to communicate experiences, wishes, and feelings. Examples of questions teachers are asked: Can the child communicate his/her own needs? Can the child communicate with adults and children?
EDI Zones
EDI Zones
The EDI is reported for 15 geographic neighborhoods across Oakland, which we refer to as "EDI Zones." The zones represent clusters of census tracts where between 150 and 200 Kindergarten students live. Importantly the zones represent where students live rather than where they go to school.
How is "Fully Supported by EC Systems" Calculated?
How is "Fully Supported by EC Systems" Calculated?
As a population-level measure, the EDI data shows us a snapshot by OUSD EDI Zone of where children are most developmentally "on track." While some neighborhood clusters show more significant proportions of students who are "on track," that varies across the city.
Children who are "Fully Supported by ECE Systems" are those who are less likely to experience challenges in their school years and beyond. The EDI determines whether children are "Fully Supported by ECE Systems" for each of the five EDI domains. Children whose scores fall above the 25th percentile on a particular EDI domain are said to be "Fully Supported by ECE Systems" in that area of development.
Page updated
Report abuse