Toronto EDI Results
Understanding and Interpreting EDI Results
For the purpose of understanding and interpreting the following EDI results, a number of points should be emphasized.
The EDI is not intended to be interpreted in isolation; rather, its value as a planning tool is achieved in its interpretation within the context of the communities in which the information is generated. For example, examining the data in relation to other relevant forms of community data, including child outcome measures and indicators, social, demographic and neighbourhood factors, as well as information regarding community services, is instrumental in the effective interpretation and application of EDI data.
The attribution of scores to particular geographical areas within Toronto is accomplished using the postal codes at which children reside and not where they attend school. Hence, a child may attend school in one neighbourhood, but his or her EDI scores may contribute to the results of another neighbourhood.
Comprehensiveness of the Sample
The EDI is a population-based measure, meaning that theoretically, the goal is to complete a questionnaire for an entire group or cohort of children. Specifically, our goal is to complete a questionnaire for every 5-year-old child in the city. At this time, our sample consists of children who attend one of the four district school boards. While we reach the majority of our target population through the district school boards, note that there is a small proportion of children that are not included: for example, children who attend privately-funded schools (this includes children who attend SK in a child care setting) and children who are home-schooled. Ideally, we would like to include these groups of children and we continue to examine the feasibility of doing so with each implementation.
Our sample is further pared down based on the quality of the data. For example, while our final sample consists of 20,520 children, we did receive fully- or partially-completed questionnaires for 23,166 children (from the four district school boards). The majority of the excluded records were excluded because of missing responses (either a large number of missing responses or critical questions were left blank). A smaller number of records were excluded because the teachers indicated the children had special needs (683 records). Our final sample of 20,520 thus consists of all valid and non-special needs records. While included in the final sample, there were a small number of records (519 of the 20,520) that were missing postal codes. This precluded us from linking those scores with particular ridings and neighbourhoods.
The comprehensiveness of the data is of particular relevance when examining results in small areas, such as neighbourhoods. As a rough estimate of the comprehensiveness of your neighbourhood sample, compare the total number of children in your neighbourhood sample (n) to the population of 5-year-old children in your neighbourhood (these numbers are available in the Riding Profiles). The smaller the difference between these two numbers, the more confident you can be that the results reflect the actual state of school readiness in your area.