2 ECE DISCUSSIONS - DUE IN 16 HOURS

combs

CH12_Curriculum_Jaruszewicz.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >2 ECE DISCUSSIONS - DUE IN 16 HOURS

Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and Programs

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Explain the concept of developmentally appropriate assessment.

2. Describe different types of formal and informal assessments teachers use with children.

3. Describe how teachers manage and use assessment information.

4. Identify and explain processes used to evaluate curriculum.

5. Describe developmentally appropriate considerations for using technology with children.

6. Describe important considerations for lifelong professional learning.

12 Pretest 1. Teachers don’t need to plan for assessment

because the curriculum includes all the materials they need. T/F

2. Standardized tests are the best tools to use to assess young children. T/F

3. Teachers use assessment information and analyses to adapt curriculum. T/F

4. Program evaluations provide valuable information for teachers about how to strengthen their practices. T/F

5. It is possible to use technologies with young children in developmentally appropriate ways. T/F

6. Once teachers have experience, they no lon- ger need to prioritize intentional reflection about their work. T/F

Answers can be found at end of the chapter.© iStockphoto / Thinkstock

Developmentally Appropriate Assessment Chapter 12

Well here you are, on your way to understanding the intricacies of early childhood curriculum and the balancing act that a developmentally appropriate approach requires. Your classroom is a happy, busy place. Friendships are forming, children are playing, and you are using your understanding of the developmental emphasis in the early learning standards and content focus of K–12 academic standards to plan and implement engaging and challenging activities. You’ve also begun to notice the individual characteristics, strengths, and needs of your chil- dren and are beginning to think about ways of adapting the curriculum to meet their needs.

Your sense is that everything is going well, but how do you know for sure that you are meet- ing the goals and expectations of your curriculum? Throughout this book, we’ve addressed this question in part by discussing the need to observe children in order to scaffold their devel- opment. But what specific things can you do to determine your children’s individual needs and chart their progress? How do you identify children who might have special needs? How do you know whether your curriculum is working as intended? What should you do to con- tinue developing your own curriculum knowledge? In view of increasing use and awareness of technologies, what are the most effective ways to use these technologies for curriculum and/or assessment?

In this chapter, we examine the concepts of student assessment and ongoing evaluation for continuous improvement of the curriculum. We also address the emerging and changing role of technology as a tool for curriculum implementation and assessment.

12.1 Developmentally Appropriate Assessment The primary goal of a developmentally appropriate approach to assessment is to inform your practices so that the curriculum you implement matches the developmental needs and inter- ests of the children in your care or classroom (Gullo, 2006; NAEYC/NAECS/SDE, 2003). As you continue to think about theory as part of the “why” behind curriculum decisions, assessment of your students and your program also provides practical, ongoing information to guide what you choose to do. For example, setting up your classroom using sound principles of design should theoretically provide children with opportunities to engage with materials, explore their ideas and imagination, and promote socialization. Your assessment of how children actu- ally use the environment, however, may reveal that some areas need more or fewer materials to balance movement and activity levels.

Similarly, while you observe daily that Anna Bess is a highly verbal child, with a large vocabu- lary and sophisticated sense of story structure, you may learn through assessment that she needs a great deal of support to identify the sounds in words to help her progress in reading and writing.

Creating an Assessment Plan

Planning for the assessment of groups and individual children should reflect a systematic, comprehensive approach (NAEYC, 2005). Assessment of young children is most effective when it is curriculum-based—that is, aligned with learning standards as well as the goals and content of the curriculum and used to modify activities and practices to advance the develop- ment of each child (Gullo, 2006). In general, assessments are categorized either as formative

Developmentally Appropriate Assessment Chapter 12

if they document ongoing development and progress, or summative if they are administered at intervals, such as end-of-year reports used to confer with a child’s family.

Some widely used programs, such as Creative Curriculum and High Scope, offer integrated, curriculum-based assessment systems with tools, schedules, and guidance for teachers that are also aligned with state early learning standards. In elementary schools, assessment sys- tems are driven by national and state standards and typically include a balance of formative and summative assessments (often standardized tests) that measure overall achievement at the end of a school year. Independent or private early childhood programs may design their own assessment systems, such as the one displayed in Table 12.1, designed by an NAEYC- accredited program to meet the standard for assessment. This example of an assessment system for a preschool program provides a timetable that indicates when and how assessment information is collected, communicated, organized, and applied.

Table 12.1: Sample Assessment System

Time Line Activity Instruments Product Follow-up

At enrollment Developmental screening

Ages/Stages Questionnaire (ASQ) for appropriate age and Social Emotional Questionnaire (ASQ/ SE) if indicated

Formal report for child file

Referral to BabyNet or Child Find and process via school district if warranted or follow up with additional question- naires for more data

August Teacher–teacher conference

Child file Draft Goals Form (GF) for home visit

Confer with prior teacher if more information needed

August Home visits Home Information Form (HIF), goals form photo

Family/child profile

Initiate or revise existing goals

Regular informal communications; referrals if needed

September New family orien- tation (evening session about assessment system)

All assessment system documents

Present/discuss assessment system

Q&A as indicated; ongoing informal communications

Ongoing Home/school communication

Celebrations and Concerns form (CCF)

Completed form Conversation, conferences if requested; information used to inform curricular decisions

Fall term, monthly:

August, September, October

Observation, recording anecdotal evidence

Anecdotal record Updated goals Individualizing instruction and adjusting curriculum

Fall term, monthly:

August, September, October

Work sample collection

Portfolio Photo, video/ audio recording, artifact

Used to inform curricular decisions and evidence of growth; shared during parent/teacher conference

(continued)

https://teachingstrategies.com/solutions/teach/

https://highscope.org/

Developmentally Appropriate Assessment Chapter 12

The NAEYC recommends that a well-developed assessment system should focus on identifying children’s needs and interests, describing and reporting their progress accurately, and using assessment information to make curriculum decisions (National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2005). As described in the 2003 NAEYC/NAECS/SDE position statement, an effective assessment system is characterized by:

• Ethical practices

• Fidelity between assessment practices and their intended uses

• Age, developmental, and cultural appropriateness

• Reliable and valid methods and instruments

• Alignment with desired outcomes that are educationally significant

• Application of results that improves learning and outcomes for children

Time Line Activity Instruments Product Follow-up

Fall Conference Day

Parent/teacher conference; compile informa- tion from various sources used throughout the term

Goals Form (GF)

Celebrations and Concerns Forms (CCF)

Work samples

Early Learning Standards (ELS) checklist

Performance assessments

Early Learning Standards Report (ELS) and work samples

Revised goals

Referrals to BabyNet or Child Find if warranted; entry signed by both parent and teacher on goals form; recommendations for future curricular decisions and individualization

Spring Term monthly: January, February, March

Work sample collection

Portfolio Updated portfo- lios with photos and artifacts

Individualizing instruction and adjusting curriculum

By February 15

Quarterly commu- nication: Verbal or written updates as indicated/ needed per fall conferences

Conference and/ or written narrative progress report

Celebrations and Concerns Forms (CCF)

Update goals Conversation or formal conference if parent/teacher requests

April Conference Day

Parent/teacher conference; compile informa- tion from various sources used throughout the term

Goals Form

Celebration and Concerns Forms

Work samples

Early Learning Standards checklist

Performance assessments

Early Learning Standards Report (ELS) and work samples

Revised Goals

Referrals to BabyNet or Child Find if warranted

April Conference Day

“Paper Day”— Update family information

Home Information Form (HIF)

Health and Emergency Forms

Completed form Compile list of students with allergies, inform teacher for involving parents and children in family and culturally sensitive ways, planning curriculum

Developmentally Appropriate Assessment Chapter 12

• Concrete evidence collected in real-world contexts

• Conclusions based on multiple sources of evidence gathered over time

• Follow-through as needed to provide referrals or other needed services

• Limited use of standardized tests

• Collaboration between teachers, programs, and families

These principles make sense because they focus on acquiring information that is used to improve teaching and learning and identify children who may need interventions. Practices consistent with these principles promote access to services, efficient use of resources, and confidence in determinations and decisions made on behalf of young children. NAEYC and NAECS/SDE assessment guidelines are based on professional standards established by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Center for Measurement in Education (NAEYC/NAECS/SDE, 2003).

The Importance of Objectivity

Critical to the use of any assessment strategy or method is objectivity. Teachers must learn to separate the accounting of what they observe or measure in children from interpretation, which should be done separately in the context of analyzing multiple sources of data (Jablon, Dombro & Dichtelmiller, 2007). In other words, teachers strive to separate facts from opinions.

Consider the two sample anecdotal entries below recorded by a teacher of a 4-year-old class:

1. Jamison stepped on a line of blocks that Camden was arranging on the floor in the block area. Camden looked at Jamison and said, “Stop it, you are wrecking my road.” Jamison stepped on the blocks again and then kicked two of them out of the line. Camden started to cry and Jamison said, “You are just a big baby, I don’t want to play with you anyways.” Jamison backed away from the block center and stood off to the side with his fists clenched and tears in his eyes as Anya came and sat down next to Camden.

2. Camden wanted to work alone and was minding his own business arranging blocks in a line to make a road; Jamison intruded and stepped on them. Camden felt frustrated and when he said “Stop it, you are wrecking my road,” Jamison kicked the blocks and in typically mean fashion said, “You are just a big baby, I don’t want to play with you anyways.” Anya came over to make Camden feel better and Jamison just sulked and pouted over in the corner.

The first record preserves the events as they occurred with matter-of-fact language, while the second clearly assigns protagonist/antagonist roles to Jamison and Camden and assumes moti- vations for the behavior that occurred for all three children. The first note, compared with other narratives, can be analyzed for behavior trends over time for any of the children. Perhaps this episode is consistent with a pattern of aggressive (Jamison) or passive (Camden) or empathetic (Anya) behaviors, but it could just as easily represent a departure from any of the children’s usual interactions. The second entry clearly indicates that the teacher has already made a judgment about each of the children, and its usefulness for gleaning insights is limited.

Similarly, suppose four times a year a teacher conducted a fine motor assessment by asking each child to cut out a paper circle with scissors. Table 12.2 displays two records of this task on separate occasions as it might be recorded by different teachers.

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

Table 12.2: Two Accounts of Cutting

Teacher A Teacher B

9/14: Does not hold scissors properly. Can’t cut.

9/14: Holds scissors in right hand sideways with thumb in one hole and index finger in the other. Holds paper in left hand at 12 o’clock position. Attempting to cut in counterclockwise motion, starting at 6 o’clock, but paper slides through scissors.

11/15: Good grip; still can’t cut very well.

11/15: Right-hand grip now includes thumb and first two fingers with thumb up. Holds paper with left hand at 9 o’clock position. Cuts counterclockwise from 3 to 12 o’clock and stops.

Teacher A uses subjective labeling (“properly,” “good”) and language indicating an opinion about the child’s performance on each occasion, while teacher B records information that can be interpreted to describe progress in measurable terms.

Another way teachers ensure objectivity is by using scoring tools, or rubrics, that rely on criterion referencing based on observable behaviors or performance rather than subjective judgments. A criterion is similar to a standard or benchmark—a statement or descriptor that conveys an expected outcome or level of performance. If a criterion describes an action or behavior that is observable, it is more likely that anyone who performs the assessment will score it objectively, as the behavior will either be observed or it won’t.

For example, suppose you are assessing self-help skills. Using criteria such as “not indepen- dent, working on independence, independent” is subjective; if two teachers rated the same child they might each have a very different idea about what “working on . . .” means or what criterion must be met to be rated “independent.” A scoring tool that lists criteria such as “ties shoes, zips, cleans up without being asked, puts nap items away unassisted, asks for help when needed” is objective because the assessor must see the child perform each task in order to check it off.

12.2 Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Assessment methods can be formal or informal. Formal assessments include standardized measures that are norm-referenced; that is, they score an individual child’s performance against the average, or mean, scores of a larger population of children. The larger popula- tion is selected to be representative of the smaller samples of children to whom the test is administered.

Informal assessments are not normed, may be narratively expressed, and can be obtained commercially or teacher-designed. Informal assessments are implemented in the classroom or care setting to document learning, skills, and/or behavior. These measures contribute valuable information that provides a holistic, context-specific view of growth over time.

Other measures, either formal or informal, are criterion-referenced, or designed to assess each individual child or group of children with respect to specific goals or desired outcomes expressed in curriculum materials, state early learning and academic standards, or individual- ized learning plans for children with special needs, such as the Individual Educational Plan (IEP) or Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP).

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

Formal Assessments

Normed standardized instruments generally fall into one of three categories: screens, achieve- ment tests, or intelligence tests. The purpose of a screening tool such as the Denver II (Denver Developmental Materials, 2012) or the Brigance Early Childhood series (Curriculum Associates, 2011) is usually to obtain a general picture of development or behavior to deter- mine if a more detailed assessment or evaluation is warranted. Screens can be administered by trained professionals, but instructions are typically easy for educators to follow. Some screens, such as the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (2012), are specifically designed for parents.

Achievement tests are intended to assess what a child knows or can do and are the types of tests administered annually to elementary and high school students to measure progress toward meeting state academic standards and curriculum outcomes. A battery of several subtests is typically administered over several days. Use of a single achievement test to make high-stakes decisions, such as a child’s readiness for school, is considered inadequate and developmentally inappropriate (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009).

Intelligence tests are designed to deter- mine a person’s aptitude and capacities for learning in comparison to all others in the population from which the norms are derived. The Binet-Simon Intelligence Test, developed by Alfred Binet and Lewis Simon in 1905, was the first to be introduced. In 1916, Lewis Terman, at Stanford University, adapted the scales for American use as the Stanford-Binet Scales (Levine & Munsch, 2011). The test score was expressed as an intelligence quo- tient (IQ) or ratio of mental to chrono- logical age.

The Wechsler Intelligence Scales, intro- duced by psychologist David Wechsler in 1955, are also widely used and adapted the IQ concept to an intelligence deviation score, basing norms on a distribution of scores across the normal curve. These tests are reliable only when they are administered by trained professionals, usually psychologists, and typically not before age 6.

Concerns about cultural bias in the norming processes first expressed by Alfred Binet (Siegler, 1992) persist today, since many believe that the heavy reliance on language in these tests compromises results for children with limited English proficiency (Levine & Munsch, 2011).

Widespread implementation of standardized testing with children under the age of 8, espe- cially if not balanced with the holistic data that informal assessments provide, is considered developmentally inappropriate (NAEYC/NAECS/SDE, 2003). Such tests offer only a “snapshot” of what the child can do, don’t allow for modification to accommodate individual differences, don’t accurately reflect a child’s real-life experience, may be linguistically or culturally biased, and focus only on what rather than how a child learns (Anderson, Moffat, & Shapiro, 2006; Branscombe, Castle, Dorsey & Taylor, 2003; Gullo, 2006). While teachers need to understand

Early childhood educators and researchers exercise cau- tion in using standardized test for a variety of reasons.

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

how formal measures such as standardized tests are developed and used, their administra- tion should be limited to instances where it is clear that the results may benefit children in a specific way, such as identifying a child with special needs who would be entitled to support services (NAEYC/NAECS/SDE, 2003).

Informal Assessments

Programs and teachers that apply developmentally appropriate principles to assessment make extensive use of informal assessments, also known as alternative or authentic methods. Informal assessments match curriculum goals, actively involve children and families, focus on change and growth over time, and occur in real time in the classroom or care setting (Branscombe, Castle, Dorsey & Taylor, 2003; Gullo, 2006; Jablon, Dombro, & Dichtelmiller, 2007; Wortham, 2011). Often, authentic assessments focus on recording observations of individual children during play (Beaty, 2009; Bodrova & Leong, 2007; Flagler, 1996; Gullo, 2006; Jablon, Dombro, & Dichtelmiller, 2007) or daily routines, interactions with family mem- bers, and in group interaction (Jablon, Dombro & Dichtelmiller, 2007).

Teachers also design per- formance or skills assess- ments and collect and analyze learning artifacts to evaluate growth and identify needed curriculum modifica- tions. Authentic assessments don’t require that the teacher “prep” children, in contrast to the coaching that teach- ers sometimes provide to prepare children for a paper- and-pencil standardized test. Rather than offering the child a preselected group of available responses that may not necessarily match what the child knows, authentic assessments record behavior

and performance in the precise terms or actions displayed by the child (Anderson, Moffat, & Shapiro, 2006; Gullo, 2006).

Observational Strategies and Tools Assessment information obtained via the direct observation of children can provide valuable data over time, in multiple contexts, in the words of the teacher or child, and during many kinds of activities (Jablon, Dombro, & Dichtelmiller, p. 42). For example, a teacher might observe a child during indoor or outdoor play, at lunchtime, or during transitions. Tools for observation can be premade, obtained from various resources, or constructed by the teacher. Observations should always be dated and the observer noted if multiple people are assessing the same group of children. Types of observational assessments include those described in Table 12.3.

Authentic assessments take place in the learning setting, with familiar materials and adults that children know and trust.

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

Table 12.3: Observation-Based Assessments

Type of Observation

Description and Uses Formats/Tools

Anecdotal record

Descriptive narratives that record details of events, behaviors, or notes about children’s activities, accomplishments, or needs.

Index cards, notebook paper, bound journal, adhesive mailing labels, sticky notes, calendar.

Running record Real-time recording of activity, conversation, or behavior, often time-stamped as observation proceeds (akin to a video recording, but with words rather than a camera).

Index cards, notebook paper, journal.

Daily log Records observations over the course of a day, in sync with different time or activity blocks.

Clipboard with preprinted daily schedule and blanks for recording what child does at different times.

Checklists While observing, the teacher checks for presence or absence of targeted outcomes, behaviors, or language on a preprinted list; this may be used to track whether child completed sequence of activities; teacher checks off or records date target is achieved. Used to track growth of skills or development over time.

Clipboard and pre- printed forms or online lists of skills or behaviors used with laptop, tablet, or other portable device for use in the classroom.

Time/event sampling

Often used together to discern the frequency or cause of problem behaviors; the teacher may use a tally sheet to record the number of times a particular behavior (such as hitting or crying) is observed over a predetermined time period such as an hour or day; event sampling records what activity or behavior directly preceded or followed a behavior being tracked to look for patterns or cause/ effect. Can also be used to track how many times a child visits a particular center, the rest room, or how much time is spent there.

Clipboard with tally sheet; notebook paper or index cards.

Diagrams/ sketches

Track movement of children around the room; can be helpful for identifying interaction patterns, and children’s interests.

Preprinted floor plan.

Interest inventories

Can be used to gain information from children and families about what children like and dislike; helps in planning and selecting activities and materials.

Checklist or question- naires; sign-up sheets for activities.

Child interviews Conducted any time first-hand information about children’s needs, problems, interests, or reasoning would be helpful for assessment, conflict resolution, behavior management, or planning.

Audio- or videotape; written transcriptions.

Rating scales Records a qualitative assessment using predetermined indicators of achievement (e.g., emergent, developing, mastered) or frequency (e.g., never, sometimes, always).

Preprinted forms that list activity or skills being observed with blank space for recording assessment.

Matrices/grids Preprinted chart that records activity of a group of children or for observing multifaceted activity, such as both social interactions and language during play. Usually represented on a chart with both vertical and horizontal axes. With a group of children, names are listed on one axis and targeted behavior or skills on the other. With an individual child, one type of behavior is noted on each axis.

Clipboard and preprinted sheets.

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

What the teacher does while observing varies by the purpose, timing, and characteristics of the observational tool being used. For instance, an anecdotal record or note is an “after- the-fact” narrative; a teacher might make entries during planning time, at the end of a day or week while memory is fresh and events can be recalled accurately. A running record or time/event sampling is recorded in real time as behavior is occurring. A teacher might use a checklist to observe and assess a child or group of children for vocabulary and social interac- tion skills while interacting with them during lunchtime or he or she might record the same kind of data while standing or sitting off to the side as children build with blocks or engage in dramatic play.

Performance-Based Assessments and Developmental Checklists Teachers sometimes conduct assessments with individual children in face-to-face interactions to determine their level of mastery of particular skills. Performance assessments provide infor- mation about what a child knows or does. The teacher may ask a child to perform an action, such as scissor-cutting to assess motor skills. Or the teacher might ask a child to complete a task to assess the extent to which a child has attained a cognitive skill such as one-to-one correspondence. She could select items from the classroom math or manipulative center, set them up in a line on the table, and ask the child to point to each item while counting, repeat- ing the assessment as many times as necessary to determine for sure what the child can do.

Further, to document a child’s reasoning ability, a teacher may ask the child to demonstrate how he or she might solve a problem, such as dividing a set of objects into two equivalent sets, and record informa- tion about the child’s ability to do so.

The main advantage of this type of assessment is the opportunity to use materials familiar to the child in a context where you can also ask questions and invite the child to explain his or her thinking or reasoning. As discussed in earlier chapters, many of the state standards documents provide examples of things you should be observing as indicators that each cri- terion is being met. These “snapshots” can be very helpful as suggestions for skills assessments.

Some teachers do performance assessments on a predetermined schedule, such as two children per week for a particular set of skills; others do so on an as-needed basis for compiling conferencing reports or completing comprehensive developmental checklists.

Artifacts and Work Sampling An artifact is a concrete sample of work produced by a child, such as a journal page, painting, pho- tograph of a block construction, or recording of a child speaking or reading. Artifacts provide direct evidence of what a child can do, and a collection of artifacts contributes to the teacher’s understanding of growth and learning.

Teachers create anecdotal records by making notes about each child, either on a regularly scheduled basis or as needed to document behavior and observations. The narrative record about learning that builds over time may be used for many purposes.

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

Teachers employ work sampling by selectively choosing and saving artifacts that reflect curriculum goals and develop- mental benchmarks. The Work Sampling System developed by Samuel J. Meisels and colleagues (2012) is used by many early childhood programs, including a ver- sion specifically designed for Head Start.

Self-Assessment Even very young children can provide information about what they know and what they can do through self- assessment, which helps teachers document their growth and learning. Sometimes self- assessment occurs naturally through conversation or verbal interactions. For instance, a 3-year-old might say “My jacket is wrong” as he tries to close the snaps before going outside. The teacher observes that he has fastened some snaps but that they are not matched correctly. Therefore she knows that he does indeed have the fine motor skill needed to press the two pieces of a snap closure together and that he realizes they also need to be matched properly.

A kindergarten child may come to the teacher with his writing journal and state, “I know the word “papa” starts with “p” but I don’t know what letter comes next, “o” or “a.” This state- ment reveals that the child has already narrowed down the sound that follows p to two viable alternatives, one that represents the sound he hears and the other perhaps an indication of emerging knowledge that words aren’t always spelled the way they sound.

In other instances, teachers intentionally engage children in self-assessment in a short inter- view or conference. For example, upon completion of a study of birds, the teacher might ask each child, “What birds do you know about now that you didn’t before? Can you tell me some things you learned about them?" Or, after a child has spent several days building an airport in the block center, the teacher could show the child several pictures of the structure in progress and ask, “What was the hardest part of building the airport? I see that you made a parking garage with a ramp, can you tell me how you figured out a way to make the roof? How did you decide when the airport was finished?”

Writing conferences with children allow for a child to isolate specific problems encountered or challenges overcome, such as circling words in the draft of a story that might be misspelled or underlining words the child is confident about.

Similarly, a teacher can engage a child in making evaluative judgments. For instance, she could ask the child to look at two different paintings and choose the one that represents his best effort and to explain why he thinks so. Or she could give him two different highlighters with which to identify his best examples of written letters and ones he needs to practice more.

The value of self-assessment is that it gives voice to a child’s ideas about her own strengths and weaknesses and contributes to constructing an image of herself as a partner in the learning process. The child’s observations may be congruent with the teacher’s independent

Teachers selectively choose learning artifacts, such as a child’s artwork, to represent evidence of growth and change over time.

Identifying Children’s Needs and Interests Chapter 12

evaluations, identify misperceptions the child might have about her skills, or provide addi- tional factors for the teacher to consider.

Identifying Children with Special Needs

Each state is required to provide a process for referring, evaluating, and implementing early intervention services for young children as needed under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (U.S. Department of Education, 2012). Part C of IDEA focuses on children from birth through age 2, and Part B covers individuals aged 3 through 21.

Providing support for children with disabilities is a collaborative process, and part of your role in assessment is noting and sharing observations with families when you see indications of a developmental delay or atypical behavior. Your concerns should be noted with a high level of sensitivity, as parents often feel anxious or confused and may need help with initiating a referral request.

As an early childhood educator or caregiver, you will be part of an assessment team that determines the possible existence of delays or disabilities that constitute eligibility for services and, second, ensures that your curriculum and assessment strategies support those children who do need extra help (Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children, 2007). If a child in your care is determined to be eligible for services, you will also participate in documenting the child’s progress toward goals that are established and periodically revised in the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) or Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP). The kinds of authentic assessment strategies and tools described in this chapter are preferred:

Because the participants or informants for most criterion- or curriculum-based assess- ments are teachers and care providers who know the child best, these assessments [e.g., anecdotal records, performance assessments, work sampling, etc.] may be more efficient and may also facilitate the development of collabor- ative partnerships. Results also provide a direct and functional link to IFSP/IEP development, curriculum planning, and implementation. The information collected can easily be translated for use in instruction. (DEC, 2007 p. 14)

Children who may not qualify for the specialized education outlined in an IEP or ISFP but who have a disability such as an illness, injury, or chronic condi- tion such as asthma or allergies are also protected under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This provision declares that all children with disabilities are entitled to accommodations so that they may fully partici- pate in public school activities. A “504” plan might include such things as a wheelchair ramp, peanut-free environment, or keeping an inhaler at school (U.S. Department of Education, 2012).

Teachers play an integral role in the support system for children and families with special needs.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq9805.html

https://sites.ed.gov/idea/

Describing Children’s Progress and Adapting the Curriculum Chapter 12

12.3 Describing Children’s Progress and Adapting the Curriculum As assessment data are collected, they must also be organized and stored so that this informa- tion will be available for interpretation, analysis, and reporting purposes. Because assessment products can represent a variety of materials, there are also different kinds of organizational systems. Programs with integrated online assessment systems will have a means to enter and store data and generate reports.

Organizing Data

The most common means for organizing early childhood assessment data is the portfolio, which may include examples of any or all of the assessments described above. The window of time a portfolio represents can vary considerably. For example, you might assemble a portfolio of artifacts to document one thematic or emergent group project, individual portfolios for one area of focus such as writing, or a comprehensive portfolio that tracks a child’s general progress for an entire year.

Portfolios provide powerful holistic evi- dence of learning because they include documentation of both process and products and demonstrate growth, change, and potential. Teachers have multiple sources of information to deter- mine how the curriculum is working as they make planning decisions. Most of the samples in a portfolio are selected by the teacher. However, allowing and even encouraging children to choose some of their own samples is another means for children to be involved in the process and can reveal useful insights about their thinking. Families can also be included in the construction of a portfolio, since they may be able to provide examples of things children do at home to supplement those collected at school.

For instance, Ms. Mary was having difficulty collecting art samples from a child who routinely preferred the block and math centers or doing things that involved high levels of physical activity and the opportunity to interact with friends. In conversation with the child’s mother, she learned that at home, as an only child in a neighborhood without many other children to play with, he often did spend a great deal of time drawing and coloring. She was able to contribute samples of artwork that provided his teacher with important information.

The amount of material included in a portfolio, particularly one assembled over a year, will vary, and storing the file can be a challenge. Teachers often use expanding files or a crate with file folders. Fortunately the increasing availability of technologies provides options for scanning and digital data storage that don’t require the physical space of traditional folios.

Early childhood educators commonly organize assessment information and artifacts in an individual portfolio for each child.

Describing Children’s Progress and Adapting the Curriculum Chapter 12

Portfolios intended to be kept for multiple years typically require selecting a few artifacts that best represent progress, such as a drawing from the beginning and end of the year or a piece of writing that represents the highest technical quality achieved by a child.

Interpreting and Analyzing Data

Your interpretation and analysis of the assessment data you collect will be purposely targeted to match curriculum and developmental goals. Many programs use a comprehensive develop- mental checklist to provide families with an overall picture of the child’s growth over time in multiple domains and specific information about strengths or needs.

Since early learning standards based on the National Education Goals Panel (NEGP) recom- mendations are developmentally based and organized by domain, the indicators in these documents can be very helpful in the absence of commercially produced assessments that may accompany a curriculum. For instance, in one program teachers converted the criteria in the state’s early learning standards to a master checklist, as Figure 12.1 illustrates.

Figure 12.1: Excerpt from South Carolina Early Learning Standards Checklist for 2-Year-Olds

In this example, developmental indicators from the state’s early learning standards have been con- verted to a format that can be used as a checklist.

Date Example/Evidence Developmental Indicators

Developmental Indicators

Calls to caregiver to watch activities; very proud to show off abilities to special adults.

Tells caregiver about experiences; details increase with age.

Calls to caregiver for help when frustrated.

Tests limits, particularly with trusted adults, to see what response will be given.

Seeks adult help to get something another child has (around 24 months).

Works with caregiver to solve problems (around 30 months).

SELF-AWARENESS

Date Example/Evidence

Comments on hair color, skin color, clothing or language dif- ferent from own.

Knows first and last name.

Wants to do things by self.

Seeks adult attention; Says, “Look at me!” to show skills.

Demonstrates strong opinions about likes and dislikes.

Repeats words provided by caregiver.

Labels feelings: “I am happy.” “I am mad.”

Wants to do many things on own.

EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT GOAL: The child will develop trusting relationships with important adults, express a

confident sense of self, and learn to control self.

BUILDING TRUST STANDARD: The child demonstrates strong, secure relationships with adults who

love and care for them.

STANDARD: The child demonstrates growing awareness of personal preferences and abilities.

Describing Children’s Progress and Adapting the Curriculum Chapter 12

As you review observation data, anecdotal records, work samples, skills assessments, and so forth, you are look- ing for evidence that allows you to document that a goal has been met or a developmental benchmark achieved. Sometimes teachers develop a coding system that pro- vides a kind of shorthand for noting evidence. For exam- ple, you might refer to anecdotal records as “AR1, AR2,” or dated drawings as “D11/3, D3/4.” These abbreviations can then be entered in different places on a global devel- opmental assessment. One assessment artifact might provide evidence for multiple indicators, or you might need multiple artifacts to document a single criterion. Summarized data from individual child checklists or pro- files can be aggregated to a profile for the group, helpful for seeing interests, strengths, and needs and for plan- ning adaptations to the curriculum.

Reporting and Sharing Results

Teachers have many ways of reporting and sharing assessment results that may be predetermined by pro- gram or school policies or established independently by each teacher. Written reports that summarize assessment results for a given period of time are often distributed to families. The best way to share and explain assessment results, discuss a child’s development and learning, and encourage parent participation in setting goals or identifying needs is to schedule a face-to- face meeting with the family members.

However, parent-teacher conferences held once or twice a year should not be the only means of communication. As discussed in Chapter 5, establishing and maintaining respectful ongo- ing relationships with each of your families is a critical component of an effective assessment system.

Adapting the Curriculum

As teachers compile and analyze assessment data, they make decisions about how to adapt or modify the curriculum and choose materials and strategies to diversify activities and instruc- tion to meet identified needs and interests. In the broadest sense, this might mean, for exam- ple, rotating materials out of activity areas that you observe children are no longer interested in and replacing them with different ones that complement new inquiry themes, general advancement of skill levels, or materials specifically requested by children.

More specifically, you will use assessment information to plan adaptations for individual chil- dren. Strategies for doing so and representative examples include:

• Planning small-group activities for children with similar skill levels (e.g., Anna Bess, Mario, and Katie will play a word game that requires identification of beginning letter sounds “p”, “k”, and “g”; Camden, Catherine, Adi, and Holland will use knowledge of beginning letter sounds to match all consonants with corresponding picture cards;

Face-to-face interactions such as a parent-teacher conference give teachers the opportunity to include families in a long-term conversation about the growth and learning of each child.

Curriculum and Program Evaluation Chapter 12

Timmy and Noah will continue working on dictating dialogue for play they have been working on all week).

• Providing options within an activity to accommodate different skill or interest lev- els (e.g., 3-year-olds have multiple materials for the construction of collages with fall theme; children can cut, tear, use hole punchers, glue sticks, papers of different weights, precut shapes, stamps, etc.; the light table in toddler class has colored straws for three children to sort; water beads in a bowl for four others, and shaving cream inside Zip-Loc bags for two others who are resistant to working with squishy things that are wet).

• Individualized directed instruction (e.g., working with Blake on scissor cutting).

• Providing opportunities for independent work (e.g., designating Charlie and Rosie to set up the balance scale, find materials of equivalent weight, and record their results on the observation chart).

12.4 Curriculum and Program Evaluation Insights gained from the assessment of individual children will tell you a lot about how the curriculum is working. One of the problems, from a developmentally appropriate perspective, with standardized testing in public schools and programs is that they often result in limiting curriculum opportunities in favor of “teaching to the test” (Branscombe, 2003; Gullo, 2006; Lambert, Abbott-Shim, & Sibley, 2006). There are however, systems for the global assess- ment of an early childhood curriculum that are consistent with developmentally appropriate principles. These processes include licensing and regulatory structures, program accreditation, and environmental assessments.

Licensing and Regulatory Structures

Each state has child-care licensing regulations that describe what is minimally acceptable in a curriculum (Lambert, Abbott-Shim, & Sibley, 2006). Typically regulations require that teachers provide a safe and healthy environment, planned daily program of developmentally appropri- ate activities, balance of indoor and outdoor activities, quiet and active times, and limited use of media such as TV and computers.

Increasingly, states are engaging in the national Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS) initiative, which is supported with resources provided by various organizations, includ- ing NAEYC (2005). NAEYC reports in their QRIS Toolkit, published in 2010, that more than twenty-one states had established QRIS systems with at least twenty-two more in the pro- cess of doing so. As part of a comprehensive approach to providing standards, account- ability, outreach, financial incentives, and consumer education, states establish requirements for curricula that are much more specific than those found in older versions of child-care regulations.

While each state is free to develop its own vision of assessment or measurement, options presently include program standards, state-level approval of specific curriculum models (see the feature box in Chapter 2), use of environmental rating scales, and multitiered rating systems, which reward programs that complete an accreditation process. If you work in a state that currently has or is developing a QRIS, you will have access to specific tools to moni- tor and continue to improve the quality of your curriculum.

Curriculum and Program Evaluation Chapter 12

Early Education Program Standards

Program standards are different from early learning stan- dards in that they apply to all dimensions of the program, including curriculum, whereas early learning standards are written as expectations for individual children. States that provide program standards will include a set of global indicators for curriculum. For example, the Massachusetts Standards for 3- and 4-Year-Old Programs include a sec- tion on curriculum with multiple criteria for each of the following:

• Opportunities for curriculum planning

• Curriculum based on information about children

• Educational goals that promote concrete learning

• Adapting goals to meet individual needs

• Adapting curriculum based on the assessment of individual children

• Flexible structure

• Flexible and predictable daily routines

• Smooth, unregimented transitions between activities

• Quiet activities

• Opportunities to develop self-help skills

• Parental input about curriculum (Massachusetts Department of Education, 2003, pp. 9–12)

Accreditation

The NAEYC Academy was established in 1985 to provide the first comprehensive volun- tary accreditation process, which was most recently revised in 2005. Subsequently, accredi- tation processes have been developed by other organizations including the National Early Childhood Program Accreditation and the National Accreditation Commission for Early Care and Education Programs.

Accreditation is a fee-based multistage long-term process focused on the self-study of pro- gram and teacher practices. The program personnel document and report staff qualifications and produce evidence about how their curriculum, teaching practices, and other dimensions such as relationships with families, meet the accreditation standards. A trained professional visits the site to verify the accuracy of the program report. Typically teachers are most involved in documenting how they meet criteria related to curriculum, assessment, environments, and working with families.

Accreditation is designed to promote ongoing improvement through a multiyear renewal cycle. Standards are research-based. They are written so that the process of documenting how all parts of the program meet each standard provides information and opportunities for teachers to closely examine and strengthen their curriculum and practices. Figure 12.2 pro- vides an example of how teachers of three different age groups answered the same sample NAEYC accreditation criteria.

State regulations for child-care pro- grams always include regular facility inspections to ensure that the chil- dren’s environment is safe and healthy and that it has a developmentally appropriate curriculum.

http://www.naeyc.org/accreditation

http://www.necpa.net/

https://www.earlylearningleaders.org/

Curriculum and Program Evaluation Chapter 12

Figure 12.2: Examples from an NAEYC Accreditation Folio

The NAEYC Standard 2 Curriculum includes many criteria that the teacher documents by providing a narra- tive explanation and supporting evidence in the form of images or artifacts.

1.C.: Helping Children Make Friends 1.C.03: Teaching staff support children as they practice social skills and build friendships by helping them enter into, sustain, and enhance play.

Age Group Narrative Response Evidence

Toddler Class Great effort is made to support children as they build friendships and negotiate play relationships. This is done through a variety of methods including the following: 1) Large Group Time—We often have discussions about what being a good friend looks like, how to initiate play with another child and how to, in a nice way, say that you don't want to play. The children take turns role-playing these different scenarios; 2) Modeling—Often times when we see children struggling with friends we will assist by demonstrating appropriate language and behavior necessary for play. 3) Literature Models—We read books to the children which demonstrate good friendships.

The teacher leads the children in a game of ring-around-the- rosey while on our playground.

3-Year-Old Class

Each day during our Free Choice time in the classroom and on the playground, the teachers interact and play with the children to help them stay on task, to encourage socialization between classmates and teachers, and to help solve problems.

The teacher assists a group of children working on a floor puzzle together.

4/5K Class Great effort is made to support children as they build friendships and negotiate play relationships. This is done through a variety of ways including the following: 1) Morning Meetings—We read books and have discus- sions about what being a good friend looks like, how to initiate play with another child and how to, in a nice way, say that you don't want to play. The children take turns role-playing these different scenarios: 2) Matching—With some children who are new to the program or just have not been successful in developing friend- ships we will try to pair that particular child with someone who has common interests or someone who might serve as a mentor or act as a protégé: 3) Modeling—Often times when we see children struggling with friends we will assist by joining in play and demonstrating appropriate language and behavior necessary for play; and 4) Literature Models—We read books to the children which demonstrate good friendships.

This example of a filled-out form identifies that a particular child is having trouble cooperating with his peers. It identifies our plan for the next week to help him in this area.

Technology in the Curriculum Chapter 12

Environmental Rating Scales

Prior to the launch of the 1985 NAEYC accreditation process, Thelma Harms and Richard Clifford of the University of North Carolina (Chapel Hill) Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute developed the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS). This was expanded to a series of Environment Rating Scales (ERSs) that have since been revised. They include the ECERS-R (Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 2005) and versions for infants and toddlers (Harms, Cryer, & Clifford, 2006), family child care (Harms, Cryer, & Clifford, 2007), and school-aged children (Harms, Jacobs, & White, 1995). Each scale has between thirty-eight and forty-nine items arranged in subscales that address different parts of the environment, including curriculum.

One of the distinguishing features of the ERS is that each criterion is scored on a rating scale of 1 to 7, ranging from inadequate (1), minimal (3), and good (5) to excellent (7). Narrative descriptions for each of the scoring indicators are unique to the item. The language is so pre- cise that it provides both self-correcting information and a high level of interrater reliabil- ity, ensuring that observational ratings will be consistent even when different people conduct the assessment (Lambert, Abbot-Shim, & Sibley, 2006). For example, the “good” statement for greeting in the ECERS-R reads, “Each child is greeted individually (e.g., staff say ‘hello’ and use child’s name; use child’s primary language spoken at home to say ‘hello’)” (Harms, Clifford & Cryer, 2005, p. 22). The ERS is available in Spanish and widely used across the United States as a relatively quick and reliable means for gaining a measure of quality and information that can be used for improvement.

The format of the ERS is so popular and user-friendly that other educators have devel- oped similar scales to assess different age groups or particular aspects of the environment or curriculum. These include the Assessment of Practices in Early Elementary Classrooms (APEEC) by Hemmeter, Maxwell, Ault, and Schuster (2001), the Rating Observation Scale for Inspiring Environments (Deviney, Duncan, Harris, Rody, & Rosenberry, 2010), and POEMS: Preschool Outdoor Environment Measurement Scale (Hestenes, DeBord, Moore, Cosco, & McGinnis, 2005).

12.5 Technology in the Curriculum Technology today represents societal transition to an age driven by access to information and products, social networking, and an increasing array of devices, integrated systems, and plat- forms for delivery of technological processes and activities. Your ability to interact with this text in Ebook format is evidence of this phenomenon.

The term technology is also relative. For example, when the forerunners of today’s copy machines, the mimeograph and ditto, were first introduced and used in schools in the mid- twentieth century, the ability to easily reproduce printed copy in classrooms produced dra- matic changes. These machines enabled teachers to create a worksheet or handout on a single stencil or ditto-master that could then be duplicated via an inked drum to print multiple copies; thus the generic term dittos. Teachers prior to that time laboriously printed spelling words, math problems, and other seat work each day on the blackboard for children to copy by hand on their own papers.

With this one technological advance, curriculum materials changed significantly to include preprinted masters for teachers to copy and distribute. Thus teacher time once spent creating board work became available for other activities, and teachers could arrange desks (which

http://ers.fpg.unc.edu/

Technology in the Curriculum Chapter 12

previously had to be aligned so that all desks faced the board) and other classroom furniture in different ways. Classrooms now feature wipe-off whiteboards and, increasingly, electronic smart boards not as the central means for instruction but one of many kinds of resources for teaching.

As yet we have no way of knowing the full impact of modern technologies on the future of education and specifically early childhood education, curriculum, and assessment practices. But we do know that technology is the focus of a great deal of research and dialogue about its potential effects and challenges.

Using Technology with Children

In 2012 NAEYC and the Fred Rogers Center (FRC) for Early Learning and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent College released a revised position statement on using technology with young children. The statement reflected the views, research, and experiences of experts and early childhood practitioners. While, before the advent of interactive technologies, the NAEYC has always promoted a developmentally appropriate stance, there were concerns among many early childhood educators who felt pressured to use software-based programs with young children. These programs, the educators pointed out, promoted rote learning and passive skill/drill activity in place of the active, play-based concrete experiences supported in devel- opmental research.

The potential applications of current technologies greatly expand the options teachers have to enhance rather than replace elements of the curriculum (Bers & Horn, 2010; Linder, 2012; McManis & Gunnewig, 2012; Parnell & Bartlett, 2012; Shifflet, Toledo, & Mattoon, 2012; U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, 2017). A divide continues to exist between children who grow up as digital natives—that is, those who have had ready

access to and experience with technologies (Rosen, 2006; Yelland, 2010)—and those with limited or no access to twenty-first- century technology. Classrooms are a logi- cal context for providing equitable access and helping all children develop the tech- nological proficiencies they will need to be successful in American society today (Wang, 2010; U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, 2017). Further, the challenge of promoting digital liter- acy (National Institute for Literacy, 2008) is complicated when early childhood educa- tors also face issues or a lack of resources affecting their access to technology.

Developmentally appropriate technology use (DATU) involves “the use of tools and strategies in ways that capitalize on chil- dren’s natural desire to actively, collabora- tively construct knowledge, respecting the

The use of emerging technologies by young children can be developmentally appropriate.

Technology in the Curriculum Chapter 12

unique challenges presented by children’s levels of development across all developmental domains” (Rosen & Jaruszewicz, 2009, p. 164). The new position statement emphasizes the important role of adults in making appropriate decisions; it also places stress on active rather than passive involvement and on teacher education and professional development. Planning activities with technology must also be adapted to support children with linguistic challenges and special needs (Connecticut Office of Early Childhood, 2016; NAEYC/FRC, 2012; Simon & Nemeth, 2012). An ethical framework that protects children from potential exposure to online abuse (Beach, 2010; Croll & Kunze, 2010) should also be kept in mind.

The NAEYC/FRC (2012) and others recommend that teachers and caregivers follow the American Academy of Pediatrics 2010 guidelines, which prohibit the use of passive devices for children younger than age 2; they also recommend that early childhood educators con- sider the amount of screen time at school or care in the context of additional time spent with television or computers elsewhere, particularly at home (Hill, n.d.; Simon & Nemeth, 2012). In addition to the assessment of learning in other domains, teachers should also document children’s emerging digital competencies (Rosen & Jaruszewicz, 2009).

Technology for Teachers

The range of technology tools that teachers can use to support, enhance, and document the curriculum and learning is increasingly broad, although they may continue to use older tech- nologies as well. For instance, a teacher may be reluctant to give up an overhead projector because she uses it to enlarge images on the wall for tracing, or children make extensive use of it for pantomime, shadow pictures, and as a makeshift light table. Similarly, while an MP3 player is readily available, she might continue to provide a pushbutton cassette tape recorder that children can use independently to make audiotapes of themselves reading, which she later uses for assessment purposes.

Since many kinds of computers are no longer restricted to desktops, the increasing array of portable laptops, tablets, iPads, and Ereaders as well as mobile communications devices such as smartphones, offer opportunities to work on computers with children in any location. For example, an iPad can go on a field trip to document or search online for information about fish species seen at the aquarium, or a teacher might use a built-in camera to record inter- views with children about a performance they have attended or send a message from children to families from an off-site location.

An increasing number of schools and classrooms have installed interactive whiteboards that provide computer capability for software and online access in a vertical format for both teachers and children to use. Digital cameras and uploaded software make it possible to document daily activities, videotape children for assessment purposes, translate images into products such as books or digital stories, and share images with families. Scanners, digital copiers, online access, and electronic communications make it possible to stream- line data management, lesson or activity planning, and share information with families and others.

As the ditto and mimeograph machines freed teachers from the front of the room and the chalkboard, modern technology offers teachers the opportunity to reenvision their programs as schools without walls.

Growing as a Curriculum Decision Maker Chapter 12

12.6 Growing as a Curriculum Decision Maker This text has focused on five elements key to developing an integrated teaching philosophy:

1. The purpose of early childhood education

2. How young children learn

3. The role of those who participate in the education of young children

4. The characteristics and content of curriculum

5. How to implement curriculum effectively

We have also emphasized the importance of continual intentional reflection about these fac- tors. You know that your work will be shaped and influenced by the context in which you teach or care for children, the needs and interests of your children and families, and evolving public policy and sociocultural factors. The classroom or care setting is not just a place where children will develop and learn: it’s also a laboratory for your continued learning and develop- ment. Several ideas can guide you in this journey:

• The way you approach teaching emerges from the way you experienced learning but is not bound by it.

• Others have informed early childhood education in the past, but you have a role in conceptualizing the curriculum of the future.

• Reflecting on your experiences should provoke more questions than answers.

• Planning for curriculum should be informed by insights about how the curriculum is experienced by children.

• Continual examination of your assumptions about learners, your role, and curriculum is at the core of intentional reflection about your teaching.

Finally, your influence on the children, families, and colleagues you work with will extend beyond any curriculum you develop or implement. Teaching is unique among the professions; you will remember children long after they have left your classroom or care and they will remember you as someone who has played an important role in their lives. You will learn as much from them as they do from you. Teaching gives those of us who choose it the opportu- nity for a professional life that is both challenging and fulfilling.

Teachers are patient; they realize that the return on their efforts is often not realized for years or decades. As Rachel Carson stated in The Sense of Wonder (1965), the last book she wrote:

If I had influence with the good fairy, who is supposed to preside over the christen- ing of all children, I should ask that her gift to each child in the world be a sense of wonder so indestructible that it would last throughout life, as an unfailing antidote against the boredom and disenchantments of later years, the sterile preoccupation with things that are artificial, the alienation from sources of our strength. If a child is to keep alive his inborn sense of wonder without any such gift from the fairies, he needs the companionship of at least one adult who can share it, rediscovering with him the joy, excitement and mystery of the world we live in.

Posttest Chapter 12

Chapter Summary • A developmentally appropriate approach to assessment is comprehensive, systematic,

and focused on learning and development.

• Objectivity is critically important to ensure assessment information is reliable and accurate.

• Research has documented the limitations of using standardized testing with young children, although norm-referenced measures can be useful sources of information when combined with other more authentic measures and strategies.

• Teachers rely on many tools, such as anecdotal and running records, checklists, skills assessments, and tallies to record their observations of children in the classroom or care setting.

• Teachers use data from observational tools, interviews with children, and analysis of artifacts to construct a picture of what each individual child knows and can do and communicate effectively with families about their strengths and needs.

• Teachers play an important role in the identification, referral, and support of children with special needs and their families, and they use assessment information to adapt the curriculum for individual children.

• Global measures such as state program standards, accreditation processes, and envi- ronmental rating scales are increasingly being applied in early childhood across the United States to assess program quality.

• Curriculum evaluation processes offer a valuable professional development opportu- nity for teachers to document and strengthen their practices.

• An important consideration for teachers as they continue to assess and reflect on their practices is access to and the role of technology in the curriculum of the future.

• Technologies can be used in developmentally appropriate ways to expand learning opportunities for young children and teachers.

• Ongoing reflection about the purpose of early childhood education, how children learn, the roles of teachers and families, curriculum content, and strategies provides a cohesive framework for the continued development of a teaching philosophy.

Posttest

1. The primary goal of a developmentally appropriate approach to assessment is:

a. To know what your children need to do to master the curriculum.

b. To inform your practices so that the curriculum matches the needs and interests of the children.

c. To report standardized test scores to the state.

d. To meet the accountability requirements of your position or job.

2. Which of the following statements is an example of objective language in an anecdotal record?

a. Jamison jumped off the climber.

b. Susie isn’t very good at eating with a spoon yet.

c. Mikey snapped the top three of the four snaps on his jacket.

Posttest Chapter 12

d. Tessa played well today.

3. Standardized tests are norm-referenced, which means:

a. Individual scores are compared to the scores of the group of children who are being tested.

b. Each score compares to a desired goal, or criterion.

c. Individual scores reflect a comparison to the mean or average score of a larger pop- ulation similar to the group being tested.

d. Individual scores are graded on a curve.

4. Which of the following is not an example of “real-time” authentic assessment?

a. Anecdotal record.

b. Running record.

c. Tally.

d. Performance assessment.

5. One of the advantages of a portfolio for assessment purposes is that it provides:

a. Portability.

b. Holistic information.

c. A snapshot in time.

d. An alternative to authentic assessment.

6. The preferred means for communicating assessment results to families is:

a. A face-to-face conference.

b. Email the test scores.

c. Send a comprehensive written report in the mail.

d. Scan all original assessment documents and keep them in the school archives so families can come in and view any time.

7. Licensing regulations for child-care programs often consist of:

a. Rigorous standards to ensure the best possible program.

b. Playground safety to reduce liability risk.

c. Assessment and accountability systems.

d. Minimally acceptable standards for health, safety, and curriculum.

8. Accreditation standards typically follow a multistep process focused primarily on:

a. Screening out low-quality programs so parents will know which ones to choose.

b. Providing programs and teachers an opportunity to examine and strengthen their practices.

c. Allowing teachers the chance to use emerging technologies to document their curriculum.

d. Creating a national accountability system for child-care programs.

9. Using technology with young children is appropriate when characterized by:

a. Designated amounts of screen time each day for all children.

Answers and Rejoinders to Pretest Chapter 12

b. A technology curriculum that makes sure all children have access to electronic games, smart boards, and keyboarding experience.

c. Active engagement in activities that enhance but do not replace other elements of the curriculum.

d. Never using technology with children as it is harmful to their cognitive development before the age of 5.

10. Continued reflection on practices is helpful because:

a. Teaching is a legacy passed on from one teacher to another.

b. Since the field is driven by the “big thinkers” of the past, your role is to apply their ideas in the best possible way.

c. Reflecting on your experiences should answer all your questions.

d. Planning for curriculum should be informed by insights about how the curriculum is experienced by both you and your students.

Answers: 1 (b); 2 (c); 3 (c); 4 (a); 5 (b); 6 (a); 7 (d); 8 (b); 9 (c); 10 (d)

Discussion Questions

1. You know that early childhood educators are wary of using standardized tests with young children; how can early childhood teachers further the conversation about this issue?

2. Imagine you have strong assessment evidence that one of your students needs further evaluation for autism spectrum. You are pretty sure the family will be resistant to the idea of referral. What kind of approach would you take to make sure the child gets appropriate supports?

3. Now that we are at the end of this book, how have your ideas about your role as an early childhood educator changed or grown over time?

Answers and Rejoinders to Pretest

1. False. The teacher is critical to the process of planning and implementing any kind of assessment system.

2. False. Standardized tests are considered developmentally inappropriate in most instances for children in the early childhood years.

3. True. Assessment information guides teacher decision making so the curriculum can respond to the needs and interests of children.

4. True. Program evaluations provide information about how the curriculum is working and opportunities for teachers to examine their practices.

5. True. While technologies should not be indiscriminately used with young children, there are many ways they can be implemented or applied effectively.

6. False. Reflection should be a lifelong dimension of a teacher’s professional life.

Key Terms Chapter 12

Key Terms

Achievement test Norm-referenced test that measures what a person knows

Accreditation Process involving self-study and documentation about how a program meets comprehensive quality standards

Artifact Concrete product generated by a child such as a drawing or writing sample, or photograph of concrete product such as block construction, saved by teacher to use for assessment purposes

Authentic assessment Assessments that occur in natural settings with tools that are not norm-referenced

Coding Using a notation system to organize assessment artifacts

Criterion referencing Measuring a child’s performance against specific outcomes or objectives rather than comparison to a larger population of children

DATU Acronym for developmentally appropriate technology use, an extension of the principles of developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) to using technologies with young children

Digital literacy Development of skills, paralleling those of early literacy, that demonstrate awareness of communication with digital devices

Digital natives Term that refers to children who grow up with access to technologies

Environmental rating scale An assessment that uses a sliding numerical scale to denote performance or achievement

Formal assessment A test that expresses performance in terms of norm-referenced scores and administration according to a strict, uniform protocol

Formative assessment Ongoing evaluation

Informal assessment Use of authentic or alternative tools and strategies

Intelligence deviation Expressing an intelligence test score in comparison with others who took the same test

Intelligence quotient Expressing an intelligence test score in terms of mental age com- pared with chronological age

Intelligence test A standardized measure that assesses learning capacity and mental ability

Interrater reliability The probability that consistent results will be achieved regardless of who conducts an environmental assessment

Learning artifacts Samples of actual work produced by children

Norm-referenced Referring to a test designed to report individual scores in comparison with a larger population selected to be representative of all those who will take the test

References Chapter 12

Objectivity Recording, reporting, or assessing without bias

Observation Assessment data obtained through close attention to children as they work and play

Portfolio A collection of artifacts and assessment results intended to provide evaluation based on multiple sources of data

Program standards A set of criteria intended for the comprehensive evaluation of all ele- ments of a program, including curriculum

Rubric A scoring tool that includes criteria based on observable behaviors

Screen A standardized measure that provides evidence of possible deviations from normal development or behavior

Skills assessment Direct observation of specific skills during either normal activity or con- structed situations

Standardized tests Norm-referenced assessments/tests

Summative assessment An evaluation that provides a report of cumulative achievement for a particular period of time, such as the end of a teaching unit or a school year

Work sampling The process of collecting individual learning artifacts over time

References

Anderson, J., Moffatt, L., & Shapiro, J. (2006). Reconceptualizing language education in early childhood: Socio-cultural perspectives. B. S. Saracho (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (2nd ed., pp. 135–152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Beach, R. (2010). Developing a cybersafety program for early childhood education: A New Zealand case study. I. B. Berson (Ed.), High tech tots: Childhood in a digital world (pp. 71–92). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Beaty, J. (2009). Observing development of the young child (7th ed). Columbus: Merrill.

Bers, M. U., & Horn, M. S. (2010). Tangible programming in early childhood: Revisiting devel- opmental assumptions through new technologies. In I. R. Berson & M. J. Berson (Eds.), High-tech tots: Childhood in a digital world (pp. 49–70). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. J. (2007). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Branscombe, N. A., Castle, K., Dorsey, A. G., Surbeck, E., & Taylor, J. B. (2003). Early child- hood curriculum: A constructivist perspective. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Carson, R. (1965). The sense of wonder. New York: Harper & Row.

Connecticut Office of Early Childhood. (2016). Supporting all children using the Connecticut Early Learning and Development Standards: Meeting the needs of diverse learners [PDF file]. Retrieved from http://www.ct.gov/oec/lib/oec/DiverseLearnersApril_26_2016_Finalw. pdf.

References Chapter 12

Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (3rd ed.), Washington, DC: NAEYC.

Croll, J., & Kunze, K. (2010). Youth protection online: Joint efforts are needed. I. B. Berson (Ed.), High tech tots: Childhood in a digital world (pp. 153–184). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Curriculum Associates. (2011). Brigance early childhood screens. New Jersey: Curriculum Associates.

Denver Developmental Materials, Inc. (2012). Denver II. Denver Developmental Materials, Inc. Retrieved from: http://denverii.com/denverii/.

Deviney, J., Duncan, S., Harris, S., Rody, M. A., & Rosenberry, L. (2010). Rating observation scale for inspiring environments. Silver Spring, MD: Gryphon House.

Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children. (2007). Promoting posi- tive outcomes for children with disabilities: Recommendations for curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation. Missoula, MT: Division for Early Childhood.

Flagler, S. (1996). Multidimensional assessment of young children through play. Lewisville, NC: Kaplan Press.

Gullo, D. (2006). Alternative means of assessing children’s learning in early childhood class- rooms. B. S. Saracho (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (2nd ed., pp. 443– 455). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Harms, T., Cryer, D., & Clifford, R. (2006). Infant toddler environment rating scale, revised edition, updated (ITERS-R). New York: Teachers College Press.

Harms, T., Clifford, R. M., & Cryer, D. (2005). Early childhood environment rating scale, revised edition, updated (ECERS-R). New York: Teachers College Press.

Harms, T., Cryer, D., & Clifford, R. M. (2007). Family child care environment rating scale, revised edition (FCCERS-R). New York: Teachers College Press.

Harms, T., Jacobs, E. V., & White, D. R. (1995). School-age care environment rating scale (SACERS). New York: Teachers College Press.

Hemmeter, M. L., Maxwell, K. L., Ault, M. J., & Schuster, J. W. (2001). Assessment of prac- tices in early elementary classrooms (APEEC). New York: Teachers College Press.

Hestenes, L., DeBord, K., Moore, R., Cosco, N., & McGinnis, J. (2005). Preschool outdoor environment measurement scale (POEMS). Winston Salem, NC: Kaplan Company.

Hill, D. (n.d.). Mindful technology use DOs for parents [Blog post]. Media Cricket. Retrieved from https://keepingtechincheck.com/mindful-technology-use-dos-for-parents/.

Jablon, J. R., Dombro, A. L., & Dichtelmiller, M. L. (2007). The power of observation for birth through eight (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: NAEYC.

Lambert, R., Abbott-Shim, M., & Sibley, A. (2006). Evaluating the quality of early childhood educational settings. B. S. Saracho (Ed.), Review of research on the education of young children (2nd ed., pp. 457–475). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Levine, L. E., & Munsch, J (2011). Child development: An active learning approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

References Chapter 12

Linder, S. (2012). Interactive whiteboards in early childhood mathematics. Young Children, 67(3), 26– 35.

Massachusetts Department of Education Early Childhood Advisory Council. (2003). Early childhood program standards for three and four year olds. Malden, MA: Massachusetts Department of Education. Retrieved from Massachusetts Department of Education. http:// www.eec.state.ma.us/docs1/research_planning/ta_earlychildprogstan.pdf.

McManis, L. D., & Gunnewig, S. B. (2012). Finding the education in educational technology with young learners. Young Children, 67(3), 14–24.

Meisels, S. J., Marsden, D. B., Jablon, J. R., Dorfman, A. B., & Dichtelmiller, M. K. (2012). The work sampling system. San Antonio, TX: Pearson.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2005). Accreditation standard 4. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (2010). QRIS toolkit. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

National Association for the Education of Young Children and the Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent College. (2012). Technology and interactive media as tools in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

National Association for the Education of Young Children and the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Education (NAEYC/NAECS/SDE). (2003). Early childhood curriculum, assessment, and program evaluation. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

National Institute for Literacy. (2008). Developing early literacy: report of the national early literacy panel. A scientific synthesis of early literacy development and implications for intervention. Louisville, KY: National Center for Family Literacy.

Parnell, W., & Bartlett, J. (2012). iDocument: how smartphones and tablets are changing documentation in preschool and primary classrooms. Young Children, 67(3), 50–58.

Paul H. BrookesPublishing Company. (2012). Ages and stages questionnaire 3. Brookes Publishing.

Rosen, D. (2006). Emerging research agenda for technology and young children. C. Crawford et al. (Eds.). Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 4287–4291). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

Rosen, D., & Jaruszewicz, C. (2009). Developmentally appropriate technology use and early childhood teacher education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 30(2), 162–171.

Shifflet, R., Toledo, C., & Mattoon, C. (2012). Touch tablet surprises: A preschool teacher’s story. Young Children, 67(3), 36–41.

Siegler, R. S. (1992). The other Alfred Binet. Developmental Psychology, 28, 179–190.

Simon, F., & Nemeth, K. (2012). Digital decisions: Choosing the right technology tools for early childhood education. Lewisville, NC: Gryphon House.

References Chapter 12

U.S. Department of Education. (2012). Americans with Disabilities Act. Retrieved from http:// www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/hq9805.html.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017, January). Reimagining the role of technology in education: 2017 National Education Technology Plan update [PDF file]. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf.

Wang, X. C., Berson, I. R., Jaruszewicz, C., Hartle, L., & Rosen, D. (2010). Young children’s technology experiences in multiple contexts: Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory reconsid- ered. I. B. Berson (Ed.), High tech tots: Childhood in a digital world (pp. 23–47). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Wortham, S. (2011). Assessment in early childhood education (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River NJ: Pearson.

Yelland, N. (2010). New technologies, playful experiences, and multimodal learning. I. B. Berson (Ed.), High tech tots: Childhood in a digital world (pp. 5–22). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.