You are on page 1of 11

Assessment Review

Assessment Review
Kara D St.Hilaire
University of Maine
SEI 508






















Assessment Review

When assessing in early childhood, it must go deeper and further than simply
evaluating their achievements in a specific area. It should focus on their individual
traits, capabilities, and real behaviors through natural tactics, observation and
record keeping. Authentic assessments focus on a humanistic approach to testing,
incorporating specific standards including: acceptability, authenticity, collaboration,
evidence, multifactors, and sensitivity.
In order to determine which assessments in early childhood intervention are
best measures for best practices, five assessments will be investigated and
reviewed.

Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and Children
(AEPS), Second Edition

The Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and
Children (AEPS), Second Edition is a curriculum based assessment, divided into two
levels: Birth to 36 months (0-3 years) and 36-72 months (3-6 years). It incorporates
six domains, Fine Motor, Gross Motor, Adaptive, Cognitive, Social-Communication,
and Social. Skills addressed include reading, math, science, and social studies. The
AEPS also measures functional skills important to a childs every day routine in their
natural environments; these skills are measured by the childs caregivers through
observation. (Bagnato, Neisworth, & Frontczak-Pretti, 2010)
The AEPS places a strong emphasis on having a strong transdisciplinary team
with members who know the child best including teachers, therapists, and parents.
The role each member plays is crucial, as they are able to observe the child in
Assessment Review

various environments at various times throughout the day. While professionals such
as teachers and therapists have their own way of documenting the childs progress,
the family is able to do the same through the Family Report included in the AEPS,
providing them evidence of where successes or challenges are in the childs routine.
Multiple studies and research groups have demonstrated the AEPS reliability
and validity in assessing and developing goals for children. Findings have shown
that users of this assessment find instructions to be clear, and useful when designing
intervention plans. The items on the AEPS test are arranged from simple to complex
in each developmental domain, indicating developmental sequencing. Rather than
using a percent delay based on the childs chronological age and performance to
score the assessment, AEPS uses standard deviations for each developmental
domain. Using standard deviation increases the validity of the scores, as for any
developmental skill in typically developing children; there are variations in the
specific age at which the skill is mastered. Users have also found using the AEPS
allows for more family focused outcomes in the childs progress, improving families
satisfaction in the assessment and in their childs program. (Bricker, Allen, Clifford,
Pretti-Frontczak, Slentz, & Squires, 2008)


The Carolina Curriculum for Preschoolers with Special Needs

The Carolina Curriculum for Preschoolers with Special Needs (CCPSN) is a
curriculum embedded assessment for children 24-60 months with moderate to
Assessment Review

severe disabilities. It includes Personal-Social, Cognition, Communication, Fine
Motor, and Gross Motor domains. The assessment is administered through natural
observation and direct assessment in settings familiar to the child, typically home or
a childcare center. The items in the assessment focus on the childs everyday
experiences and skills needed to function in everyday living. The assessment and
curriculum are integrated; there are twenty-two teaching sequences that cover each
of the five developmental domains, after the initial assessment teachers are able to
individualize the curriculum based on the childs special needs. All items are also
easily adaptable so that children with significant impairments are able to exhibit
their skills with modifications if necessary. (Bagnato, Neisworth, & Frontczak-
Pretti, 2010)
Not only are parents involved in the assessment process, they are also
involved with deciding their childs intervention goals. The terminology used in the
CCPSN is written in a way that all users can understand, making it easy for any
caregiver to aid in the assessment process. There are four steps in the process of
assessing the child: preparation, observation, directed assessment, and completing
the developmental progress chart. The scores obtained from the assessments
include (+) for a skill the child has mastered, (+/-) for an emerging skill, and (-) for a
skill the child is unable to do. (Strauss & Austin, 2008)
Although there is more research needed to determine the reliability, validity,
and utility of scores made from The Carolina Curriculum for Preschoolers with
Special Needs, a study done in Italy has proved it to be the most effective and cost-
Assessment Review

efficient way of providing services to young children with Down Syndrome and
other developmental disabilities. (Del Guidice, et al. 2006)


Dynamic Assessment
Dynamic Assessment is a way of examining an individuals potential by
intervening during assessment, with the purpose of intentionally influencing their
performance. Dynamic Assessment is derived from Vygotskys proposal of the zone
of proximal development: the distance between an individuals current
developmental level without assistance, and their level of development with
assistance, thus providing information on the individuals ability to learn through
their response to intervention. (Dorfler, Golke, & Artelt, 2009)
There are two forms of dynamic assessment. The first, most popular form used
in educational settings is referred to as a test-train-test design where the instructor
gives specific training to the individual in between taking a pre and a post-test. The
results from each test determine how well the individual s score improved after
receiving training. The second form is a train-within-test design where the
instructor gives training immediately upon failure via hints, prompts, or feedback.
The test-train-test approach has been found to produce higher scores. (Lantolf &
Poehner 2010)
According to Lantolf & Poehner, (2010) research in dynamic assessment has
proven that current levels of the independent functioning of learners are not
necessarily the predictor of their actual capabilities, however the issue becomes
Assessment Review

properly scoring and measuring this data. Also, as Dynamic Assessment scores are
based upon an individuals learning ability or potential, the question arises of how
they become domain specific.

Creative Curriculum, Developmental Continuum for Ages 3-5
The creative curriculum is a curriculum embedded assessment for children
ages 3-5, including Social/Emotional, Physical, Cognitive, and Language domains.
The test has fifty objectives, and it suitable for all young children. The curriculum
places an emphasis on the importance of play, providing teachers with materials
and resources for lessons that build upon the childrens interests. An importance is
placed on family involvement as they encourage teachers to develop strong
partnerships. (Bagnato, Neisworth, & Frontczak-Pretti, 2010) At the end of each
lesson/chapter, there are letters that are available to be sent home to families
discussing what the child learned about, why it is important to their development,
and how caregivers can expand more on the topic at home.
Along with a teaching curriculum, the Creative Curriculum also includes an
assessment system called Teaching Strategies GOLD, which is organized through
developmental advancement from birth to kindergarten. Teaching strategies are
included for each objective, which has ten levels of progression. Scoring is done
electronically, producing reports with the options to view an individual child report,
a class profile, or a developmental learning report that can be shared with families
showing the childs strengths, next steps, and suggested activities.
Multiple research studies have been done on the effectiveness of the Creative
Assessment Review

Curriculum for Preschool. A study done in Hartford, CT, took 14 children who were
slightly below the national average in five areas of development. After receiving the
creative curriculum intervention, all 14 children were shown to have made
substantial gains, and scoring considerably higher than the national average
(Hartford Children are Learning by Leaps and Bounds, 2004.) In another research
study conducted by the U.S. Department of Defense Education Activity, including
100 children and 10 randomly selected classrooms. The study provided significant
evidence that The Creative Curriculum for Early Childhood, when implemented as
intended is a curriculum model that ensures positive child outcomes, effective teaching
practices, and high parent satisfaction (Abbott-Shim, M., 2000.) The GOLD assessment
system has actually gone through an extensive national field validation in 2,500 children,
with results showing potential in fulfilling specific early childhood intervention purposes.

Desired Results Developmental Profile Access (DRDP)
The Desired Results Developmental Profile Access is a criterion-references
assessment for children with disabilities, birth to five years. Domains addressed in the
assessment include: Self-Concept, Social and Interpretation Skills, Self-Regulation,
Language, Learning, Cognitive Competence, Math, Literacy, Motor Skills, and Safety
and Health. It is described as being an authentic, universal, and evidence based
system that is designed to document the status and progress of young children, and
ensure inclusion in state-wide assessments. The DRDP tracks progress across time,
from preschool to 12 years old.
The DRDP includes 48 measures in which they connect to 4 desired results: 1)
Assessment Review

Children are personally and socially competent. 2) Children are effective learners. 3)
Children show physical and motor competence. 4) Children are safe and healthy.
(Desired Results Developmental Profile School Readiness, 2010.) Functional skills
are included under these desired results, but allows for adaption so the assessment
accurately describes the childs individual abilities. The primary service provider
completes this assessment, but it is strongly recommended that parents or other
provider gather to help in this process.
A study done in California, of a group of 1,644 preschool aged children, 887 of
which were children with disabilities provided evidence of high reliability including
reports of consistency, sensitivity, and utility of the assessment. Today, all children
enrolled in state-funded preschool programs in California are required to complete
some form of the DRDP assessment. (Bagnato, Neisworth, & Frontczak-Pretti, 2010)
It is important that assessments measuring development across multiple age
groups capture behaviors across these cross-age transitions to make valid
inferences about children. A study done by Karelitz
,
, Montgomery, Yamada, and
Wilson (2010) assessed the DRDPs validity in this matter. The main conclusion
from the study found the three parts of the DRDPR is aligned so that within each
age group, children at various levels of development can be readily assessed. In
other words, each instrument provides levels of assessment for the typical children
in the age group it was designed to assess, as well as relatively low-achieving and
relatively high- achieving children in this age group.


Assessment Review

In conclusion, there are multiple components that must be involved in creating
an assessment that is to be considered best practice. Among the popular
assessments reviewed, most seemed to place a high emphasis on family
involvement, which is extremely important when assessing a child in order to tie his
or her environments together. It was also common for assessments to be validated
by research studies in order to prove its authenticity, while incorporating a variety
of domains, and objectives for each domain.
It is important to keep in mind, among all the assessments provided, some are
different due to the varying needs. Regardless, all are there to better the lives of
young children and to make sure they are developing at an appropriate pace suited
for the individual child.






















Assessment Review

References and Research Articles


AEPS:

Horn, Eva M. (2003) Topics in Early Childhood Special Education. 1(23) p41

Bricker, D., Allen, D, Clifford, J, Pretti-Frontczak, K., Slentz, K., & Squires, J.
(2008). The relationship between the Ages & Stages Questionnaires (ASQ) and
the Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and Children
(AEPS) (EMRG White Paper No. 1).

(2006) AEPS Chosen for First Steps Eligibility Determination, UTS TRAINING TIMES
2(4) 5-18

Bagnato, J, S., Neisworth, J, T., Frontczak-Pretti, K. (2010) LINKing Authentic
Assessment & Early Childhood Intervention. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H.
Brooks Publishing co.


The Carolina Curriculum for Preschoolers with Special Needs:

Strauss, K., N., Austin, J. C. (2008) Reporting Preschool Special Education
Outcomes for SPP Indicator 7: Assessment Tool Information and Alignments. 79-
128 Retrieved From: www.michigan.gov

Del Guidice, E., Titomanlio, L., Brogna, G., Bonaccorso, A., Romano, A., Mansi, G., et al.
(2006). Early Intervention for children with Down syndrome in southern Italy:
The role of parent-implemented developmental training. Infants & Young
Children, 19(1) 50-58.

Bagnato, J, S., Neisworth, J, T., Frontczak-Pretti, K. (2010) LINKing Authentic
Assessment & Early Childhood Intervention. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H.
Brooks Publishing co.


Dynamic Assessment:

Dorfler, T., Golke, S., Artelt, C. (2009) Dynamic assessment and its potential for the
assessment of reading competence. Studies in Educational Evaluation 35(4) 77-
82

Lantolf, J., P., Poehner, E., M. (2010) Dynamic assessment in the classroom:
Vygotskian praxis for second language development. Language Teaching
Research 15(1) 11-33 DOI: 10.1177/1362168810383328

Assessment Review

Creative Curriculum:

Hartford Children are Learning by Leaps and Bounds (2004) Accord, NY: Philliber
Research Associates

Abbott-Shim, M. (2000). Sure Start Effectiveness Study: Final Report. Atlanta, GA:
Quality Assist, Inc.

Bagnato, J, S., Neisworth, J, T., Frontczak-Pretti, K. (2010) LINKing Authentic
Assessment & Early Childhood Intervention. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H.
Brooks Publishing co.


Desired Results Development Profile access

Desired Results Developmental Profile School Readiness (2010) California
Department of Education, Child Development Division. 1-35

Karelitz
,
T, M., Montgomery, D, P., Yamada, H., Wilson, M. (2010)
Articulating Assessments Across Childhood: The Cross-Age Validity of the
Desired Results Developmental ProfileRevised. 15(1) DOI:
10.1080/10627191003673208.

You might also like