Blended Practices for Teaching Young Children in Inclusive Settings / Edition 1

Paperback (Print)
Rent
Rent from BN.com
$13.26
(Save 67%)
Est. Return Date: 07/23/2015
Buy New
Buy New from BN.com
$32.87
Used and New from Other Sellers
Used and New from Other Sellers
from $7.87
Usually ships in 1-2 business days
(Save 80%)
Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (23) from $7.87   
  • New (6) from $31.01   
  • Used (17) from $7.87   

Overview

This core early childhood curriculum textbook bridges the gap between early childhood education and early childhood special education. The book advocates a linked systems approach for developing curriculum that is composed of four independent program processes: assessment, curriculum & goal development, instruction & intervention, and monitoring. This early childhood curriculum textbook bridges the gap between early childhood education (ECE) and early childhood special education (ECSE). The book provides university students and early childhood professionals with an integrated approach to working with children with and without disabilities and their families.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

Lucky McKeen

"A meaningful, thoughtful and evocative resource. Educators struggling with the demands of accountability, state and agency standards, and the challenges of inclusive programs will value the practical, realistic strategies and guidance."
Assistant Professor and Coordinator of the Birth-Kindergarten Licensure Program, Meredith College - Diane E. Strangis
"Comprehensively integrates conceptual knowledge and recommended practices . . . delivers material in a well-organized and accessible manner. This is a book I will use."
Professor and Judith Daso Herb Endowed Chair in Early Childhood Education, University of Toledo - Laurie A. Dinnebeil
"An excellent text [and] an important resource to anyone focused on the education of preschoolers . . . blends key knowledge and concepts with meaningful curriculum practices."
University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee - Mary McLean
"Truly succeed[s] in "pulling it all together" for teachers in inclusive early childhood settings . . . This is just what teachers need right now."
Professor and Coordinator, Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education, Western Kentucky University - Vicki D. Stayton
"Addresses a significant gap in the field . . . [and] clearly presents a curriculum framework that is supported by research and theory."
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9781557667991
  • Publisher: Brookes Publishing
  • Publication date: 6/1/2005
  • Edition description: New Edition
  • Edition number: 1
  • Pages: 292
  • Sales rank: 342,576
  • Product dimensions: 7.00 (w) x 9.20 (h) x 0.80 (d)

Meet the Author

Jennifer Grisham-Brown, Ed.D., is Professor in the Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education program at the University of Kentucky, Lexington. She received her doctorate in Education from the University of Kentucky. She is also Director of the Early Childhood Laboratory at the University of Kentucky, an inclusive early childhood program for children from birth to 5 years of age.

Dr. Grisham-Brown directs research projects on topics including linking assessment and instruction, early care and education program quality, and individualizing instruction for young children with disabilities. In addition, she has conducted research on the effectiveness of instructional procedures that are embedded into developmentally appropriate activities, use of distance learning in personnel preparation programs, and assessment strategies for students with significant disabilities. Dr. Grisham-Brown provides training and technical assistance through the United States on these topics.

Dr. Grisham-Brown is co-founder of a children’s home and preschool program in Guatemala City called Hope for Tomorrow, where she accompanies students for the education abroad program.

Mary Louise Hemmeter, Ph.D., is a professor in the Department of Special Education at Vanderbilt University. She teaches courses, advises students, and conducts research on early childhood issues. She is the cofaculty director of the Susan Gray School for Children, which is an early childhood program for children with and without disabilities. Her research focuses on effective instruction, social–emotional development and challenging behavior, translating research to practice, and effective approaches to professional development. Currently, she directs an Institute of Education Sciences–funded research project focused on the efficacy of implementing the Teaching Pyramid in classrooms, and she works on the National Center on Quality Teaching and Learning and the Office of Special Education Programs–funded Technical Assistance Center on Social Emotional Interventions. She is a coeditor of the Journal of Early Intervention and serves on the editorial boards of other major journals in early childhood special education. She served as President of the Council for Exceptional Children’s Division for Early Childhood (DEC) and received the Merle B. Karnes award from DEC.

Dr. Pretti-Frontczak is Professor in the School of Lifespan Development and Educational Sciences at Kent State University, Ohio. She received her doctorate in early intervention from the University of Oregon and has extensive experience in preparing preservice and in-service personnel in recommended practices for working with young children and their families.

She directs the Early Childhood Intervention Specialist Program at Kent State University, where she is responsible for preparing preservice teachers to work with children with disabilities from birth to age 8. Her lines of research center on using authentic assessment practices for accountability and programming, specifically on the utility of the Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and Children, 2nd Edition (AEPS®), effective approaches to working with young children in inclusive settings (specifically regarding the efficacy of an activity-based approach and the application of universal design for learning principles), and the link between assessment, individualized goals, and quality curriculum.

Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Excerpted from Chapter 4 of Blended Practices for Teaching Young Children in Inclusive Settings, by Jennifer Grisham-Brown, Ed.D., Mary Louise Hemmeter, Ph.D., & Kristie Pretti-Frontczak, Ph.D.

Copyright©2005 by Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.

Ms. Susan works in an inclusive preschool in a rural midwestern town. Her program is operated by the public school system. She has eighteen 3- and 4-year-old children in her class. Six of those children have developmental delays. Ten of the children qualify for the school district's at-risk preschool program, based on socio-economic status. The remaining children are tuition-paying students whose caregivers want them to have a preschool experience. Ms. Susan is frustrated by the numerous assessment requirements she must complete for all of the children she teaches. She administers Get it Got it Go! (http://ggg.umn.edu) for all children as a means of quickly documenting children's progress toward specific language and early literacy indicators. Furthermore, the public school system requires that she complete a standardized developmental assessment on every child enrolled in the program. This information must be used to identify goals and objectives for the children who have individualized education programs (IEPs). In addition, the school district wants Ms. Susan to report how children are progressing toward the attainment of state preschool standards that have been recently implemented. She uses The Creative Curriculum for Preschool, Fourth Edition(Trister Dodge, Colker, & Herman, 2003), which also has its own set of outcomes and indicators. She believes that the skills found in The Creative Curriculum are what she is actually teaching and is confused about how all of the assessment pieces fit with what she is doing every day in her classroom. In addition, her preschool coordinator has asked that she start doing portfolio assessments of each child. The coordinator insists that she needs a consistent way to monitor each child's individualized outcomes. Ms. Susan is completely overwhelmed and doesn't know where to begin!

Teachers like Ms. Susan encounter a number of challenges related to assessing young children, such as conducting developmental assessments on groups of children, developing individualized plans to meet the needs of all children, monitoring individual children's progress as well as children's progress toward state or agency standards, and linking assessment to other program processes. Consequently, many teachers feel they spend too much time engaged in assessment-related activities and not enough time teaching. Despite the challenges and time required, teachers need to engage in systematic assessment of young children to ensure the development of appropriate services and to meet accountability requirements. Throughout this volume, assessment is defined as "a process of gathering information for purposes of making decisions" (Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development, 1998, p. 2). This broad definition of assessment is used to convey that 1) assessment cannot and should not represent a single point in time and 2) ongoing decisions should be continuously made based on data when programming for young children.

As highlighted in the opening vignette, the assessment of young children can take on many forms and purposes. When providing services to young children in inclusive settings, assessment is used for at least five purposes: 1) identifying which children may need additional services or whose development is suspect (i.e., screening); 2) documenting an identified disability or delay and outlining needed services (i.e., eligibility determination); 3) understanding children's strengths and emerging skills to better support their learning and design instruction (i.e., program planning); 4) observing, documenting, analyzing, and interpreting data related to individual children's performance on specific skills and/or processes (i.e., progress monitoring); and 5) synthesizing and interpreting information about program effects and demonstrating accountability (i.e., program evaluation) (e.g., Bricker, 2002; Division for Early Childhood, 2005; Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development, 1998; McLean, Wolery, & Bailey, 2004; NAEYC and NAECS/SDE, 2003). It is important for teachers to keep in mind that although each of these purposes accomplishes separate tasks or assists in making different types of decisions, the knowledge and information gained from each should be linked to one another. Table 4.1 provides a brief summary of these key assessment purposes, as well as the assessment questions that are answered by each. Although it is beyond the scope of this volume to discuss all five assessment purposes in depth, a comprehensive measurement framework is discussed as a means of conceptualizing the role that assessment plays in inclusive preschool programs. Prior to the discussion of a measurement framework, recommended practices related to assessing young children are described. Following the brief overview of recommended practices and the measurement framework, strategies and suggestions for program planning and evaluating program effects on young children's development and progress toward state and agency standards are discussed (information related to progress monitoring is described in Chapter 5). The chapter concludes with a description of how programs serving children in inclusive preschool settings can engage in authentic assessment practices.

RECOMMENDED ASSESSMENT PRACTICES

Both the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997; NAEYC and NAECS/SDE, 2003) and the Council for Exceptional Children's Division for Early Childhood (DEC) (Sandall, Hemmeter, Smith, & McLean, 2005; Sandall, McLean, & Smith, 2000) have developed guidelines for appropriate assessment practices based on many years of research in child development and learning. These guidelines highlight the need for assessment approaches that are developmentally appropriate in terms of the purpose, content, and methods used. In general, recommended practice regarding the assessment of young children emphasizes authentic assessment, sometimes referred to as play based (Linder, 1993), performance assessment (Meisels, 1992), functional assessment (Grisham-Brown, 2000), and standards-based assessment (Steffy, 1993). Characteristics of an authentic assessment model include 1) being ecologically referenced or occurring in the natural environment, 2) actively involving the child's family/caregivers, and 3) using a variety of methods for collecting information. An authentic assessment model has been used to assess children who are typically developing as well as those with various developmental difficulties (e.g., Grisham-Brown, 2000; Schill, Kratochwill, & Elliot, 1998). The following are key recommended practices of an authentic assessment model:

  1. Assessment should be ongoing and the various purposes closely related or linked to one another. Assessment should not be conducted in single or isolated instances and the information gathered from one assessment (e.g., screening) should be used to interpret and guide assessment used for another purpose (e.g., eligibility determination).
  2. Assessment should cover all relevant areas of growth and learning (i.e., cover all developmental domains and content areas), measure developmentally appropriate skills, and be conducted in natural, authentic situations. In other words, children should be assessed as they are engaged in hands-on activities and interacting with their physical and social environment rather than being required to "perform on demand."
  3. Assessments should result in information that can be used to make accurate and useful decisions. Teachers (and other team members) should be able to use the information to identify children's individual needs, plan appropriate intervention, and accurately monitor children's progress.
  4. Assessment practices should involve multiple observations, multiple approaches, and multiple informants. Given the complexities of early development and the variability with which children perform, gathering information from multiple sources, across time, and with various materials ensures a convergence of ideas and a more holistic view of the child.

MEASUREMENT FRAMEWORK

An overall framework for assessing young children is useful in understanding the assessment issues with which teachers like Ms. Susan are struggling. In addition to helping sort the various components of the assessment process, the framework can ensure that teams make sound decisions aimed at improving child outcomes. The framework shown in Figure 4.1 is composed of three assessment levels (i.e., program evaluation, program planning, and progress monitoring). As stated previously, Levels One and Two are discussed here and Level Three is discussed in Chapter 5.

Level One: Program Evaluation

Program evaluation has been defined as the process of "systematically collecting, synthesizing, and interpreting information about programs for the purpose of assisting with decision making" (Snyder & Sheehan, 1996, p. 359). Program evaluation at a broad level can include examining staff quality and needs for training, the effects of various interventions or treatments on children, and whether a program is meeting the outcomes stated in their mission. Increasingly, the term accountability has been used when thinking about program evaluation efforts. Accountability refers to the "systematic collection, analysis and use of information to hold schools, educators and others responsible for the performance of students and the education system" (Education Commission of the States, 1998, p. 3).

With the passage of such acts as the Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994 (PL 103-227), public schools have become increasingly accountable for ensuring that students are making progress toward identified learning standards. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (PL 107-110) increased accountability requirements for programs by enacting certain sanctions to schools whose students are not performing at or above proficient levels. Gradually, states are starting to include preschool children in these accountability systems. Specifically, programs are accountable for ensuring the success of the children they teach. For preschool children this has been interpreted to mean "Are the children ready for kindergarten when they leave preschool?" In an effort to ensure accountability, state- and federally-funded preschool programs are being asked to measure children's progress toward the attainment of identified standards before leaving preschool. For example, the Head Start Outcomes Framework was developed as a result of the reauthorization of Head Start in 1998, which "created a new provision on education performance standards to ensure school readiness" (Lombardi & Cubbage, 2004). Similarly, many states have developed preschool standards (refer to Chapter 2 for a discussion of standards within a curriculum framework).

Participation in high-quality early childhood programs has been linked to promoting children's readiness for kindergarten (Bryant et al., 2003). Studies that thoroughly examine this linkage rely on numerous assessment methods to link quality with achievement. Although a full explanation of all of these assessment methods is beyond the scope of this text, Table 4.2 provides examples of methods that can be used to measure program quality for the purpose of linking to child outcomes.

Although teachers of young children are not routinely responsible for implementing program quality studies, there are implications for teachers with regard to assessment and accountability. Because high-quality early childhood education programs better prepare children for school, teachers must ensure that they are providing high-quality early childhood experiences to young children. Fortunately, teachers can use a number of tools to evaluate the quality of the learning environment and to develop improvement plans. Table 4.3 provides an overview of several of these types of instruments: the Early Childhood Environmental Rating Scale, Revised Edition (ECERS-R; Harms, Clifford, & Cryer, 1998); the Early Language & Literacy Classroom Observation (ELLCO) Toolkit, Research Edition (Smith & Dickinson, 2002); and the DEC Recommended Practices Program Assessment: Improving Practices for Young Children with Special Needs and Their Families (Hemmeter, Joseph, Smith, & Sandall, 2001).

In addition to assessing the quality of programs, teachers must find a method for assessing children's progress toward state or agency standards. At least two possibilities exist for how this information might be gathered. First, norm—referenced instruments may be used to compare a child "with a representative sample of children" (McLean, 2004, p. 27). Researchers who engage in program evaluation often utilize repeated measures of standardized measures to assess developmental and content areas (McCormick & Nellis, 2004). For example, the Head Start National Reporting System (NRS; see http://www.headstartinfo.org/nrsk&r.htm) is composed of a 20–minute battery of tests that assess early math and preliteracy skills of 4–year–old children in Head Start. In other programs, teachers may be required to administer certain tests such as the Learning Accomplishment Profile–Diagnostic Edition (LAP–D; Nehring, Nehring, Bruni, & Randolph, 1992) or the Battelle Developmental Inventory, Second Edition (BDI–2; Newborg, Stock, & Wnek, 2004) at certain points during the year in an effort to show improvement in children's development over time.

Second, teachers may use curriculum-based measures to document growth over time toward outcomes. In some cases, curriculum-based measures have aligned curricular goals or assessment items with state and agency standards. For example, The Creative Curriculum for Preschool, Fourth Edition (Trister Dodge et al., 2003) has aligned its curriculum with the Head Start Outcomes Framework. Furthermore, the state of Illinois has worked with the developers of the Work Sampling System (Meisels, Jablon, Marsden, Dichtelmiller, & Dorfman, 1994) to align the state's early learning standards with theWork Sampling System's items. Such an alignment helps teachers understand the relationship between what they are assessing and what they are teaching. Research on primary programs shows that schools that align what is taught with what is assessed have better test scores than those who do not (McCormick, Grisham-Brown, Nellis, Anderman, Privett, & Williams, 2003). Teachers working with young children should ensure they have aligned what they are teaching with what they are assessing (e.g., McTighe & Wiggins, 1998). This notion of alignment is a challenge for teachers for several reasons. First, many state and agency standards are described broadly (e.g., begins to demonstrate safe practices and appropriate use of materials, begins to offer explanations using his or her own words), and it is difficult for teachers to know how to link their instruction with these broader constructs that represent development over time.

Second, when teachers use assessment tools composed of nonfunctional and narrowly defined skills (e.g., stringing beads, snipping with scissors, working wooden puzzles), it makes it difficult for teachers to align what they are teaching (e.g., functional and generative skills) with assessment items. Such is the problem with using standardized instruments for the purposes of demonstrating progress over time. In addition to concerns about the appropriateness of giving standardized tests to young children (Greenspan & Meisels, 1996), these tests typically are not appropriate for guiding instruction. When teachers rely on standardized instruments, there is a temptation to select items from the test as target behaviors for instruction. Although important skills are associated with some of these test items (e.g., eye–hand coordination, problem solving, fine motor skills for working puzzles), the associated or underlying skills generally align with the standards and not the item itself. Therefore, an assessment that assesses these underlying skills is preferred for guiding instruction.

As mentioned previously, program evaluation is one of the major assessment purposes in which teachers serving young children are increasingly asked to engage. In addition to reporting on the progress of their students toward state or agency standards, teachers must be mindful of the connection between the quality of their program and developmental outcomes for children.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents


About the Authors
Foreword
Marilou Hyson< Ph.D., and Pamela Winton, Ph.D.
Preface
Acknowledgments
  1. Introduction
  2. Designing Quality Curriculum Frameworks
  3. Involving Families in Planning and Implementing Inclusive Programs
  4. Using Assessment Information to Plan What to Teach
  5. Strategies for Monitoring Child Progress
  6. Curriculum Planning
  7. Designing the Learning Environment
  8. Individualizing Instruction to Support Children's Learning
  9. A Systematic Approach to Preventing and Addressing Challenging Behavior
Index
Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star

(0)

4 Star

(0)

3 Star

(0)

2 Star

(0)

1 Star

(0)

Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Noble.com Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & Noble.com that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & Noble.com does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at BN.com or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation

Reminder:

  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & Noble.com and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Noble.com Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & Noble.com reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & Noble.com also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on BN.com. It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

 
Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

    If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
    Why is this product inappropriate?
    Comments (optional)