Assessing Young Children in Inclusive Settings: The Blended Practices Approach / Edition 1 available in Paperback
To ensure the best possible outcomes for young children with and without disabilities, early childhood educators must enter the classroom ready to conduct all types of early childhood assessment-including determining if children need additional services, planning and monitoring instruction, and determining program effectiveness. They'll get the preparation they need with this comprehensive textbook, an in-depth blueprint for high-quality assessment in today's age of inclusion, standards-based education, and accountability. Developed by prominent early childhood special education experts Jennifer Grisham-Brown and Kristie Pretti-Frontczak, this book is a natural follow-up to the bestselling, widely adopted Blended Practices for Teaching Young Children in Inclusive Settings. Future educators of young children will get the research and recommended practices they need to conduct authentic assessment during children's natural routines and play activities, so their true abilities can be accurately measured use assessment to inform effective program planning, both for individual children and groups ensure that their practices are aligned with DEC and NAEYC recommendations involve families as collaborative partners in the whole assessment process, from planning the assessment to determining if the results represent the child's abilities select and use assessment instruments with documented evidence of technical adequacy conduct eligibility assessments and identify children for special services under IDEA assess children with diverse abilities, including children who have severe or multiple disabilities, are from diverse cultural backgrounds, and are dual or multi-language learners engage in assessment to plan and revise quality instruction collect reliable program evaluation data at classroom, program-wide, state, and national levels Guiding future educators through every aspect of skillful assessment, this textbook gives reader
|Product dimensions:||7.00(w) x 9.90(h) x 0.80(d)|
About the Author
Anna H. Hall, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor of Early Childhood Education in the Eugene T. Moore School of Education at Clemson University. She earned her Ph.D. in Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education from the University of Kentucky.
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 childrenâ€™s home and preschool program in Guatemala City called Hope for Tomorrow, where she accompanies students for the education abroad program.
As the president of B2K Solutions, Ltd., Dr. Pretti-Frontczak extends her expertise in the preparation of personnel to a global market with the aim of improving the implementation of effective practices and services by those who work with young children with diverse abilities. She is a gifted speaker, strong applied researcher, and is known for creating solutions to complex problems. She has presented to diverse audiences in countries such as Singapore and Australia as well as to early education providers in virtually every state in the US. Dr. Pretti-Frontczak is a Past President of the Division for Early Childhood, was a professor at Kent State University for 16 years, and has worked as an early childhood consultant and trainer since 1990.
Stephen J. Bagnato, Ed.D., NCSP, is a developmental school psychologist and professor of pediatrics and psychology at the University of Pittsburgh Schools of Medicine and Education. Dr. Bagnato holds joint appointments in psychology in education/applied developmental psychology and clinical/developmental psychology at the university. He is Director of the Early Childhood Partnerships Program at the university and Core Interdisciplinary Leadership Team Faculty Member for The University, Community, Leaders, and Individuals with Disabilities (UCLID) Center at the University of Pittsburgh.
In 1986, Dr. Bagnato received the Braintree Hospital National Brain Injury Research Award for his research on the impact of interdisciplinary intervention for young children with acquired and congenital brain injuries. In 2001, he was recipient of the University of Pittsburgh Chancellor's Distinguished Public Service Award for the innovation and community impact of his consultation and research programs in early childhood partnerships, and in 2008, Dr. Bagnato received The Pennsylvania State University Excellence in Education Alumni Award for his career of innovative national and international service and research in education and psychology. Dr. Bagnato was recently appointed to Governor Rendell's Pennsylvania Early Learning Council, a task force to influence early childhood intervention policy and practices through systems integration efforts among education, public welfare, and health.
Dr. Bagnato specializes in authentic curriculum-based assessment and applied program evaluation research for infants, toddlers, and preschoolers at developmental risk and with neurodevelopmental disabilities and neurobehavioral disorders and their families. He has published more than 120 applied research studies and professional articles in early childhood care and education, early intervention, early childhood special education, school psychology, neurodevelopmental disabilities, and developmental neuropsychology.
Dr. Bagnato is Director of Early Childhood Partnerships (ECP; http://www.earlychildhoodpartnerships.com), a community-based consultation, training, technical assistance, and research collaborative between Children's Hospital and The UCLID Center at the University of Pittsburgh with community partners. For more than 10 years, Dr. Bagnato and his ECP program have been funded by the Heinz Endowments to conduct longitudinal research on the impact and outcomes of high-quality early childhood intervention programs on nearly 15,000 high-risk children in 30 school districts and regions across Pennsylvania (e.g., Early Childhood Initiative, Pre-K Counts).
Dr. Bagnato is a fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA) in Division 16 and he received the 1995 Best Research Article Award from Division 16 of APA (with John T. Neisworth) for his "national study on the social and treatment invalidity of intelligence testing in early childhood intervention." He is coauthor of the professional "best practice" policy statements and standards on early childhood assessment, evaluation, and early intervention for The National Association of School Psychologists and the Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children.
Julie Harp Rutland, M.S. is Assistant Professor of Early Childhood, Elementary, and Special Education at Morehead State University. She is a Ph.D. candidate in Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education at the University of Kentucky.
Read an Excerpt
Excerpted from Chapter 4 of Assessing Young Children in Inclusive Settings: The Blended Practices Approach, by Jennifer Grisham-Brown, Ed.D., & Kristie Pretti-Frontczak, Ph.D. Copyright© 2011 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.
This section provides specific recommendations for assessing children who have severe or multiple disabilities, who are from diverse cultural backgrounds, or who are dual- or multilanguage learners. The section provides specific recommendations regarding what and how information is gathered across assessment purposes. The recommendations provided will apply to all of the specified populations of children (children with diverse abilities) unless otherwise specified by one of the following: children with multiple or severe disabilities, children from diverse cultural backgrounds, and children who are dual- or multilanguage learners.
What to Assess
When assessing children with multiple or severe disabilities, teachers need to gather information about the general effects of the disability on typical development to support their interpretations of test results (i.e., determine whether a documented delay should be considered an area of need or if the delay is within the typical trajectory for same-age peers with the same disability). For most children with multiple or severe disabilities, the course of development is different, not necessarily slower (Ferrell, 1998). For example, research has shown that children with visual impairments learn things in a different sequence and at a different rate than children who are typically developing. As a general rule, teachers should avoid comparisons between children who are typically developing and children with a disability and should keep in mind that a disability in one area affects a child's abilities or developmental trajectories in other areas.
Gathering information about the child's use of functional skills is critical when assessing young children with multiple or severe disabilities (Browder, 2001). As previously mentioned, teachers should examine function rather than form. For example, an item that measures ability to get from Point A to Point B is a more appropriate assessment of a child's functioning than an item that focuses on specific locomotor skills, such as walking or running. Children may demonstrate the function of the skill by moving around in a wheelchair, crawling, or using a walker. Likewise, an open-ended item that measures a child's ability to communicate his or her wants and needs is more functional than focusing on specific verbal communication skills, such as speaking or pointing. Therefore, teachers should focus on developing comprehensive descriptions of a child's functioning on tasks or skills considered important to the child's present and future performance (Meisels & Atkins-Burnett, 2000).
When assessing children from diverse cultural backgrounds or children who are dual- or multilanguage learners, teachers should gather information about the child's culture and language patterns in the home (Espinosa, 2010; Sandall, Hemmeter, Smith, & McLean, 2005). It would be wise to collect information about the child's learning style and experience with materials, the family's preferences and child-rearing practices, as well as what behaviors and ways of approaching adults are culturally appropriate before conducting screening and assessment (California Department of Education, 2007). Furthermore, teachers should determine who in the child's family speaks or understands which languages and for what purposes (e.g., read the newspaper, watch TV, listen to the radio, talk to friends or socialize). Simply determining the language spoken in the home is not enough. Parent surveys or as recommended by the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (Westby, Burda, & Mehta, 2003), ethnographic interviewing, can be used for gathering information regarding the language a child is exposed to, how and when they use various languages, and for gaining a better understanding of the family context and preferences.
Gathering information about the language patterns in the home can provide insight about the acculturation of the child and family. The term acculturation refers to the process in which members of one cultural group adopt the beliefs, behaviors, language, or cultural traits of another cultural group (Schumann, 1978). Understanding the level of acculturation is important, given that young children who are dual- or multilanguage learners are acquiring not just a new language, but a new culture as well. When children experience culture shock, their academic and social behaviors can appear to mirror those of a student with special needs (Grassi & Barker, 2010). Consider the preschool child who is not expected to feed himself at home. At preschool, food is placed in front of the child with the expectation that he will feed himself. The child might scream, cry, or simply "shut down" out of fear or frustration, not understanding the situation or not being able to perform the task. During the assessment process, teachers might interpret the child's behavior as a number of things that are untrue about the child's abilities (e.g., a fine motor delay, challenging behavior, sensory processing issue). Box 4.3 outlines further examples of behaviors exhibited by dual- or multilanguage learners experiencing culture shock. Behaviors exhibited by dual or multilanguage learners experiencing culture shock
- Constantly asking to go to the bathroom or the school nurse
- Crying or exhibiting signs of depression
- Throwing chairs or books across the room
- Being unable to stay focused on tasks
- Falling asleep during class
- Exhibiting outbursts of anger, violence, frustration, or sadness
- Getting into fights at recess
- Leaving the classroom or asking to go home
- Being out sick from school for many days
Finally, when assessing the language skills of children who are dual or multilanguage learners, it is critical to gather information about the child's language acquisition for each language the child speaks and avoid comparisons with children who are native English speakers (Goodz, 1994). Teachers should determine whether the child who is a dual- or multilanguage learner has an age-appropriate level of vocabulary and syntax in his or her native language in order to evaluate the child's English language acquisition. If there is no communication disorder in the child's native language, then the likelihood is that there is no communication disorder. If possible, another strategy is to compare children who are dual- or multilanguage learners with same-age peers who are also dual- or multilanguage learners. If the child is acquiring English at the same rate as other nonnative English speakers of the same age, then chances are there is no significant communication disorder. In other words, the likelihood of both children exhibiting a communication disorder at the same rate is small. That being said, when making comparisons between children, teachers should consider the length of time each child has been exposed to the new language because children spend a predictable amount of time in each stage of the language acquisition process (Haynes, 2006).
How to Assess
The remainder of the section provides recommendations for how transdisciplinary teams should approach the assessment process for children with diverse abilities (i.e., those who have multiple or severe disabilities, who are from diverse cultural backgrounds, or who are dual- or multilanguage learners). Teachers need to consider the influences and biases inherent to the assessment process, integrate and use interchangeable cuing systems and alternative materials, and allow children to provide alternative responses.
Influences and Biases
When assessing young children with diverse abilities, teachers should consider influences and biases created by both the assessment setting or situation and those who are conducting the assessment. Using an authentic assessment approach (i.e., familiar adults in familiar settings) is critical to the success of the assessment process. Research has shown that when conducting assessments of young children who have severe or multiple disabilities, who are from diverse cultural backgrounds, or who are dual or multilanguage learners in familiar settings, familiar adults are able to elicit better performance and more elaborate responses (Barkley, 1982; Copenhaver-Johnson & Katz, 2009; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1984).
When gathering information for a child who is from a diverse cultural background or who is a dual- or multilanguage learner, teachers should match the child with an examiner who is knowledgeable about the child's culture and who speaks the same language (McLean, 2000). Furthermore, the examiner should understand the language acquisition process. It is important the examiner have a firm understanding of the types of grammatical, phonological, and discourse errors that dual- or multilanguage learners typically make as well as the common errors made in interlanguage (Grassi & Barker, 2010). The term interlanguage refers to a made-up linguistic system developed by a child who is learning a second language in which the child uses language transfer, overgeneralization, and simplification to approximate the target language while preserving features of the native language. When conducting the assessment, if it is not possible to find someone who is knowledgeable about the child's culture, who speaks the same language, or who understands the language acquisition process, the team should at the very least, arrange for a one-on-one situation with an interactive adult, caregiver, or teacher. High-context situations, such as a one-on-one interaction, can enhance receptive language abilities as well as increase the likelihood of expressive speech (Copenhaver-Johnson & Katz, 2009).
Interchangeable Cuing Systems
Teachers should also try to incorporate interchangeable cuing systems when assessing children with diverse abilities. Assessments should be administered in the mode of communication most commonly used by the child (Espinosa, 2005). Often, the mode of communication used by children with diverse abilities is nonverbal. Teachers should incorporate the use of picture communication systems, augmentative communication devices, object and tactile cues, and gestures or sign language when appropriate. Nevertheless, teachers should beware of translating standardized verbal tests into any alternative mode of communication. For example, sign language is not a precise equivalent of spoken language, so translation can invalidate the standardization of test procedures (Schum, 2004).
For children who are dual- or multilanguage learners, assessments should be administered in the child's native language. Keep in mind, again, that translation is not always an exact science. Sometimes words or phrases can sound inappropriate and even offensive to another culture (Fabri & Freidel, 2008). If an English language assessment is translated into another language, the assessment should be carefully reviewed for linguistic and cultural appropriateness by someone who understands the language and culture and who is well versed in the complex issues of both assessment and translation (National Association for the Education of Young Children, 2009). When translation is not available, nonverbal cuing systems paired with multiple visual or gestural cues can support the assessment of young children who are dual- or multilanguage learners.
In addition to using interchangeable cuing systems, the manner in which cues are represented should be adjusted to match the needs of the child. For example, children with receptive language deficits will benefit when test questions, instructions, and commands are short, concrete, and repeated (Zentall, 1988). For children with hearing impairments, teachers should ensure the administration of any auditory information is within the child's acuity level. Pairing appropriate cues with reinforcement can help improve motivation and, therefore, test performance for children with behavioral disabilities (Singh, Barto, & Chentanez, 2005). When using reinforcers, teachers should consider the interests and preferences of the child. For example, for children with autism, repetitive stimulation (e.g., strobe light, vibration, rocking) can be more motivating than typical primary reinforcers (e.g., food; Freeman, Frankel, & Ritvo, 1976; Margolies, 1977).
Alternative, Flexible Materials
When assessing young children with diverse abilities, teachers also need to utilize alternative and flexible materials. Choosing materials that are a match for the child's capabilities and that allow for flexibility in the assessment process will give children with diverse abilities multiple ways of accessing the test content. For example, when children have visual impairments, teachers should choose materials that provide tactile information or large, contrasting visual displays. For children with behavior disorders, instruments with more manipulative items and shorter duration of tasks are an appropriate choice (Shaw, 2008).
Specifically for young children who have diverse cultural backgrounds or who are dual- or multilanguage learners, teachers should use materials that align with the child's cultural or linguistic background. The National Association for the Education of Young Children (2005) recommends a systematic, observational assessment process incorporating culturally and linguistically appropriate tools as the primary source of guidance. In other words, when using multiple assessments, teachers should rely more heavily on those which are 1) observation based and 2) culturally and linguistically appropriate for the child (Espinosa, in press). If the transdisciplinary team has enlisted the support of a "cultural guide" who knows and understands the child's language and culture, that person can help determine the appropriateness of assessment tools by examining them for cultural bias.
When allowing for alternative responses, teachers should consider the strengths of the child and attempt to align the response options with the child's unique set of skills (Neisworth & Bagnato, 2004). For example, instruments that emphasize nonverbal procedures, such as pointing to pictures or signaling choice with an eye gaze are appropriate for children with communication disorders or who are nonverbal. For children with motor impairments, teachers should acknowledge and verify movement responses that are approximations of standard responses and appear to demonstrate intent (Robinson & Fieber, 1988). Sometimes, incorporating materials that are familiar to the child such as pictures, toys, or objects from the child's home can encourage children who are from diverse cultural backgrounds or who are dual- or multilanguage learners to narrate stories or role-play events to show what they know and can do (Copenhaver-Johnson & Katz, 2009; Hills, 1992). Allowing children to draw their responses is an alternative option. When children produce verbal responses, teachers should focus on the function or content of the response rather than the form. Finally, children with diverse abilities should be given the option of using adaptive equipment, augmentative communication devices, or other supportive technologies to accommodate their responses during the assessment process.
Table of Contents
About the Authors vii
Foreword Stephen J. Bagnato ix
Chapter 1 Introduction Jennifer Grisham-Brown Kristie Pretti-Frontczak 1
Section I Recommended Practices
Chapter 2 Authentic Assessment Whitney A. Stevenson Jennifer Grisham-Brown Kristie Pretti-Frontczak 15
Chapter 3 Family Involvement in the Assessment Process Anna H. Hall Julie Harp Rutland Jennifer Grisham-Brown 37
Chapter 4 Recommended Practices for Assessing Children with Diverse Abilities Sandra Hess Robbins Kristie Pretti-Frontczak Jennifer Grisham-Brown 61
Chapter 5 Recommended Practices for Determining Technical Adequacy Kristie Pretti-Frontczak Nicole R. Shannon 91
Section II Reasons for Conducting Assessment
Chapter 6 Recommended Practices in Identifying Children for Special Services Jennifer Grisham-Brown Kristie Pretti-Frontczak Sophia Hubbell 121
Chapter 7 Assessment for Program Planning Purposes Sarah R. Hawkins Kristie Pretti-Frontczak Jennifer Grisham-Brown Teresa L. Brown Lydia Moore 149
Chapter 8 Performance Monitoring within a Tiered Instructional Model Carrie Pfeiffer-Fiala Kristie Pretti-Frontczak Lydia Moore Ashley N. Lyons 193
Chapter 9 Program Evaluation Jennifer Grisham-Brown Kristie Pretti-Frontczak 231