Preschool Assessment
High/Scope Information Paper on Preschool Assessment by Ann S. Epstein, Ph.D., Director, Early Childhood Division
Lawrence J. Schweinhart, Ph.D., President
Andrea DeBruin-Parecki, Ph. D., Director, Early Childhood Reading Institute
Purpose of Paper
This paper addresses the many questions the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation has received about testing four-year-olds. Our reasons for sharing this paper with early childhood practitioners, policymakers, and parents is three-fold: (a) to provide basic information about the terms and issues surrounding assessment; (b) to add an empirical and pragmatic perspective to what can sometimes be an impassioned debate; and (c) to affirm our commitment to doing what is best for young children and supporting those who develop the programs and policies that serve them. High/Scope believes child assessment is a vital and necessary component of all high quality early childhood programs. Assessment is important to understand and support young children’s development. It is also essential to document and evaluate how effectively programs are meeting their educational needs, in the broadest sense of this term. For assessment to occur, it must be feasible. That is, it must meet reasonable criteria regarding its efficiency, cost, and so on. If assessment places an undue burden on programs or evaluators, it will not be undertaken at all and the lack of data will hurt all concerned. In addition to feasibility, however, assessment must also meet the demands of ecological validity. The assessment must addresses the criteria outlined below for informing us about what children in real programs are learning and doing every day.
Efficiency and ecological validity are not mutually exclusive, but must sometimes be balanced against one another. Our challenge is to find the best balance under the conditions given and, when necessary, to work toward altering those conditions. Practically speaking, this means we
must
Lawrence J. Schweinhart, Ph.D., President
Andrea DeBruin-Parecki, Ph. D., Director, Early Childhood Reading Institute
Purpose of Paper
This paper addresses the many questions the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation has received about testing four-year-olds. Our reasons for sharing this paper with early childhood practitioners, policymakers, and parents is three-fold: (a) to provide basic information about the terms and issues surrounding assessment; (b) to add an empirical and pragmatic perspective to what can sometimes be an impassioned debate; and (c) to affirm our commitment to doing what is best for young children and supporting those who develop the programs and policies that serve them. High/Scope believes child assessment is a vital and necessary component of all high quality early childhood programs. Assessment is important to understand and support young children’s development. It is also essential to document and evaluate how effectively programs are meeting their educational needs, in the broadest sense of this term. For assessment to occur, it must be feasible. That is, it must meet reasonable criteria regarding its efficiency, cost, and so on. If assessment places an undue burden on programs or evaluators, it will not be undertaken at all and the lack of data will hurt all concerned. In addition to feasibility, however, assessment must also meet the demands of ecological validity. The assessment must addresses the criteria outlined below for informing us about what children in real programs are learning and doing every day.
Efficiency and ecological validity are not mutually exclusive, but must sometimes be balanced against one another. Our challenge is to find the best balance under the conditions given and, when necessary, to work toward altering those conditions. Practically speaking, this means we
must
References: Brede kamp, S., & Rosegra nt, T. (Ed s.) (1992 ). R eaching Potentials: Appropriate Curriculum and Assessment for Young Children McLa ughlin, M., & Vogt, M . (1997) . P ortfolios in teacher education . Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association. Meisels, S. (2003, 19 March). Can Head Start pass the test? E ducation Week , 2 2 (27), 44 & 29. N ational E ducation G oals Pane l. (1998). P rinciples and rec ommen dations for early childh ood assessm ents. Paris, S. G ., & Ayers, L. R . (1994) . B ecom ing reflective s tudents a nd teach ers with po rtfolios and authen tic assessment Paulson, F. L., Paulson, P. R., & Meyer, C. A. (1991). What makes a portfolio a portfolio? E duca tional Lea dership , 48 (5), 60–63. Shaklee, B . D., Barb our, N. E ., Ambros e, R., & H ansford, S. J . (1997) . D esigning and using portfolios. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Wiggins, G . (1992) . Creating tests wo rth taking. E duca tional Lea dership , 4 9 (8), 26–33. Wolf, D., Bixby, J., Glenn, J., & Gardner, H. (1991). To use their minds well: Investigating new forms of student assessment Zill, N., Conn ell, D., Mc Key, R. H ., O’Brien, R . et al. (2001 , January). H ead Start FACES: Longitudinal Findings on Pro gram P erforma nce, Third Progres s Report (COR; High/Scope, 2003). The new version has been updated to take into account the current assessment needs of early childhood educators (for example, sections on language and literacy and math and science foundations have been expanded) and to reflect the many ideas gained from over a decade of experience with the earlier version (High/Scope, 1992) Bureau. At that time, a two-year study with Head Start teaching teams found the COR to be a feasible, valid, and reliable assessment tool (Schweinhart, McNair, Barnes, & Larner, 1993)