Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and ProgramsLearni

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
© 2019 Bridgepoint Education, Inc. All rights reserved. Not for
resale or redistribution.
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

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/

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
• 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 fi ne
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).
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

© iStockphoto / Thinkstock
Early childhood educators and researchers exercise cau-
tion in using standardized test for a variety of reasons.
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.
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.
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.
© Monkey Business / Thinkstock
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.
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
© Digital Vision / Thinkstock
Teachers selectively choose learning artifacts, such as a
child’s artwork, to represent evidence of growth and
change over time.

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/
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 repor ting
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 w ith
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.
© Exactostock / SuperStock
Early childhood educators commonly organize assessment
information and artifacts in an individual portfolio for each
child.
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.
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 pl an
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;
© Comstock Images / Thinkstock
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.
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/
http://www.necpa.net/
https://www.earlylearningleaders.org/
https://www.earlylearningleaders.org/

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/
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.
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 wel l 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_F
inalw.
pdf.
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.
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_earlychildprog
stan.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 technolo gy 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.
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.
Curriculum as a Collaboration
with Families and the Community

Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Explain the importance of a collaborative approach to
working with families.
2. Summarize accepted principles, effective strategies, and
typical challenges for under-
standing and working with families.
3. Explain how teachers can help families understand the
current standards-driven
environment.
4. Describe ways in which teachers can help families understand
the curriculum.
5. Describe how the community can be incorporated as a
resource for your curriculum.
5
Pretest
1. Collaboration with families and finding
ways to involve them in the curriculum is an
important goal in early childhood education
today. T/F
2. Teachers don’t need to learn about
students’ families in order to have an
effective curriculum. T/F
3. Offering them information about learning
standards helps families understand how
the curriculum works. T/F

4. Documenting and displaying what children
do conveys a message that their work is
important. T/F
5. It is worth the effort to invite families and
members of the business and neighborhood
communities to serve as volunteers. T/F
Answers can be found at end of the chapter.
© Yellow Dog Productions / Getty Images
What Is a Collaborative Approach and Why Is It Important?
Chapter 5
After completing your home visits, you realize that you now
have a lot of additional informa-
tion about the families of the children who will be in your class.
You know which children
have a single parent as the household head and have some
information about family occupa-
tions and work schedules. You now know who lives with
siblings and/or an extended family
and which children have pets. You have also identified the
parents and children with limited
English proficiency, and you have some information about what
steps have been taken to sup-
port the two children with special needs.
But you also have many remaining ques-
tions about how the families will respond

to you as the teacher and how to create
and sustain productive and satisfying rela-
tionships. You want the families to feel
like partners in the adventure of early
childhood education, but you also realize
that there may be many factors that could
complicate your efforts.
What can you do to learn more about the
values, traditions, hopes, and wishes of
your families? What strategies to include
them in their children’s school lives will be
most successful? How will you help them
understand the curriculum as partners in
their children’s learning? How will you
make connections between the school,
your families, and the local community?
In this chapter, we will address the very important challenge of
how to construct meaning-
ful and mutually beneficial relationships with families and the
community, particularly with
respect to curriculum. (Note: In this chapter, all references to
interactions and communications
with families are made on the assumption that they would be
conducted in or translated to
the home language as needed.)
5.1 What Is a Collaborative Approach and Why Is It
Important?
An expanding number of households have both parents working
outside the home. As of
2010, the number of women in the workforce is 58.6 percent or
72 million; women are pro-
jected to account for 51 percent of the increase in total growth
in the labor force between

2008 and 2018 (United States Department of Labor, n.d.).
Therefore it can be challenging to
effect a significant representation of families in the affairs of
programs and schools. In one
survey, approximately 58 percent of parents with students in
grades K-12 did not volunteer or
serve on a committee at their child's school; 26 percent did not
attend a school or class event
(Noel, Stark, Redford, & Zukerberg, 2016).
The National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC) states that there is
no single formula for collaboration between programs and
families. However, as part of their
© Banana Stock / Thinkstock
There are many ways for early childhood educators to
connect with families and the community, as we will dis-
cuss in this chapter.
Chapter 5
recent Engaging Diverse Families project, they have outlined
six principles that focus on com-
munication, engagement, and decision making. The principles
suggest that:
1. Teachers and programs engage families in two-way
communication

2. Programs implement a comprehensive program-level system
of family engagement
3. Programs and teachers engage families in ways that are truly
reciprocal
4. Programs provide learning activities for the home and in the
community
5. Programs invite families to participate in program-level
decisions and wider advocacy
efforts
6. Programs invite families to participate in decision making
and goal setting for their chil-
dren (National Association for the Education of Young
Children, 2012)
Many years of research and well over one hundred studies on
initiatives connecting families,
schools, and communities overwhelmingly attest to the value
and benefits of strong, positive
connections (Fiese, Eckert, & Spagnola, 2006), not just for the
children but for the parents
and teachers as well. When families are actively involved in the
daily lives of their children
in school or care and they know what their children are doing
during the day, children feel
more secure, have a higher sense of self-worth, and learn better.
Parents can benefit from
feelings of affirmation, increased knowledge about early
education and child development,
and higher self-esteem. Teachers feel supported and gain
additional, relevant knowledge and
resources from working closely with families (Gestwicki, 2004).

These kinds of positive correlations with student achievement
are most closely associated with
programs that feature:
• Support and respect for family values and expectations
• Attention to and observation of parent behaviors and
interactions
• Promotion of parent and family participation in school
activities and affairs
• Inclusion of parents in decision-
making processes that affect their
children (Weiss, Krieder, Lopez, &
Chatman, 2005)
Early Collaboration: Parent-
Teacher Associations
Like other aspects of early childhood edu-
cation, the characteristics of parent/fam-
ily involvement in schools have evolved
over a long period of time (Olsen & Fuller,
2008). In the 1800s, when schools were
primarily isolated and rural, the men in a
community typically had control over all
school matters. As more schools were
built to accommodate the population
growth that occurred with large-scale immigration, schools were
located increasingly in urban
areas.
© Candace Jaruszewicz

In the days of mostly rural schools, the community shared
all responsibility for the education of its children. This
photo documents the author’s great grandfather using
his tractor in 1918 to move the local one-room “Liberty”
school across the prairie to its new location.
http://www.naeyc.org/familyengagement/about
https://www.naeyc.org/resources/topics/family-
engagement/principles
Chapter 5
In response to growing concerns about social issues and the
welfare of children, women—
who did not yet have the right to vote—began to organize and
advocate. Alice McLellan
Birney and Phoebe Apperson Hearst established the National
Parent-Teacher Association
(PTA) in 1897. The goals established at that time (and
subsequently achieved over the follow-
ing century) were:
• The creation of kindergarten classes
• Child labor laws
• A public health service
• Hot-lunch programs
• A juvenile justice system

• Mandatory immunization
By the 1950s, parent involvement in elementary schools through
PTA membership had swelled
to more than 6 million members. As many women returned to
homemaking after World War
II, they became increasingly involved in their children’s schools
in both volunteer support and
PTA leadership roles. Today, the PTA (https://www.pta.org/)
continues as a national organiza-
tion, with the mission to “make every child’s potential a reality
by engaging and empowering
families and communities to advocate for all children.”
In addition, local parent-teacher organizations, loosely referred
to as PTOs, have established
a parallel network of independent groups. Most recently, federal
funding for Title 1 schools
through the 2001 No Child Left Behind Act mandates that
schools receiving funding should
establish parental involvement policies that focus on:
• Assisting their child’s learning
• Being actively involved in their child’s education at school
• Serving as full partners in their child’s education and being
included, as appropriate,
in decision making and on advisory committees to assist in the
education of their child
(National Coalition for Parent Involvement in Education, 2012)
In child care centers, no such national grassroots effort took
place. Public funding for child
care began during the Great Depression through the Works

Progress Administration (WPA)
and with the Lanham Act of 1940, which established child care
for the many women working
in factories to support the war effort (Cohen, 1996). These
programs were temporary, ending
with the crises that spurred their establishment. However,
federal funding for early education,
starting with Head Start, expanded the missions of programs to
include a focus on families.
The Goals of a Collaborative Approach
According to the NAEYC, the goals of a collaborative approach
to home/school/community
involvement should be to increase learning and reduce the
achievement gap that still persists
in our society (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009). One of the core
considerations of DAP is the
need to understand sociocultural family contexts as essential to
developing curriculum and
experiences that are meaningful and relevant. Curriculum
should be “clearly defined for, com-
municated to, and understood by all stakeholders, including
families” (Copple & Bredekamp,
2009, p. 20).
Engaging the entire family, particularly fathers, is a very high
priority today. As Glenn Olsen
and Mary Lou Fuller (2008, p. 11) have stated, “Educators are
experts in . . . the education
https://www.pta.org/

Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and ProgramsLearni

Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and ProgramsLearni

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and ProgramsLearni

Similar to Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and ProgramsLearni (20)

More from BetseyCalderon89

More from BetseyCalderon89 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Evaluation and Assessment of Learning and ProgramsLearni