Table 5.1 Commonly Used Standardized TestsTestCategoryMost .docx

Table 5.1: Commonly Used Standardized Tests
Test
Category
Most recent edition
Ages tested
Skills tested
AGS Early Screening Profiles
Developmental screening
1990
2–6
Cognitive, language, motor, social development;
self-help skills
Basic School Skills Inventory
Readiness
1998
4–8
Oral language, reading, math, behavior, daily living skills
Bayley Scales of Infant Development
1993
Birth–2½
Mental, motor, behavior
Boehm Test of Basic Concepts
Readiness
2000
3–5
Size, direction, spatial relationships, quantity
Brigance Diagnostic Inventory
Assessment/Readiness
2004
Under 7
Knowledge, comprehension, pre-academics, psychomotor,
self-help, language
California Achievement Test (CAT)

Educational achievement
1996
School age
Literacy, spelling, language, math, science, social studies,
study skills
Child Development Inventory (CDI)
1992
15 months–6
Social development, self-help, motor, language, letters,
numbers
Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning (DIA
L-3)
2011
2–6
Motor, conceptual, language, self-help skills; social
development
Early Screening Inventory
Developmental screening to identify at-risk children
2008
N/A
Cognitive, social/emotional, motor development;
communication, adaptive behaviors
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS)
2007
K–grade 3
Language, math
Metropolitan Achievement Tests
2000
School age
Language, math, social studies, science
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
Diagnostic test

2007
2½ and up
Receptive vocabulary
Preschool Language Scale
Diagnostic test
2011
Birth–7
Auditory comprehension, communication
Screening
Assessment for Gifted Elementary Students-Primary (SAGES)
Developmental test
2001
K and up
Reasoning, general information related to giftedness
Stanford Early Achievement Test
Achievement
2010
K–grade 1
Language, math
Test of Early Language Development (TELD)
Diagnostic test
1999
2–7
Receptive and expressive language related to language
delays
Wechsler Individual Achievement Test
Achievement
2009
School age
Comprehensive language, math
Wechsler Preschool & Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI)
Diagnostic test
2012
3–7
Intelligence: verbal, performance
Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT)

Achievement
2006
School age
Language, math
Chapter 5
Assessment and Evaluation: The Background
© Blend Images/Ariel Skelley/The Agency Collection/Getty Ima
ges
Learning Objectives
After reading this chapter, you should be able to:
·
Describe historical points in the evolution of assessment and ev
aluation in the United States.
·
Identify the four essential purposes of assessment and evaluatio
n.
·
Identify some of the most popular standardized tests used in ear
ly childhood education.
· Compare and contrast formal and informal assessment.
Introduction
Chapter 1 provided a brief overview of the need for and functio
ns of assessment and evaluation. As you will recall, assessment
is the process of gathering information for the purpose of obser
vation and planning for next steps, while evaluation uses the gat
hered information to make judgments. If, for example, an assess
ment of a new infant's reflexes shows potential problems, furthe
r assessments will be conducted and evaluations made to determ
ine appropriate treatments. In this chapter, we will expand on th
ese definitions and explanations, as well as provide case studies
that demonstrate the importance of using assessments and evalu
ations in early education. As is often the case, we will rely on t

he National Association for the Education of Young Children (N
AEYC) as a valuable resource, although we will refer to other e
xpert sources as well.
5.1 Assessment and Evaluation: A Brief History
© Dtimiraos/E+/Getty Images
Doctors conduct assessments and evaluations, techniques also e
mployed by teachers.
Tests related to school performance had their origins in the earl
y 20th century with the creation in France of the "Binet Scale,"
designed to measure intelligence and, thus, predict future succes
s or failure in education. Later, the scale was revised at Stanfor
d University by the psychologist Lewis Terman and became kno
wn as the Stanford-
Binet Intelligence Scales, complete with the concept of intellige
nce quotient, or IQ (Gullo, 2005). In subsequent years, various
modifications were made to the Stanford-
Binet, most recently in 2003.
Competing with the Stanford-Binet were the intelligence
tests developed by David Wechsler in the 1940s. By 1967, he ha
d published a preschool version that lowered the age range to le
ss than 3 years (Wechsler, 1989). Both the Stanford-
Binet and Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence
(WPPSI) are administered to children individually. Both contai
n a number of sub-sections
that test abilities such as verbal and quantitative skills, short-
term memory, and reasoning. It is important to remember that w
hile intelligence tests are useful for understanding children's co
gnitive capabilities, they do not relate directly to educational
performance.
The Emergence of Standardized Early Childhood Testing
Public Domain
Edward Lee Thorndike introduced the first standardized test in
1909.

The first standardized test directly related to education
was the 1909 Thorndike Handwriting Scale, and testing became
increasingly more common throughout the 1930s and beyond (P
errone, 1990). When a test is standardized, it is administered an
d scored consistently for all test takers. The Thorndike Handwri
ting Scale was a norm-
referenced test, so called because performance was measured rel
ative to that of all other students taking the test. It was, howeve
r, a test for children in the fifth grade and beyond; testing for yo
unger children was not seen as necessary at this time.
The need for early childhood testing and program evaluations ar
ose in the 1960s, with the emergence of Head Start and the man
y variations of curricula that were created. The development of t
hese programs was one of the outcomes of President Lyndon Joh
nson's "War on Poverty." Because they were federally funded, e
valuations were necessary for continued financial support. The e
valuation instruments that were developed were less than perfec
t, but they did contribute to what was then a growing field of ea
rly childhood assessment, and they continued to improve over ti
me (Gullo, 2005). Although more than 200 preschool tests were
published over a 10-
year period, even more were needed after the passage of the Edu
cation for All Handicapped Children Act, P.L. 94-
142 in 1975. For example, such developmental instruments as th
e Bayley Scales could be used to identify potential development
al delays before a child's entrance into a Head Start program. A
nd the Test of Early Language Development could be used eithe
r before or during the program. Its purpose has been to "identify
children who are significantly language delayed as compared to
their age peers, to assess their language strengths, and to docu
ment their progress as a result of intervention" (Gullo, 2005, p.
158).
The development of such widespread testing was, to a great exte
nt, responsible for teachers beginning to "teach to the test," or f
ocusing the curriculum primarily on what would appear on an u
pcoming standardized test. Assessment expert James Popham (2

003) expressed his concerns about teaching in this way:
[T]eachers must aim their instruction not at the tests, but toward
the skill, knowledge, or affect that those tests represent. . . . Pr
eoccupation with test scores becomes so profound that many tea
chers and administrators mistakenly succumb to the belief that i
ncreased test scores are appropriate educational targets. They're
not. (p. 27)
Along with teaching to the test, early childhood educators, some
times at the insistence of their administrators, began watering d
own the elementary curriculum in the belief that scores would b
e higher. Somehow forgotten by many was the fact that
young children are active learners by nature. They learn and dev
elop best when they have opportunities to manipulate concrete o
bjects. . . . They construct their knowledge about the world thro
ugh experiences that involve interactions with objects and peopl
e in their environment. . . . They are concrete thinkers and inter
active learners; they are active thinkers and active learners. (Gu
llo, 2005, pp. 36–37)
Concerns over teaching to the test and inappropriately watering
down the curriculum led to the writing of position papers on the
part of NAEYC and other organizations from the 1980s onward
. For example, the National Association of State Boards of Educ
ation stated in 1988, that "Preschool, kindergarten and primary
grade teachers report an increasing use of standardized tests, wo
rksheets and workbooks, ability grouping, retention and other pr
actices that focus on academic skills too early and in inappropri
ate ways" (p. 3). Authoritative statements such as these, coupled
with the popularity of NAEYC's publications, made it possible
for early educators to resist some inappropriate curricula and tes
ting. A move toward alternative assessment (also known as auth
entic assessment) began to emerge. This type of assessment repr
esents a shift away from standardized testing and makes use of
methods that assess children's progress in ways that are more m
eaningful to the learner, both inside and outside the classroom.
Both child and teacher are involved, and materials may be tangi
ble products, portfolio collections of work, and other teacher do

cumentation. Authentic assessment will be discussed later in thi
s chapter, as well as in Chapter 6.
The Current State of Standards-Based Testing
Today, we continue to find much standardized testing in the clas
sroom, particularly within the constraints of the No Child Left
Behind Act (NCLB) of 2002. This act, a product of the George
W. Bush administration, brought a standards-
based approach to educational reform. Public schools, their distr
icts, and their states were to be held accountable for the annual
yearly progress of all their students. The act affected educationa
l requirements and funding nationally, but individual states wer
e given the power to create their own assessment of basic skills
in literacy and mathematics. Although the act mandated yearly t
esting only from grade 3 onward, many states instituted tests for
younger children as well. Despite the pressures related to such
testing, many educators continued to work toward assessments t
hat would be more authentic, or meaningful, to both their studen
ts and themselves. Subsequent education legislation under Barac
k Obama's administration became known as Race to the Top (RT
TT), with a focus on providing more flexibility to states under t
he NCLB requirements. Most recently, a Race to the Top—
Early Learning Challenge (RTTT –
ELC) was announced. Its focus was to improve early learning p
rograms, from birth to age 5, in three ways:
· "increase the number and percentage of low-
income and disadvantaged children in each age group of infants,
toddlers, and preschoolers who are enrolled in high-
quality early learning programs"
· "design and implement an integrated system of high-
quality early learning programs and services"
·
"ensure that any use of assessments conforms with the recomme
ndations of the National Research Council's report on early chil
dhood" (U.S. Department of Education, 2012)
Note particularly the requirements of the last bullet point. The
National Research Council's extensive report from 2008 covers t

he many kinds of assessments given to infants and young childr
en, such as those relating to cognitive, social, and physical deve
lopment, and progress in academic subjects. It also addresses as
sessments focused on entire programs, as well as the need for w
ell-
trained assessors for many of the assessments given to young ch
ildren (Snow & Van Hemel, 2008).
ECE in Motion: Tests and Teaching Strategies
Educators talk about the issue of tailoring instruction to fit stan
dardized tests.
Critical Thinking Question
·
Do you think it is more effective to base instruction on establish
ed tests, or to create a tailored curriculum and then design the te
st to match instruction?
As of December 2011, nine states of the 35 that had applied for
RTTT—
ELC had received grants. In its announcement of the successful
applicants, the White House press office stated that key reforms
would include "aligning and raising standards for existing early
learning and development programs; improving training and su
pport for the early learning workforce through evidence-
based practices; and building roust evaluation systems that pro
mote effective practices and
Table 5.1: Commonly Used Standardized Tests
Test
Category
most recent edition
Ages tested
Skills tested
AGS Early Screening Profiles
1990
2–6
Cognitive, language, motor, social development; self-help skills
Basic School Skills Inventory

Readiness
1998
4–8
Oral language, reading, math, behavior, daily living skills
Bayley Scales of Infant Development
1993
Birth–2½
Mental, motor, behavior
Boehm Test of Basic Concepts
Readiness
2000
3–5
Size, direction, spatial relationships, quantity
Brigance Diagnostic Inventory
Assessment/Readiness
2004
Under 7
Knowledge, comprehension, pre-academics, psychomotor, self-
help, language
California Achievement Test (CAT)
1996
School age
Literacy, spelling, language, math, science, social studies, study
skills
Child Development Inventory (CDI)
1992
15 months–6
Social development, self-help, motor, language, letters, numbers
Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning (DIA
L-3)
2011
2–6

Motor, conceptual, language, self-
help skills; social development
Early Screening Inventory
Developmental screening to identify at-risk children
2008
N/A
Cognitive, social/emotional, motor development; communicatio
n, adaptive behaviors
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS)
2007
K–grade 3
Language, math
Metropolitan Achievement Tests
2000
School age
Language, math, social studies, science
Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test
Diagnostic test
2007
2½ and up
Receptive vocabulary
Preschool Language Scale
Diagnostic test
2011
Birth–7
Auditory comprehension, communication
Screening
Assessment for Gifted Elementary Students-Primary (SAGES)
Developmental test
2001
K and up
Reasoning, general information related to giftedness
Stanford Early Achievement Test
Achievement

2010
K–grade 1
Language, math
Test of Early Language Development (TELD)
Diagnostic test
1999
2–7
Receptive and expressive language related to language delays
Wechsler Individual Achievement Test
Achievement
2009
School age
Comprehensive language, math
Wechsler Preschool & Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI)
Diagnostic test
2012
3–7
Intelligence: verbal, performance
Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT)
Achievement
2006
School age
Language, math
programs to help parents make informed decisions" (White Hous
e, 2011). Thus, the development of appropriate assessment and e
valuation in early childhood continues.
The Most Widely Used Standardized Tests
Readers of this text who pursue a career in early childhood educ
ation will, no doubt, encounter
at least one or more standardized tests for children and perhaps
be expected toadminister
them. Table 5.1 lists some of the most commonly used, high-
quality tests. Note that the names of the tests have been alphabe
tized for easy reference and that this list includes tests of divers
e types, such as developmental screenings, intelligence tests, an
d educational achievement tests.

5.2 The Purpose of Assessment and Evaluation
According to NAEYC,
assessment of children's development and learning is essential f
or teachers and programs
in order to plan, implement, and evaluate the effectiveness of th
e classroom experiences they provide. Assessment also is a tool
for monitoring children's progress toward a program's desired g
oals . . . [and] sound assessment takes into consideration such fa
ctors as a child's facility in English and stage of linguistic devel
opment in the home language. (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009, pp.
21–22)
In the following sections, the components of this statement by N
AEYC are each addressed.
Planning and Adapting a Curriculum
A curriculum for young children should never be totally set in st
one, kept the same way from year to year simply because it wor
ked in earlier times. Different children have differentinterests
and needs, and changes take place within the community and cul
ture. Knowing how and when to adapt or alter curriculum, as we
ll as how to create original plans, is achieved in part through as
sessing the interests, capabilities, and needs of the center's or sc
hool's children.
Assessment for this purpose is stated by NAEYC as "planning a
nd adapting curriculum to meet each child's developmental and l
earning needs" (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009, p. 178). The Natio
nal Education Goals Panel, sponsored by the U.S. Department of
Education, stated this first purpose as "assessing to promote chi
ldren's learning and development" (Gullo, 2005, p. 22). And in t
he words of Brough and Pool (2005), assessment is meant "to in
form the teacher about effectiveness of the curriculum approach
and instructional strategies used to present the objectives to the
students. . . . [W]ithout well-
planned effective assessment, educators
lack data to make critical decisions about teaching and learning
" (p. 196).

Ongoing, frequently administered assessment in a center or clas
sroom is referred to as formative
assessment. Its purpose is to check into children's development
and learning to determine what can be done to help them contin
ue to improve. Such "assessment of the child is implemented on
a regular basis to determine progress and to suggest modificatio
ns that need to be made to insure progress" (Gullo, 2005, p. 137
). From the viewpoint of NAEYC, there must be an assessment
plan that is systematic and ongoing, one "that is clearly written,
well-organized, complete, comprehensive, and well-
understood by administrators, teachers, and families" (Copple &
Bredekamp, 2009, p. 248). In addition, ongoing assessments sh
ould address the whole child: cognitive, social, emotional, and p
hysical. Informal observations of preschoolers' use of a newly c
ombined block-and-
housekeeping center could be an example of formative assessme
nt. Results might lead to the realization that a few children need
some intervention from the teacher, perhaps in the form of play
ing with them for a while to model play possibilities.
Without ongoing formative assessment, a school year may end
with only the final, or summative
evaluation, providing unwelcome surprises for the families and
no possible ways for the teachers to alter the curriculum to impr
ove children's progress. A summative evaluation tells educators
the end results of their teaching of a unit, a project, or an entire
semester or year. Standardized achievement tests are an exampl
e of summative evaluation, as are report cards. Summative evalu
ations might even come much later when the long-
term effects of an experimental curriculum are seen. Such was t
he case in evaluations of the different
models of the original Head Start programs, when it appeared th
at the initial academicbenefits
wore off by the third grade. Those data, however, were not cons
idered the very final summative evaluation. Children's progress
was followed into young adulthood, where it was found that the
truly long-

term benefits were positive (Zigler & Muenchow, 1992).
© Stockbyte/Stockbyte/Thinkstock
Common assessments provide both formative and summative inf
ormation. They help teachers identify
challenges individual students are facing.
When there is more than one teacher for an age- or grade-
level of children, assessing by means of common assessment ca
n be a positive
approach to learning more about children's progress. Common a
ssessments are created collaboratively by the teachers as a way t
o plan instruction, identify difficulties their individual children
are having, and improve their own teaching. Common assessmen
ts can be both formative and summative.
Whether done collaboratively or individually, some assessment
methods are used to determine
the need for curriculum creation and alteration or updating. Spe
cific examples will be described and discussed in the upcoming
section Two Approaches to Assessment of Young Children. As a
general statement, however, the intent of appropriate assessmen
t is to see what needs to be done with the curriculum rather than
to put the burden on the children, to try to "fix" them. The follo
wing case study demonstrates how one group of teachers collab
orates
on unit learning and how an informal, formative assessment led
one of them in a different direction.
CASE STUDY:
Assessing Curriculum for the Benefit of Children's Learning
As part of a team of three kindergarten teachers, Judy has partic
ipated for the past four years in a study unit that takes place eve
ry spring called "It's Circus Time!" The teachers coordinate wit
h the physical education teacher to create various age-
appropriate tricks to do for an audience. Classes read books abo
ut the circus, watch videos of real circuses, and even decorate th
eir rooms like a big top. Until this year, Judy's children have all
loved it. For unidentified reasons, however, this year's children

have been largely unenthusiastic, going through the activities a
s required but without enjoyment.
Judy, mystified, decides to discuss the problem with the class.
During group time, she asks them directly if they can tell her w
hat the problem is. "The children in the other kindergartens love
this unit," she says, a little surprised at the defensiveness in her
voice. No one seems to have a good answer. The children just a
re not interested.
One day, during free choice time, Judy observes the children's p
references closely. She sees several gravitating toward the book
s they read during their last unit, "Life under the Seas." They ev
en hold stuffed dolphins and fish on their laps while they look a
t the books. Judy decides that some informal
assessment is in order. She has already engaged in direct observ
ation. Now, she will take an informal verbal survey to determin
e what is going on.
During group time, Judy asks the class, "Do you miss our under
sea studies?" Almost everyone nods a big yes.
"Would you like to learn more about the ocean than study the ci
rcus?"
This time the yes is out loud. One child says, "We didn't get to
do it long enough!" Another adds, "I want to go to the aquarium
again."
A bit of applause follows. Judy gulps inwardly, knowing what t
his will mean if she follows through: The other teachers may we
ll be annoyed that she is not participating, the parents will be di
sappointed
that their children will not be performing, and she will have to r
evise the list of standards that would have been met by the circu
s unit. She is well aware that the collaborative approach the teac
hers took will be endangered, but she is also aware that the need
s of her children come first and that she works with a group of t
eachers who feel the same way.
Thus, Judy decides to revise her curriculum plan based on this i
nformal assessment of the children's interests. She finds that the
other teachers, after some argument, are reasonably understandi

ng; the parents barely mention the change when informed of it;
and standards can be aligned with the expanded curriculum with
relative ease. The big top decorations come down, the room aga
in turns into an under-the-
sea atmosphere, and almost everyone is pleased to gain more in-
depth knowledge
about the ocean. Two boys who state their preference for circus
performance are permitted to join another class during their phy
sical education periods.
When the time for the circus performance arrives, two parents fr
om Judy's class show up to watch their boys perform. The rest o
f the class is perfectly happy to sit on the sidelines and applaud.
Think About It
Would you have made the same decision Judy did? Would it hav
e taken some courage? What if the teachers had remained upset
about the change? What if the parents were vocally disappointed
about not seeing their children perform in the circus? What are
your arguments for making your decision?
Improving Teacher and Program Effectiveness
© iStockphoto/Thinkstock
Students benefit from enhanced learning when course curriculu
m is adapted to match their interests. While one class might be
particularly enthralled with all things "under the sea," others mi
ght be more captivated by the circus.
All states have some way of identifying teacher—
as well as program or school—effectiveness
through assessment and evaluation of children's progress. NAE
YC defines this "beneficial
purpose" as "evaluating and improving teaching effectiveness" (
Copple & Bredekamp, 2009, p. 178). The National Education G
oals Panel described this as "assessing academic achievement to
hold individual students, teachers, and schools accountable" (G
ullo, 2005, p. 27). In the words of a researcher who was speakin
g of programs, evaluation should "provide accountability data o
n program outcomes for the purpose of program improvement" (

Slentz, 2008, p. 14). Passage of the No Child Left Behind (NCL
B) Act of 2002 alerted schools to the issue of accountability as
never before. As mentioned earlier, testing was mandated and in
stituted for grades 3 and above, but many districts across the Un
ited States began testing younger children as well, as preparatio
n for the accountability that would soon matter for their progra
ms.
Although the NCLB has put more outside pressure on individual
teachers and programs, the concept of using children's progress
as a "beneficial purpose" of evaluating teacher effectiveness
is not a new one. A characteristic of effective
assessments has always been the inclusion of teaching that is gu
ided by corrective feedback for teachers as well as for children.
Accurate self-
assessment is a core activity related to suchfeedback,
and effective teachers openly model their self-
assessments so that students can learn to do so themselves.
Examples of teacher self-
assessment techniques include thinking aloud with children liste
ning, emphasizing the fact that teaching and learning often inclu
de making mistakes and that is okay, engaging in activities that
are new and challenging
and then reflecting on them, and providing
examples of good work and best practice (Brough & Pool, 2005)
. Case Study: Modeling Self-
Assessment in the Preschool demonstrates that, even in prescho
ol, self-assessments are possible for both teachers and children.
CASE STUDY:
Modeling Self-Assessment in the Preschool
Allison teaches in a mixed-age class of 3- to 5-year-
olds. Morning snack time is decided individually as children fee
l hungry and join one or two friends at a small table in the back
of the room. They know they are permitted one visit only to the
snack table during the morning and, after a few false starts, all
but the 3-year-olds have gained enough self-
discipline to comply. Occasionally one of the younger children

will quietly return a second time or neglect to clean up afterwar
d, but for the most part they follow the rules.
Allison, on the other hand, has felt that the rules do not apply to
her. She carries her coffee cup around all morning and occasion
ally reaches for a graham cracker from the master supply whene
ver
she feels the need. One morning, a mother who volunteers frequ
ently in the class comments, "It used to bother me that you carr
y your cup around. But now I think it's probably all right since t
he kids can get their snack whenever they want."
Allison is a bit taken aback by the comment, especially because
the mother apparently has not observed her delving into the gra
ham crackers. Reminding herself that it is important to be a role
model and also important to let children know that adults are at
times imperfect, Allison decides to share with the class her real
ization that she needs to change her behavior. This will be one
way to engage in some self-
assessment, and also demonstrate to the class how it can be don
e. The next day during circle time, she first reviews with the cla
ss the rules about using the snack table. Then she says, "I have
been thinking that I should obey the same rules," and announces
that she will no longer carry her cup around with her and that s
he will eat her snack at the table and have only one serving. "I t
hink that's more fair, don't you?" she asks.
The children look a bit puzzled, and Allison realizes they proba
bly believe that adults can behave as they choose, making her d
efinition of fairness a bit over their heads. Nevertheless, they ar
e happy to have their teacher join them each morning at the snac
k table, and Allison is careful to take turns with every child. Th
ey would certainly understand the unfairness of doing otherwise
! While there, she continues to demonstrate her self-
assessment by stating her behaviors aloud, such as, "Now, I'm g
oing to clean up. I've spilled a little, so I'll use the sponge to wi
pe up. That's our rule."
Allison notes that, within a few days, every child in the class pa
rticipates perfectly at the snack table, even the 3-year-

olds. Sometimes a child even states something like, "I just spille
d, so I'm going to sponge it up."
Think About It
Very young children can learn about self-
assessment, but demonstration accompanied by explanation
teaches it best. One part of the preschool curriculum includes le
arning social behaviors such as these. How might Allison extend
her lesson so the children would begin to use self-
assessment in new ways?
Tracking Children's Progress for Teachers and Families
© iStockphoto/Thinkstock
Teachers should always act as an example by modeling andexpla
ining the behavior they want their students to exhibit.
Families as well as teachers need ongoing and continuous infor
mation about their children's progress, or formative assessment.
They may also be in a position to provide information that teach
ers need. According to NAEYC, ongoing assessments "are based
on multiple sources of information," including "observations by
teachers and specialists and also information from parents" (Co
pple & Bredekamp, 2009, p. 247). Returning to our earlier
example of preschoolersneeding
teacher assistance to learn to play in the block-and-
housekeeping
center, it might be that parents feel their neighborhood is unsafe
, requiring them to keep their children
inside watching television much of the time. When they share th
is information with the teacher and the teacher shares observatio
ns of the children's play, joint planning can take place. For exa
mple, if the teacher describes or demonstrates how she plays wit
h the children, the parents might be encouraged to do the same.
One method that teachers and families rely on to share both ong
oing assessment and summative evaluations is report cards. The
se typically start formally in kindergarten, but preschools somet
imes produce them as well. The following case studies present s
amples of report cards for the early years, along with some oppo

rtunities to read between the lines. Information about what reall
y happened to the children described in the case studies is suppl
ied in the Reflections and Critical Thinking section at the end o
f the chapter. If you are curious about the answers, please wait t
o read them until you have supplied your own!
CASE STUDY:
Sample Kindergarten Report Card
Figure 5.1 represents a kindergarten report card that shows an ef
fort on the part of the school district to be developmentally appr
opriate in its grading of kindergartners. Grades are not yet used,
but a three-tier rating system demonstrates each child's growth.
Think About It
Examine the ratings and teacher comments for Jenny in languag
e and math. Which subject provides
her more success? Look over the teacher's comments for each qu
arter. What are Jenny's greatest challenges as a kindergarten stu
dent? What should be done with children like this? Should they
be held back a year? Should the curriculum or teaching methodo
logy be altered to meet their needs? If so, how might you do it?
If not, why would it be a bad idea? What would you hope to see
in terms of teacher-
family interactions during this kindergarten year?
Figure 5.1: Sample kindergarten report card
Click the figure below to view an enlarged version.
CASE STUDY:
Sample First Grade Report Card
In first and second grade, the terminology that tells how well a
child is doing tends to remain the same as in kindergarten. In th
e following report card (Figure 5.2), a different school district i
n a different state chose to use somewhat different terminology,
but the intent is the same: a system that is informative, but not o
verly formal and intimidating.
Think About It
As you note the grades Ben has made and read the teacher's com

ments, what conclusions do you reach about Ben's greatest stren
gths and "Developing" areas? (Refer also to the comments under
"Science & Health," a subject taught by another teacher.) Can y
ou think of some ways the teacher might help Ben improve in th
e areas that seem difficult for him?
Ben left his school after the first term. What challenges might h
e face in his new situation? If you were Ben's parent, what woul
d you want the new teacher to know, and what would you want t
o let evolve naturally?
Figure 5.2: Sample first grade report card
CASE STUDY:
Sample Third Grade Report Card
By the third grade, many report card models become more forma
l. In the sample report card shown in Figure 5.3 at right, letter g
rades now replace the earlier "Proficient, Developing, and Begi
nning" or "Applying/Understanding, Developing, Not Applying/
Not Understanding" terminology. In this case, there is now a ma
th specialist, while the homeroom teacher is in charge of evaluat
ing literacy and other subjects. Perhaps most notable is the new
lack of a personalized note from the teacher. Instead, there is a
numerical code that the teacher enters in the Comments column.
Figure 5.3: Sample third grade report card
Think About It
From the point of view of the teacher, the school, and the schoo
l district, what do you think are the reasons for these changes?
From the point of view of a parent, how would you respond to t
he changes? In both cases, are there pluses as well as minuses?
What are they?
Look now at the Comment numbers for Dee. What might they te
ll you about her? Are there ongoing
problems? If so, do you think they are being dealt with based on

teacher comments over time?
Screening for Special Needs
Young children with disabilities have been a focus of federal le
gislation since the passage of PL 94-
142 in 1975, titled the Education for All Handicapped Children
Act. For the first time, such children were guaranteed equal edu
cation in public schools receiving funds from the federal govern
ment. In 1986, amendments to the law strengthened the support
for early childhood, so that provisions begin at birth. In 1990, P
L 101-
576, or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), added a req
uirement that the needs of all children must be met within an ea
rly childhood
program. What had previously been called mainstreaming was n
ow called inclusion (Gullo, 2005). The idea behind mainstreami
ng was to invite children with special needs into the regular clas
sroom. Inclusion, on the other hand, assumes that everyone is in
cluded from the start, that there are no outsiders in need of an in
vitation. Such an approach to early education
indicates the importance of regarding young children on a conti
nuum of development rather than an either/or designation of "re
gular" and "special."
NAEYC identifies the federally required purpose of assessment
as "screening and diagnosis of children with disabilities or speci
al learning or developmental needs" (Copple & Bredekamp, 200
9, p. 247). Slentz (2008) defines this purpose as "to diagnose str
engths and areas of need to support development, instruction, an
d/or behavior. To diagnose the severity and nature of special ne
eds, and establish program eligibility" (p. 14). In the words of t
he National Education Goals Panel, such assessment means "ide
ntifying children for health and special services." The panel defi
ned special needs as "blindness, deafness, speech and language
disabilities, cognitive delays, emotional disturbance, learning di
sabilities, and motor impairment" (Gullo, 2005, p. 23). Teachers
and caregivers can expect to participate in initial screening, but
once that is done, further tests are undertaken by specialists ap

propriate to the situation. Case Study: Two Children, Two Appr
oaches shows how the federal requirements were carried out in
one kindergarten class. This case also demonstrates how vital as
sessment is "because positive developmental and academic outc
omes are associated with early identification of and attention to
problems" (Slentz, 2008, p. 15).
Whatever the purpose might be for assessment and evaluation, h
ere is a short list of some important things to remember (Copple
& Bredekamp, 2009):
·
Teachers need to engage continually in assessment, keeping in
mind that its goal is to improve both teaching and learning.
·
There is wide variance between individual children; they should
be allowed to demonstrate
their competence in multiple ways, not just according to what is
easiest for the teacher. This is especially important when decisi
ons will have a major impact, e.g., placement or screening for s
pecial needs.
·
Families should be called on whenever possible to contribute inf
ormation about their children; this information should be an inte
gral part of assessment.
·
Assessment should be geared toward goals that are development
ally appropriate and educationally important.
CASE STUDY:
Two Children, Two Approaches
At the beginning of the kindergarten school year, Ms. Davidson
was quickly able to identify two children who would need some
special assistance. Katie had difficulty making a number of sou
nds, and her speech was sometimes difficult to understand. Rom
ero found it impossible to sit still for more than a minute, to kee
p from poking other children, or to control his very loud voice.
Help for Katie arrived almost immediately. She had spent the pr
evious year and a half in a Head Start program and had already

been screened, her problems had been identified, and an individ
ual plan had been created and approved. The plan included a twi
ce-a-
week specialist who simply showed up one morning in Ms. Davi
dson's classroom, asking that she be allowed to work with Katie
at a small table in the back of the room. Their previous experie
nces had, no doubt, beenpositive,
because Katie was delighted to see her old friend. Within a shor
t time, the specialist asked Ms. Davidson if she might include a
few other children as well. Soon, a number of kindergartners we
re vying for spots at Katie's table so that they could play the fun
games too. Within about two months, the specialist deemed Kat
ie improved enough that she would come only once a week. By t
he end of the school year, a conference was held with Ms. David
son, the specialist, and Katie's grandmother, who was raising he
r. Katie's speech was now almost perfect, and it was decided tha
t the plan was no longer needed.
Romero was another story. Kindergarten was his first school ex
perience, so initial screening was yet to be done. After observin
g him for a few days, Ms. Davidson asked the principal to obser
ve as well. Afterward, they agreed that the district office should
be contacted and further observation
requested. It was at least a month before the very busy school ps
ychologist could make an appearance
but, once he did, Ms. Davidson requested that he observe all her
interactions with Romero as well as focusing on Romero himsel
f.
The psychologist remained about an hour, reassured Ms. Davids
on that her interactions with Romero were excellent, and said he
was ready to discuss a plan for Romero. Ms. Davidson especiall
y
wanted Romero to learn to control his behavior on his own, so it
was decided that he could learn to predict for himself when he
was about to engage in inappropriate behaviors. Then, he would
remove himself from the group to sit in his favorite beanbag cha
ir for a bit. Getting to this point would take some time, so for th

e time being, a plan of rewards for appropriate behavior would a
lso be instituted.
A follow-
up meeting with Romero's mother revealed that his problems ha
d been hers when she was younger and that "I don't want him to
go through what I did." Thus, she was entirely amenable to a pla
n of rewards for improved behaviors, as well as the longer-
term plan for self-
correction. Ms. Davidson found the reactions of the rest of the c
lass interesting, because only Romero was receiving small snack
s and occasional educational toys. Without having to discuss an
y of this with them, she observed that they seemed to understan
d Romero's need and accept what was happening. Whenever he r
eceived a reward along with an explanation and compliment, the
y simply looked on for a moment and then returned to whatever
they were doing. Ms. Davidson even found a way to give Romer
o a chance to shine as a class leader once she discovered that hi
s loud voice was accompanied by serious musical talent. When i
t was time to lead a song, she simply stepped aside and let Rom
ero take over.
Unlike Katie's, Romero's challenges did not disappear at the end
of the year, and further observations and diagnosis would be do
ne at the beginning of first grade.
5.3 Two Approaches to Assessment of Young Children
For students of any age, early childhood through adulthood, two
basic approaches to assessment and evaluation can be accessed:
formal and informal. In the next section, we will discuss the ad
vantages and disadvantages of both approaches in the context of
early childhood education.
Formal Assessment and Evaluation
Formal assessment and evaluation consists of standardized tests,
that is, tests that have been rigorously evaluated to ensure that
they reliably compare the competence of one individual child to
others with similar backgrounds or characteristics, and that the
y do so with fairness. You will recall that the Thorndike Handw

riting Test, fulfilling these qualifications, was called norm-
referenced. Although standardized tests may be designed for dif
ferent purposes, such as special education screening or achieve
ment testing, they have the following characteristics
in common:
·
A specifically stated purpose that guides each application of the
test
·
Established procedures for administering the test that are not de
viated from
·
Meaningful interpretations of results that are described for test
givers and graders
·
A clearly stated description of the sample group of students on
which the test was developed
· Clearly stated limitations of the test (Gullo, 2005)
There are many standardized tests to choose from for young chil
dren and the programs they attend. Although standardized tests
have existed since the early years of the 20th century, their num
bers increased with the advent of Head Start in the 1960s and ha
ve continued to grow with the introduction of the No Child Left
Behind Act of 2002. These tests may have any number of purpos
es, such as evaluating children's language development or early
literacy skills, mathematics ability, motor capabilities, tempera
ment and behavior, or general intelligence.
Although formal tests have the advantage of standardization, th
us ensuring some measure of fairness, they present only a snaps
hot in time. As NAEYC points out, "Sound assessment of young
children is challenging because they develop and learn in ways
that are characteristically
uneven and embedded within the specific cultural and linguistic
contexts in which they live" (Copple & Bredekamp, 2009, p. 22)
. In addition, if a child is hungry, tired, upset, fidgety, or uncoo
perative, the results might well vary extensively from one day t

o the next. Many young children do not yet have the verbal or c
ognitive skills to do well on a structured formal test. Finally, te
sts may be standardized across some criteria such as age and ge
nder, but neglect other criteria such as class, ethnicity, or Engli
sh language competence. Thus, it is important to assess in multi
ple forms.
Informal Assessment and Evaluation
The less formal methods of assessment and evaluation are often
presented as an alternative to standardized testing. The intent of
using them is to assess children's progress in ways that are mor
e authentic to their lives. Thus, the various informal approaches
are also referred to as authentic assessment or alternative asses
sment. In addition, they provide good ways to engage in formati
ve assessment so that instruction can be altered for better learni
ng experiences.
Simply because these methods are informal, however, does not
mean that one should be less careful when using them. Observat
ion methods, for example, may be biased based on the observer'
s opinion of a child. Checklists might lead to less bias, but they
can also leave out important behaviors to look for. Multiple met
hods of assessment are necessary for the full picture of a child,
a class, a teacher, or a center or school. Following are explanati
ons of authentic or alternative assessment listed alphabetically.
In Chapter 6, you will haveopportunities
to explore them further.
Anecdotal Records
This might be the most informal observational technique, but it
can still provide useful information
if observers have specific behaviors they are looking for. Focus
ed on a specific event, an anecdotal record is a written observati
on of what a child or group of children does within a designated
time frame. The goal is to describe what is seen without makin
g editorial comments
or inserting opinions. Thus, an observer might write, "Tiffany s
ucks her thumb while dragging her 'blankie' to the doll bed. She
lies on the floor next to the bed while staring quietly out the wi

ndow." The observer would not, during this time, comment, "Tif
fany is obviously
very tired today." Comments such as these are written in later,
when all evidence has been gathered and reflected on.
© Wealan Pollard/OJO Images/Getty Images
Writing a reflection and creating a checklist are examples of inf
ormal assessment, which is another way to assess a child's progr
ess.
Checklists
Some checklists are available commercially. For example, readi
ness for preschool can be tested using checklists from Leap Fro
g at http://www.leapfrog.com. Included are social and motor ski
lls, reasoning, language, math, science, and creative arts. Other
checklists can be created as needs and interests arise; these will
be tailored to a specific center or school, reflecting local culture
and expectations. They might be extensive with sub-
sections or contain just a few items as appropriate.
Checklists require the observer to either check or leave blank a
behavior that is evident or a criterion that has been met. Behavi
ors for youngsters just learning to eat at the table with others mi
ght include using a spoon effectively, drinking from a cup with
two hands and no adult help, and carrying dishes to the dirty dis
h tub. A criterion checklist might relate to academic milestones
that children are expected to meet before advancing to the next
grade. For example, many kindergartens require letter recogniti
on, and a checklist could be used for each child with each letter
listed and ready to check off. The use of a checklist for such a p
urpose indicates that it is criterion-
referenced. That is, there are stated criteria or goals to be met, b
ut children are not ranked across a standardized set of peers, as
would be the case in a norm-referenced test.
ECE in Motion: Components of PerformanceAssessment
Performance assessment emphasizes observation of certain crite
ria instead of assessment of rigid standards.
Critical Thinking Questions

·
In what instances might performance assessment be impractical
or inadequate for gauging a student's progress?
·
Why is it important to distinguish between performance criteria
and knowledge norms?
Event Sampling
This observational method focuses on a single child and a single
behavior that is cause for concern. Each time such an event tak
es place, the observer writes down what leads up to it, what take
s place during it, and how it eventually ceases. Writing about w
hat happens before and after, as well as during the event, helps t
he observer determine cause and effect. Perhaps a small boy has
been biting others but the teachers have not been able to figure
out what causes it. They begin to keep a record of each time it h
appens, noting the time of day and the events immediately befor
e and after the biting behavior. Soon it becomes apparent that th
e child is most inclined to bite just before naptime and is calme
d afterward, not by teachers talking to him about appropriate be
havior, but by a teacher rubbing his back as he goes to sleep. Th
us, once the event sampling is analyzed, teachers know to keep
a close watch on the child before naptime, ready to redirect his
behavior, and they know that a quiet backrub will no doubt be i
n order.
Portfolios
Portfolios are not in themselves assessment methods but instead
are collections of artifacts. Portfolios contain children's work o
ver time and can take the form of a manila folder, box, or other
type of container. A portfolio box for younger children will pro
bably contain art products or science projects that take up too m
uch space for a folder. Children in the primary grades are more l
ikely to have portfolios made up of written work. When teachers
help children
evaluate their products over time by giving them specific things
to look for, children gain skills in self-assessment.
Rating Scales

A rating scale is essentially a checklist that has been modified t
o indicate levels of quality. Some are commercially available, e
specially those for teachers and administrators who wish to eval
uate their care and learning sites. Perhaps the best known of the
se comes from the University of North Carolina. There are four
versions available: the original Early Childhood Rating Scale (r
evised), Infant-Toddler, Family Childcare, and School-
Age Care. These can be explored at ers.fpg.unc.edu. Another ex
ample of rating scales can be seen in the report cards in Case St
udies 5.1–
5.3. Whether letter grades or descriptive words such as "develop
ing" and "proficient" are used, the degree of competence is state
d.
Rubrics
Originally, a "rubric" was the ornate red heading to a new chapt
er in a medieval manuscript. Today, the word "rubric" tends to b
e used in a different sense, to mean a chart containing a list, lon
g or short, of criteria to be met, along with a rating scale. The c
riteria are usually lined up along the left side of a page. Across
the top of the same page, the associated ratings are listed. A kin
dergarten example might be a list of alphabet letters to be learne
d. The top of the page could be in three sections: Confident, In
Progress, Introductory. Children can participate in self-
assessment using a rubric, and these are usually simple and attra
ctive, with clever illustrations.
One might say, for example, "I can tie my shoes" and be illustra
ted with a picture of a shoe. Ratings at the top might be two fac
es, one with a smile and the other with a neutral expression indi
cating that the skill is still in progress.
Running Record
© Hemera/Thinkstock
When teachers observe a student learning a new skill such as ad
dition, they often take a running record.
This technique is often used when children are learning to read,
but it is adaptable to any number of situations. The teacher sits

close to the child and makes notes pertaining
to whatever is being observed. A running record form is typicall
y in three columns: a left-
hand column for date and time, a central column to record behav
ior, and a column on the right for comments. The form is most t
ypically used with a single
child for a finite period of time and to record a single activity, s
uch as the reading
of a story or playing during a recess. Skills and problems with t
he activity are usually the focus, and the observer typically
writes down everything the child does, perhaps in abbreviated f
orm.
Teacher and Child Self-assessments
In the case study Modeling Self-
Assessment in the Preschool, we met Allison, who engaged in se
lf-
assessment and changed her behavior. Further, she was quite ver
bal about what she did at the snack table, and even the younger
children began to assess their own behavior and, as needed, alte
r it. The same can be done with any area of the curriculum. Whe
n children are permitted to work with the teacher to choose exe
mplary products for their portfolios, they gain skills in self-
assessment. One-on-
one discussions between teacher and child about any work prod
uct can also enhance children's skills in this area.
Time Sampling
This form of observation is similar to event sampling, but it is c
onfined to a specific period of time. As an example, there might
be observations lasting one or two minutes, scheduled for every
five or 10 minutes, for a total of a half hour. If done over a peri
od of days or weeks, it would be possible to evaluate the improv
ement of behaviors, or lack thereof. Time sampling is one way o
f observing a child to see how often a behavior of concern appe
ars.
Informal methods offer a variety of ways to assess progress and
are known for the greater flexibility they provide as compared

with formal methods. Because they are typically not standardize
d, however, there is always the danger of assessing in a biased
way. Having more than one person, particularly an outsider, eng
age in the same method for a specific assessment is one way to
deal with this potential problem. Without some training, teacher
s may find that the results of their assessment are inconclusive a
s well as biased. It is suggested that beginners turn to trained, e
xperienced evaluators for assistance.
Chapter Summary
This chapter focused on the importance of assessment and evalu
ation, and it stressed the following points:
·
Assessment and evaluation for young children, just as for older
students, changes over time depending on society's needs and de
mands.
·
One purpose of assessment is to plan and adapt curriculum to se
rve children's needs and interests more effectively.
·
Assessment is often used to improve teacher and program effect
iveness, and may use children's progress as one measure of succ
ess.
·
A third purpose is to track children's progress, not only for teac
hers, but for their families
as well. Report cards are one way this is accomplished.
·
A fourth purpose is to screen children for special needs. Federal
legislation makes this not only ethically responsible, but also le
gally necessary.
·
Formal assessment uses standardized methods, thus providing fa
irness to the assessment
process. Such methods, however, often cannot be relied upon to
evaluate young children whose immaturity and constant change

provide challenges.
·
Informal assessment is often referred to as alternative, or authen
tic, assessment. These methods provide flexibility and real-
life application for formative assessment, but may not be as reli
able as approaches that are more formal.
Reflections and Critical Thinking
1.
In the case study Sample Kindergarten Report Card, a kindergar
ten child showed herself adept at math-
related topics but challenged by some literacy areas, including t
he motor skills needed for writing. "Citizenship skills" and "wor
k habits" remained a problem throughout the year. You possibly
found Jenny to be immature. Did you think that holding her bac
k a year would be a good idea? Her school believes that childre
n should not be held to the results of readiness tests and that it i
s the school's responsibility to adapt to the child's needs. In the
case of Jenny, this meant that the school had a special pull-
out program that she could participate in each morning to impro
ve her literacy skills. The parents' permission was required, how
ever, and they refused, arguing that those hours were important
for improving her citizenship skills as well; she needed to stay i
n her own class. Jenny is now in third grade. Her citizenship gra
des are middling, the child having developed perhaps too much
skill at being the class clown. Her literacy skills are all at grade
level, but she does not enjoy reading. Do you think the school
was wrong not to hold Jenny back? Do you think her parents ma
de a mistake by refusing the pull-out program? Why?
2.
In the case study Sample First Grade Report Card, a first grader
demonstrated very advanced reading skills in his first term, alth
ough he had not yet learned to spell or write on his own. An exc
ellent all-
around student academically, Ben, like Jenny, had difficulties w
ith citizenship skills. What did you think the teacher in Ben's ne
w school should know about him? As it turned out, the new scho

ol proved challenging both academically and socially for Ben. H
is family embarked on a yearlong experience in an Eastern Euro
pean country. The mother had never spoken her native language
with Ben, who now had to learn to speak Russian and read the C
yrillic alphabet. The first-
grade teacher in the neighborhood elementary school was a war
m and caring woman, but she had no training in teaching a forei
gn language child. Ben was put in the back of the classroom, wh
ere he could not even begin to track what was going on. Previou
sly a good math student, Ben began to fail the subject because t
he teacher did not think to explain the addition and subtraction
symbols. Some intervention from Ben's mother led to increased
scores in both math and reading. Nevertheless, the principal sug
gested that Ben stay home during the school-
wide final evaluations so he would not bring down their usually
stellar scores.
Of course, this outcome is not one most, if any, readers would h
ave guessed. It is shared here so that you can turn the story upsi
de down. Suppose a first grader came to your class from a Russi
an-speaking, Cyrillic-
writing country. What would you do that this teacher did? What
would you avoid? What would you do to ensure the child's succ
ess? Are there resources you might have that the other teacher
might not? The teacher did not speak the same language as the c
hild; this might happen in your program. What can a teacher do
in this situation?
3.
In the case study Sample Third Grade Report Card, the report ca
rd format changed dramatically
to a model that is similar to what students can expect throughou
t all their formal years of schooling, although there are still som
e subjects that have evaluations that are less formal than a letter
grade. You no doubt noted that Dee had trouble throughout the
year following directions, but that she still had a positive attitud
e toward school. Did you guess what her problem might be? It w

as during this year that both school and parentsrealized
that Dee should have specialized testing, and she was diagnosed
as having attention deficit disorder (ADD). A therapist began t
o help Dee with coping skills, and she is now a successful fourt
h-grade student.
Regarding the lack of personalized comments from the teacher, t
his was not an issue with the parents, most likely because they e
ngaged in much contact and communication with Dee's teacher.
Websites for Further Teaching Assistance
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The CCSSO si
te contains useful information
related to early education assessment and evaluation. Two docu
ments on the site are especially helpful for understanding forma
l processes and definitions of terms. In the search box, type "ec
ea glossary."
http://www.ccsso.org
Joint Position Statement of the National Association for the Edu
cation of Young Children (NAEYC) and the National Associatio
n of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments of Educat
ion (NAECS-
SDE). These two important and influential organizations have la
id out, in their position statement, a detailed description of what
they argue are the ethical, appropriate, valid, and reliable appro
aches to assessing young children. Go to "Policies." There you
will also find interesting links to other policy statements as well
.
http://www.naecs-sde.org
Chapter 5 Flashcards
Key Terms
Click on each key term to see the definition.
alternative assessment
Assessment that uses methods that are meaningful to both childr
en and teachers and that have application to the world outside sc
hool. Also known as authentic assessment.
common assessment

Assessment plans designed by two or more teachers of similar g
rades or levels, to be used with all their students.
criterion-referenced
Assessment that grades or ranks students on the basis of set goal
s or criteria.
formal assessment and evaluation
Standardized tests that permit the comparison of an individual's
performance with a larger and similar group.
formative assessment
Ongoing or continual assessments that can be used to modify cu
rriculum or methods as needed.
inclusion
Placing all children together in the center or classroom, includin
g those with special cognitive, physical, or social/emotional nee
ds.
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
Official title: "An act to close the achievement gap with account
ability, flexibility, and choice so that no child is left behind." A
2002 federal act providing standards-
based educational requirements across all states.
norm-referenced test
Assessment that grades or ranks students in comparison with the
ir peers.
Race to the Top—Early Learning Challenge (RTTT—ELC)
A competitive grant program provided to individual states to im
prove early childhood education, including assessment programs
. First grants were awarded to nine states in late 2011.
standardized test
See formal assessment and evaluation.
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales
Developed first in France, then updated at Stanford University i
n California, these tests assess an individual's intelligence quoti
ent, or IQ.
summative evaluation
A final evaluation of a teaching-learning sequence, either short-
or long-term.

Table 5.1 Commonly Used Standardized TestsTestCategoryMost .docx

Table 5.1 Commonly Used Standardized TestsTestCategoryMost .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Table 5.1 Commonly Used Standardized TestsTestCategoryMost .docx

Similar to Table 5.1 Commonly Used Standardized TestsTestCategoryMost .docx (19)

More from ssuserf9c51d

More from ssuserf9c51d (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Table 5.1 Commonly Used Standardized TestsTestCategoryMost .docx