5
Assessing Learning and Development

Assessments for purposes other than screening and diagnosis have become more and more common for young children. Some of these assessments are conducted to answer questions about the child (e.g., monitoring progress during instruction or intervention). Other assessments are conducted to provide information about classrooms and programs (e.g., to evaluate a specific curriculum or type of program) or society in general (e.g., to describe the school readiness of children entering kindergarten). Many of the assessments widely in use in educational settings are designed primarily to inform instruction by helping classroom personnel specify how children are learning and developing and where they could usefully adapt and adjust their instructional approaches. Thus, the goals of much testing in this later period are more closely related to educational than to medical or public health issues, and the nature of the assessments as well as the domains assessed are modified accordingly.

The greater role of education in these assessments means that the settings for assessing children may be different, and the range of domains toward which assessments are directed is expanded. Assessment that is educationally oriented often takes school-age achievement as the ultimate target and thus is organized into domains that are highly relevant to K-12 schooling (e.g., literacy, science, social studies). Understanding the developmentally rel-



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 85
5 Assessing Learning and Development A ssessments for purposes other than screening and diag- nosis have become more and more common for young children. Some of these assessments are conducted to answer questions about the child (e.g., monitoring progress dur- ing instruction or intervention). Other assessments are conducted to provide information about classrooms and programs (e.g., to evaluate a specific curriculum or type of program) or society in general (e.g., to describe the school readiness of children entering kindergarten). Many of the assessments widely in use in educa- tional settings are designed primarily to inform instruction by helping classroom personnel specify how children are learning and developing and where they could usefully adapt and adjust their instructional approaches. Thus, the goals of much testing in this later period are more closely related to educational than to medical or public health issues, and the nature of the assessments as well as the domains assessed are modified accordingly. The greater role of education in these assessments means that the settings for assessing children may be different, and the range of domains toward which assessments are directed is expanded. Assessment that is educationally oriented often takes school-age achievement as the ultimate target and thus is organized into domains that are highly relevant to K-12 schooling (e.g., literacy, science, social studies). Understanding the developmentally rel- 

OCR for page 85
 EARLY CHILDHOOD ASSESSMENT evant conceptualization of these skills for preschool-age children is a task for researchers as well as test developers; nonetheless, it is clear that precursors to academic literacy, mathematics, and general knowledge can be measured long before formal instruc- tion in these domains has commenced. The domains of relevance to schooling extend well beyond cognition and knowledge. Children being educated or cared for in groups are expected to be able to regulate their emotions and attention; to form social relationships with peers and with non- familial adults; to learn from observation, participation, and direct instruction; and increasingly to direct their own learning. All these capacities are crucial if children are going to function well in preschool and child care or in K-12 programs, and promoting these capacities is also a primary goal of adults in group care and educational settings. Thus, assessments of such capacities are seen to reflect not only child skills but also the adequacy of the settings in which children spend their time. In addition, group care and educational settings vary in quality and in design, although state and local guidelines for teacher-child ratios, number of children served, and the preparation required of preschool teachers and caregivers limit the degree of variation to some extent. Screening and diagnosis remain crucial purposes in assess- ment of older preschoolers, as well as infants and toddlers. In addition, such purposes as tracking the progress of children with an individualized education program or of groups of children exposed to a particular program or curriculum become particu- larly salient for older preschoolers. The measures discussed in this chapter are typically more appropriate for progress monitoring or program evaluation than for individual screening or diagnosis. Nonetheless, we recognize that all these domains raise assessment issues for the full range of purposes. The chapter covers five domains: (1) physical well-being and motor development, (2) social and emotional development, (3) approaches to learning, (4) language and literacy, and (5) cog- nitive skills, including mathematics as a particular case. These are widely accepted domains differentiated in various policy statements, such as the “all children ready for school” goal of the National Education Goals Panel (Kagan, Moore, and Bredekamp,

OCR for page 85
 ASSESSING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT 1995) and in the analysis of state learning standards by Scott- Little, Kagan, and Frelow (2006). For each of the domains, we first discuss how it is defined and how its internal structure has been delineated. We then present evidence for the importance of the domain: that it is widely mentioned in child achievement standards, that it is a focus of developmental theory and research, or that it relates to other outcomes important in the short or long term. We also consider evidence that the developmental domain is malleable, that is, amenable to change through interventions, since the capacity to change is another source of evidence for the importance of assessing it. We then describe some of the assess- ment approaches and tools that have been widely used to reflect status or progress in that domain. Appendix Tables 5-1 through 5-7 provide a summary listing of the major instruments discussed here, with a table for each domain. For each table, the first column indicates the subscale or specific domain assessed, and the second through fifth columns list the instruments that offer the relevant subscales, categorized by the measurement method(s) used by each: direct assessment, questionnaire, observation, or interview. Because many useful instruments do not quite fit into the domains we discuss, we have also included a table for general knowledge (sometimes categorized under cognitive skills), and have included science in the table with mathematics. For more detailed information on instruments, including evaluative reviews, specific age range, time to administer, admin- istrator qualifications required, as well as psychometric informa- tion, we have listed and described a variety of print and online instrument compendia and reviews in Appendix D. PHYSICAL WELL-BEING AND MOTOR DEVELOPMENT Defining the Domain This domain encompasses issues of health, intactness of sen- sory systems, growth, and fitness, as well as motor development. Motor development has long been a topic of interest in pediatric and developmental studies, and it also is one of the areas used in screening children for possible developmental problems. The com-

OCR for page 85
 EARLY CHILDHOOD ASSESSMENT ponent of this domain attracting particular policy interest recently is fitness, with evidence that increases in obesity and lack of exercise in childhood are coming to constitute public health challenges. Evidence of Consensus Healthy children are a goal of every society, and indicators of health are included in standards promulgated by states as well as in Head Start standards and other documents reflecting policy. Piotrkowski, Botsko, and Matthews (2000) found in a survey of kindergarten teachers that good health was one of the factors perceived to be essential to school readiness. Surprisingly, issues of physical fitness are rarely addressed in state standards items, despite their clear importance to long-term health outcomes. Half of the physical well-being and motor development items cata- loged by Scott-Little, Kagan, and Frelow (2005) addressed motor skills, but only 11.5 percent addressed fitness. Perhaps because physical fitness and health have traditionally been considered of medical rather than educational relevance, they are not richly represented in the measures typically used in developmental assessment. An interest in the general welfare of children, however, dictates more focus on them in ongoing assessment. In particular, levels of childhood obesity constitute a recognized crisis (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2005; Insti- tute of Medicine, 2005). Given the potential influences of early childhood care and education settings (which provide meals and organize physical activities that can influence obesity and fitness) and the evidence that preschool status on these dimensions pre- dicts later health indices (Quattrin et al., 2005; Weiss et al., 2004), more attention is warranted to these indicators as part of develop- mental assessment. Many general developmental measures (e.g., the Bayley Scales of Infant Development and the Denver II) have subscales reflecting motor development, but greater attention to easily obtained measures of fitness (height, weight, body-mass index) as part of early childhood assessment in care and education settings is clearly merited.

OCR for page 85
 ASSESSING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT Defining the Domain Research on young children’s social and emotional develop- ment has focused on three broad issues: (1) social competence, which reflects the degree of effectiveness the child has in social interactions with others (Fabes, Gaertner, and Popp, 2006); (2) self- regulation, which involves the modulating thought, affect, and behavior by means of deliberate as well as automated responses (Rothbart, Posner, and Kieras, 2006); and (3) maladjustment, con- sisting of clusters of symptoms that emerge over time, in more than one context, in more than one relationship, and that may impede the child’s ability to adapt and function in the family and the peer group (Campbell, 2006). Although there is general agreement on these three dimensions, different researchers parse the field somewhat differently, with the result that the various measures that have been developed reflect different emphases in defining the domain. Importance in Practice and Policy Although there is a lack of agreement as to how this domain should be subdivided, there is substantial agreement on the importance of the social and emotional development of young children to those working directly with them before and after the transition to formal schooling. In addition, a number of state consensus documents defining what young children should know and be able to do include a strong focus on their social and emotional skills, reflecting a recognition of the importance of this domain among policy makers as well. Many states have addressed social and emotional develop- ment in their early learning guidelines. In reviews of state early learning guidelines, Scott-Little and colleagues conclude that guidelines for preschool-age children focus more on language and cognition than on physical and social and emotional devel- opment, whereas guidelines for infants and toddlers are more balanced across domains, with the guidelines for infants focus- ing especially on social and emotional development (Scott-Little,

OCR for page 85
0 EARLY CHILDHOOD ASSESSMENT Kagan, and Frelow, 2006). California’s “Preschool Learning Foun- dations in Social and Emotional Development for Ages 3 and 4” (http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/pn/fd/documents/preschoollf.pdf) is an excellent example of the development of a consensus docu- ment regarding expectations for children’s social and emotional skills in the preschool years. Relying heavily on the research on young children’s social and emotional development, the docu- ment “describes benchmarks for the behavior of 3- and 4-year- olds in central domains of social and emotional development. . . . In focusing on social and emotional foundations of school readi- ness, a central assumption—well supported by developmental and educational research—is that school readiness consists of social-emotional competencies as well as other cognitive compe- tencies and approaches to learning required for school success” (p. 1). The standards for social and emotional development in California’s early learning standards identify the dimensions of self (self-awareness and self-regulation, social and emotional understanding, empathy and caring, and initiative in learning), social interaction (including interactions with familiar adults, interaction with peers, group participation, and cooperation and responsibility) and relationships (attachments to parents, close relationships with teachers and caregivers, and friendships). The perspective that social and emotional development and early learning are closely linked is reflected in the inclusion of “Initia- tive in Learning” as a component of social and emotional develop- ment, involving the child’s interest in activities in the classroom, enjoyment of learning and exploring, and confidence in his or her ability to make new discoveries. Importance for Later Development The social and emotional demands of formal schooling on young children differ from those of early childhood settings, and children’s skills in this area at school entry are predictors of how well they make the adjustment to the new setting and progress academically (see Bierman and Erath, 2006; Campbell, 2006; Ladd, Herald, and Kochel, 2006; Mashburn and Pianta, 2006; Raver, 2002; Thompson and Raikes, 2007; Vandell, Nenide, and Van Winkle, 2006). Early childhood care and educational

OCR for page 85
 ASSESSING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT settings usually involve a choice of activities for portions of the day, many activities involve small rather than large groups, and children tend to have access to adult caregivers and teachers not only for guidance on activities but also when they are upset or experiencing difficulty with peers. Studies of kindergarten class- rooms indicate a shift toward large group activities, which are structured, directed by teachers, and involve less choice. Lower adult-child ratios and more structured activities result in more limited access to adults. Not only do children need to learn to navigate interactions in larger groups and in tasks with more structure, but they also need to form new relationships with peers and teachers. The domains of socioemotional development and executive function—the cognitive processes used in response to novel stimuli—are of central importance in early childhood, although a final decision about exactly which subskills in this area are most important to measure and most predictive would be somewhat speculative at this point. Nonetheless, providing a full picture of a young child’s development or of the impact of a care and edu- cational setting requires attending at least to the measurement of social competence, attention regulation, and behavior problems. Studies in these areas illustrate evidence of linkages between early social and emotional development and behavioral adjustment to school as well as academic performance. Social competence: A series of studies by Ladd and colleagues provides evidence for how different facets of social engagement in the kindergarten classroom combine to predict participation in the classroom and achievement. In one, the researchers concluded that findings were consistent with the hypothesis that “children’s classroom participation, particularly the ability to behave in a cooperative/independent manner in the kindergarten milieu, is a powerful precursor of early achievement” (Ladd, Birch, and Buhs, 1999). The connection between a child’s socioemotional characteris- tics and teacher-child relationships is well established. Teachers report more conflicts with children who exhibit antisocial behav- iors, such as interpersonal aggression or tantrums (e.g., Birch and Ladd, 1998; Hamre and Pianta, 2001; Howes, Phillipsen, and Peisner-Feinberg, 2000; Ladd and Burgess, 2001; Ladd, Birch, and

OCR for page 85
 EARLY CHILDHOOD ASSESSMENT Buhs, 1999; Pianta and Steinberg, 1992; Silver et al., 2005). Close- ness, conflict, and dependence have been identified as three fea- tures of teacher-child relationships that are important to children’s development (Mashburn and Pianta, 2006). While relationships with teachers as well as peers during the transition to formal schooling appear to be central to posi- tive engagement in school and thereby achievement, positive teacher and peer relations in turn appear to rest at least in part on children’s knowledge of emotions and their ability to regulate the expression of their own emotions (Bierman et al., under review; Denham, 2006; Vandell, Nenide, and Van Winkle, 2006). Self-regulation: Recent research on self-regulation acknowl- edges that some aspects of it involve emotion (e.g., modulation in the expression of negative emotions) and behavior (e.g., inhibition of aggressive impulses), and other aspects focus more on atten- tional and cognitive skills (e.g., the ability to maintain a set of instructions actively in working memory over time and despite distractions, taking the perspective of another, switching attention as task demands change) (Diamond et al., 2007; McClelland et al., 2007; Raver, 2002, 2004). Socioemotional development is of importance during the early childhood period because it relates to children’s capacities to form relationships, both trusting relationships with adults and friendships with peers, and these relationships in turn seem to be related to the speed of learning in early care and educational set- tings. These markers of positive relations with peers and teachers have implications for children’s engagement and participation in the classroom. Children learn to regulate the expression of emo- tion in a variety of ways, including turning to others with whom they have secure relationships for comfort and support, using external cues, and, increasingly with age, managing their own states of arousal (Thompson and Lagattuta, 2006). Behaior problems: Serious behavior problems are apparent early in some children. Research summarized by Raver (2002) indicates that children with early and serious problems of aggres- sion who are rejected by peers are at elevated risk in terms of poor academic achievement, grade retention, dropping out of school, and eventually delinquency. Raver notes that children who are disruptive tend to get less instruction and positive feedback from

OCR for page 85
 ASSESSING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT teachers, to spend less time on task, to engage less with peers in learning tasks, and to show lower levels of school engagement overall, as reflected in part by lower attendance. With respect to evidence relating to early social and emotional competencies, two notes of caution are needed. First, social and emotional competencies are worthy developmental goals in their own right, independent of their relationship to academic out- comes. Second, research in this area is not all in accord with the perspective that early social and emotional development predicts more positive academic achievement. We note that, in a recent study, Duncan and colleagues (2007) carried out coordinated analyses of six major data sets looking at early predictors of later academic achievement. They found that early measures of achievement were strong predictors of later academic achievement, that measures of attention were moder- ately strong predictors of later achievement, but that measures of early social and emotional development, gleaned from parent and teacher reports, showed no or almost no predictive relationship to later achievement. The findings of this important study clearly differ from those of the reviews and findings summarized earlier. However, as the authors of this article themselves note, “our analysis is focused on behavior during the years just before and at the point of school entry. If some types of socioemotional skills are well established before the preschool years, and unchanging during these years, then we will not be able to detect their effects” (p. 1442). A further issue with this set of analyses is that the extensive set of control variables in the analyses includes many of the documented predictors of early social and emotional devel- opment, such as maternal education, family structure, family income, and, in some of the data sets, also parenting and home environment as well as participation in early care and education. This extensive set of controls may have diminished the capacity to detect relationships between early social and emotional develop- ment and later achievement. Finally, there was differential attri- tion in a number of the data sets included in the analyses, with greater attrition among families at greater risk. Selective attrition also works against detecting patterns of relationship between social and emotional development and academic achievement. In summary, a number of recent reviews summarize evidence

OCR for page 85
 EARLY CHILDHOOD ASSESSMENT confirming the relation of early social and emotional competen- cies, self-regulation, and absence of serious behavior problems to early participation in learning activities and to academic achieve- ment. While it is important to note that social and emotional development predicts later academic outcomes, at the same time we insist that children’s social and emotional well-being and competencies are worthy developmental goals in their own right, independent of their relationship to academic outcomes. Evidence of Malleability According to a review by Raver (2002), there is substantial evidence from experimental evaluations that it is possible to improve young children’s social and emotional development at the point of school entry or earlier, helping them to develop and stay on a positive course in their relationships with teachers and peers and to engage positively in learning activities. While the evidence summarized points to program effects across all the levels of intensity and the setting of the interventions considered (in the classroom, with parents, or both), findings are stronger when interventions engage parents as well as teachers and are more intensive. More recent reviews contribute to understanding the complexity of this domain (Bierman and Erath, 2006; Fabes, Gaertner, and Popp, 2006). Several recent developments in intervention research on young children’s social and emotional development are note- worthy. First, very recent work has focused explicitly on interven- tions targeting children’s self-regulation skills. In recent work by Diamond and colleagues (Diamond et al., 2007), the Tools of the Mind curriculum, which embeds direct instruction in strengthen- ing executive function in play activities and social interactions, was experimentally evaluated in prekindergarten programs in low-income neighborhoods. This intervention takes a Vygotskian approach—that is, it encourages extended dramatic play, teaches children to use self-regulatory private speech, and provides external stimuli to support inhibition. Results showed signifi- cant improvements in direct assessments of children’s executive function. By the end of the school year, children in classrooms

OCR for page 85
 ASSESSING LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT implementing Tools of the Mind did not need help staying on task or redirecting inappropriate behavior. This study provides impor- tant evidence that aspects of self-regulation are malleable. Measurement Issues An ongoing challenge in the research on social and emotional development of young children is to forge agreement about spe- cific constructs, measures, and the mapping of constructs to mea- sures (Fabes, Gaertner, and Popp, 2006; Raver, 2002). The internal complexity of the domain is reflected in the fact that different measures parse it differently. The lack of agreement impedes the capacity to look across studies at accumulating patterns of find- ings (Zaslow et al., 2006). Another challenge is that some see measures of social and emotional development as reflecting in part the early child - hood environment and the teacher-child relationship, rather than as pure measures of the child. For example, a teacher who requires 3-year-olds in an early childhood classroom to sit still for long periods to do seat work is likely to assess many children as inattentive or disruptive (Thompson and Raikes, 2007). Her rating of a child as having behavior problems may actually be a reflection of her inappropriate expectations, rather than a child’s enduring behavior problem. Another measurement challenge is the heavy reliance in this domain on teacher and parent reports. In development are direct assessments of children’s behavioral self-regulation (Emotion Matters II Direct assessments developed by Raver and modeled after work by Kochanska and colleagues); of the executive func- tion aspects of self-regulation (the Head to Toe Task described by McClelland and colleagues, 2007); and of the Dots Task from the Directional Stroop Battery and the Flanker Task described by Diamond and colleagues (2007). Further work with these measures may generate important evidence about their reli- ability and validity, as well as their sensitivity to intervention approaches and their relation to teacher and parent reports and direct observations.

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-5 Continued  Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview Sizes Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Comparisons Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Shapes Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Direction/position Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Self-/social Bracken Basic Concept awareness Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Texture/material Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Quantity Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Time/sequencing Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Abstract/visual Stanford-Binet Intelligence reasoning Scale, Fourth ed. (SB-IV)

OCR for page 85
Academic Expressive One-Word progress Picture Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT) Creative arts The Galileo System for the The Galileo System for the Electronic Management of Electronic Management of Learning (Galileo) Learning (Galileo) Creative High/Scope Child High/Scope Child representation Observation Record (COR) Observation Record (COR) Social studies The Work Sampling System The Work Sampling System (WSS) (WSS) The arts The Work Sampling System The Work Sampling System (WSS) (WSS) 

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-6 Math and Science Instruments  Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview Mathematics Woodcock-Johnson III Work Sampling Plans, (WJ-III), Peabody Individual Portfolio, Summative Achievement Test (PIAT), Instructional Tools Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised (PIAT-R), Test of Early Mathematics Ability (TEMA) Science Woodcock-Johnson III Work Sampling Plans, (WJ-III), Peabody Individual Portfolio, Summative Achievement Test (PIAT) Instructional Tools Quantitative Stanford-Binet Intelligence reasoning Scale, Fourth ed. (SB-IV) Number/ Bracken Basic Concept counting Scale-Revised (BBCS-R)/SRC Sizes Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R)/SRC Shapes Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R)/SRC

OCR for page 85
Quantity Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Achievement Kaufman Assessment scale–arithmetic Battery for Children subtest (K-ABC) Formal Test of Early Mathematics mathematics Ability, Second ed. (TEMA-2) Informal Test of Early Mathematics mathematics Ability, Second ed. (TEMA-2) Achievement– Woodcock-Johnson III broad (WJ-III) mathematics Achievement- Woodcock-Johnson III mathematical (WJ-III) calculation skills Achievement– Woodcock-Johnson III mathematical (WJ-III) reasoning Early The Galileo System for the The Galileo System for the mathematics Electronic Management of Electronic Management of Learning (Galileo) Learning (Galileo)  continued

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-6 Continued  Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview Nature and The Galileo System for the The Galileo System for the science Electronic Management of Electronic Management of Learning (Galileo) Learning (Galileo) Logic and High/Scope Child High/Scope Child mathematics Observation Record (COR) Observation Record (COR) Mathematical The Work Sampling System The Work Sampling System thinking (WSS) (WSS) Scientific thinking The Work Sampling System The Work Sampling System (WSS) (WSS)

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-7 Language and Literacy Instruments Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview The Galileo System for the The Galileo System for the Electronic Management of Electronic Management of Learning (Galileo) Learning (Galileo) High/Scope Child High/Scope Child Observation Record (COR) Observation Record (COR) The Work Sampling System The Work Sampling System (WSS) (WSS) General language Clinical Evaluation of Creative Curriculum Creative Curriculum Language Fundamentals Development Continuum Development Continuum (CELF), for Ages 3-5 for Ages 3-5 MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventories (CDI), Test of Language Dominance (TOLD), Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III), NEPSY Vocabulary Peabody Picture Vocabulary MacArthur-Bates Test (PPVT), Expressive Communicative One-Word Picture Development Inventories Vocabulary Test (EOWPVT) (CDI)  continued

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-7 Continued 0 Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview Phonological Comprehensive Test of awareness Phonological Processing (CTOPP), Woodcock- Johnson III (WJ-III) Grammar Diagnostic Evaluation of Language Variation (DELV) Literacy Test of Early Reading Ability Work Sampling Plans, (TERA), Woodcock-Johnson III Portfolio, Summative (WJ-III), Peabody Individual Instructional Tools Achievement Test (PIAT) Concepts About Print (Clay) Sulzby Classification Schemes: Emergent Storybook Reading (1985) Reading Peabody Individual recognition Achievement Test-Revised (PIAT-R) Reading Peabody Individual comprehension Achievement Test-Revised (PIAT-R) Spelling Peabody Individual Achievement Test-Revised (PIAT-R)

OCR for page 85
Verbal reasoning Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale, Fourth ed. (SB-IV) Verbal Primary Test of Cognitive Skills (PTCS) Letters Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) Verbal IQ Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, Third ed. (WPPSI-III) Receptive Clinical Evaluation of Sequenced Inventory Sequenced Inventory language Language Fundamentals- of Communication of Communication Preschool (CELF-Preschool) Development-Revised Development-Revised Test of Early Language (SICD-R) (SICD-R) Development, Third ed. (TELD-3) Expressive Clinical Evaluation of Sequenced Inventory Sequenced Inventory language Language Fundamentals- of Communication of Communication Preschool (CELF-Preschool) Development-Revised Development-Revised Reynell Developmental (SICD-R), Reynell (SICD-R) Language Scales: U.S. Developmental Language Edition (RDLS) Scales, U.S. ed. (RDLS) Test of Early Language Development, Third ed. (TELD-3)  continued

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-7 Continued  Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview Total language Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- Preschool (CELF-Preschool) Quick-test Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- Preschool (CELF-Preschool) Recall ability Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC), Expressive Vocabulary Subtest Verbal Kaufman Assessment expression Battery for Children (K-ABC), Expressive Vocabulary Subtest Words and MacArthur-Bates gestures Communicative Development Inventories (CDI) Words and MacArthur-Bates sentences Communicative Development Inventories (CDI)

OCR for page 85
Expressive Preschool Language Scale, communication Fourth ed. (PLS-4) Auditory Preschool Language Scale, comprehension Fourth ed. (PLS-4) Verbal Reynell Developmental comprehension Language Scales, U.S. ed. (RDLS) Spoken language Test of Early Language quotient Development, Third ed. (TELD-3) Initial sound Dynamic Indicators of Basic fluency Early Literacy Skills, Sixth ed. (DIBELS) Letter naming Dynamic Indicators of Basic fluency Early Literacy Skills, Sixth ed. (DIBELS) Word use fluency Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, Sixth ed. (DIBELS) Phoneme Dynamic Indicators of Basic segmentation Early Literacy Skills, Sixth fluency ed. (DIBELS)  continued

OCR for page 85
APPENDIx TABLE 5-7 Continued  Data-Gathering Method Assessment Subscales Direct Assessment Questionnaire Observation Interview Nonsense word Dynamic Indicators of Basic fluency Early Literacy Skills, Sixth ed. (DIBELS) Oral reading Dynamic Indicators of Basic fluency and retell Early Literacy Skills, Sixth fluency ed. (DIBELS) Alphabet Test of Early Reading Ability-3 (TERA-3) Conventions Test of Early Reading Ability-3 (TERA-3) Meaning Test of Early Reading Ability-3 (TERA-3) Letter-word Woodcock-Johnson III identification (WJ-III) Writing samples Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III) Word attack Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III) Language skills Denver II Denver II