COURSE SYLLABUS ECED 3162
DIAGNOSIS AND ASSESSMENT OF YOUNG CHILDREN I (3-5 YEARS)
NAEYC Standard 3
Catalog Description: Prerequisite: ECED 3043 and ECED 3053; concurrent enrollment in ECED 3172, ECED 3183, ECED 3192, ECED 3113, and ECED 3122. This is a study of observational and developmentally appropriate tools and methods of collecting data for decision-making. Emphasis is on qualitative assessment techniques that are specific to 3-5 year old children. This course is connected to the ECED 3122 field experience.
Text Required for Course:
McAfee, O. & Leong, D.J. (2002). Assessing and Guiding Young Children’s
Development and Learning. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Gober, S.Y. (2002). Six simple ways to Assess Young Children. Albany, NY: Delmar
Thomson Learning.
Required: Subscription to TaskStream, http://www.taskstream.com. You will self-enroll in Taskstream. Your enrollment code is: fall2011
Bibliography:
Benner, S.M. (2003). Assessment of young children with special needs: A context-based
approach. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar Learning.
Bowman, B., Donovan, M.S. and Burns, M.E. (eds.). (2000). Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press/National Research Council.
Bracken, B. (eds.). (2000).The psychoeducational assessment of preschool children (3rd
ed.) . Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bredekamp, S. and Rosegrant, T. (eds.) (1992). Reaching potentials: Appropriate
Practice in early childhood programs. Washington, D.C.: National Association
for the Education of Young Children.
Freeman, N. (2003). Ethics and the early childhood educator: Using the NAEYC code.
Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Meisels, S.J., Harrington, H.L., McMahon, P., Dichtelmiller, M.L. & Jablon, J.R.
(2002). Thinking like a teacher: Using observational assessment to improve
teaching and learning. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Shorall, E. P. (2004). Pass the Praxis: The principles of learning and teaching. Upper
Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Reed, A.J. and Bergemann, V.E. (2001). A guide to observation, participation, and reflection in the classroom (4th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.
Justification/Rationale: Emphasis in this course is on assessment tools and methodologies specific to use with 3-5 year old children. Observational and developmentally appropriate methods of collecting data for decision-making will be stressed to ensure competence of candidates in meeting state licensure standards and NAEYC guidelines for appropriate practices.
ECED Conceptual Framework Focus:
Course Objectives:
SS - Arkansas Teacher Licensure Standards
NAEYC - National Association for the Education of Young Children
It is anticipated that upon completing of this course candidates will:
1. The candidates will be able to explain the purposes of assessment for young children. Also, the candidate will be able to choose the appropriate assessment instrument for measuring and documenting the impact of learning that will guide the teacher in preparing lesson plans. (SS: 2.3.10, 5.3.1) (NAEYC: 3a,3b,3c,3d, 4b,4c) (ECED Core Values 3,4)
2. Develop a file of assessment resources and instruments. Explore the relative advantages, disadvantages, and uses of each. (SS: 2.3.3, 3.1.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.7) (NAEYC: 3a,3b,3c,4b,4c, 5c) (ECED Core Values: 3,4)
3. Identify guidelines for developmentally appropriate assessment for young
children, ages 3-5 years old. (SS: 3.1.1, 3.1.6, 3.1.7) (NAEYC:1a,1b,2a,2b,3a,3b, 3c,3d,4b,4c,5a) (ECED Core Values: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
4. Explain the functions of assessment and the links between assessment, evaluation,
instruction, reflection, and learning. (SS: 1.1.3, 2.3.10, 5.2.1) (NAEYC: 3a,3b,3c, 4b) (ECED Core Values: 3, 4)
5. Demonstrate the ability to design and implement performance assessment tasks
connected to objectives as they appear in on-line lesson plans. (SS: 2.1.7, 2.3.7, 2.3.9) (NAEYC: 3a,3b,4d) (ECED Core Values: 3,4)
6. Demonstrate knowledge of a variety of observational and authentic assessment
options and their appropriate use with young children including anecdotal records,
checklists, inventories, event and time sampling records, case studies, rating scales, criterion-referenced tests, teacher-designed test, and pre-screening tests.
(SS: 1.3.1, 2.1.7, 2.3.9) (NAEYC:1c,2c,3a,3b,3c,4d,5b) (ECED Core Values: 1,2, 3,4,5,)
7. Describe ethical and legal consideration involved in the assessment of very young
children, and in the reporting of those results to parents, agencies, and other
professionals. (SS: 1.3.9, 4.1.3, 4.1.4, 4.2.2, 4.3.4, 5.1.3) (NAEYC: 3a,3b,3c, 3d,5c) (ECED Core Values: 3,5)
8. Demonstrate knowledge of various techniques used to disseminate assessment
information to parents and other educators. (SS: 4.1.4, 4.2.2, 4.3.4) (NAEYC:3a,3b,3c,3d,5b) (ECED Core Values: 3, 5)
Organizing Theme: The Early Childhood Educator is a life long learner who uses reflective decision making to implement developmentally appropriate practice.
Methods of Instruction: A variety of instructional strategies such as direct instruction, guided discussion, field observation, interpreting student data, modeling, demonstrations, application exercises, and cooperative learning will be utilized in teaching this course. Coursework will consist of text readings, homework assignments, class exercises, class discussions, and field experience field observations (this must be in a different school from the one your have already had a practicum and a school other than the one you plan to use for student teaching. Homework assignments may include writing objectives, designing an observational checklist for a particular set of objectives as well as collecting information about a particular child’s needs.
Assessment Methods: Tests, final exam, case study, participation in Blackboard and/or with the class, case study, engagement with children during the practicum experience, the impact on student learning, and dispositions.
Assignments:
1. Administer the DAYC (Developmental Assessment of Young Children) –You will administer a sub-test of the DAYC to a child you are working with in your Practicum. You will write a brief summary of the testing experience and turn in the test form. Due October3
2. Case Study: This must be completed over at least a minimum of 5 weeks. A written narrative of the findings from the case study. Identify a child who is having difficulty in learning developmentally appropriate curriculum. DO not use the child’s name, explain that the child will have an alias, discover the background of the child: family, race, culture, socioeconomic status, strengths, weaknesses, and interests. Write a behavioral objective and intervention aligned with state and NAEYC standards (when possible, partner with parents in designing how to best meet the needs of the child), procedures for the intervention, an assessment to show where the child was in the beginning, middle, and end of the study, three copies of the child’s scanned in work with written feedback (if applicable—delete the child’s name from the papers), an explanation of the impact the intervention has had on the child (can be learned from the assessment results, the child, the parents, and/or the teacher), create a bar graph to show progress (label and explain what the bar graph is showing), provide a recommendation for future interventions for the child, an in-depth reflection on what you learned that will help you in the future, and assistive technology (where applicable) with five Internet references that provided insight into how to work with the child in this study. Include an anecdotal record and a checklist as part of the assessment used.
Based on the information you discovered in this case study, write a short letter or report to a parents to effectively disseminated assessment information (you do not have to send the letter but it needs to be included in the back of your case study. To send a letter to a child’s home, you would need to have permission from your teacher. (Assessment: A rubric will be used to grade the case study.) (Assessment: Rubric) These should be submitted on Taskstream. Nov. 30
3. Exams 3 @ 100 pts each
4. Develop a lesson plan with appropriate assessment. Nov. 2
5. Group Tests/projects as assigned- In class.
6. Develop an in-depth assessment for a Kindergarten student. This should cover the Cognitive, Psychomotor and Social/Emotional areas. Sept. 21
Artifact: Academic Case Study (NAEYC: 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5) saved in TASKSTREAM. (Assessment: Rubric)
Grading: Course grades will be based on the professional accuracy and quality of the candidate’s work, disposition, knowledge, skills, and ability to apply what has been studied, and along with the discussions, tests, and the final exam.
Points:
1. Case Study 75 points
2. Tests 300 points
3. lesson plan 10 points
4. DAYC 10 points
5. Kindergarten Assessment 10 points
6. Group Projects 20 points
Total Points 425 points
Scale:
A= 90-100%
B= 80-89%
C= 70-79%
D= 60-69%
F= below 59%
Policy on Absences, Cheating, Plagiarism, etc.: Frequent ( 6 or more) unexcused absences from class will result in the lowering of the students’ final grade. Your active participation in class exercises and discussion is vital to your growth and development as a reflective practitioner and decision-maker. Please refer to your Student Handbook for the university policy concerning cheating, plagiarism, and misconduct in class.
Course Content:
I. Assessment, Teaching, and Learning Intertwined
A. Purpose and Tools of Assessment
B. Overview of Measurement in Early Childhood
1. Historical and Current Trends and Issues
C. The Language of Assessment
D. Laws concerning Assessment
E. Types of Assessments
II. Measurement Strategies at Various Developmental Levels
A. Developmental Profiles
B. Screening and Diagnostic Tools for Decision-Making
C. Guidelines for Appropriate Assessment Practices
D. Writing Measurable Instructional Objectives
1. Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Cognitive
Domain
2. Krathwohl’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:
Affective Domain
III. Informal Measures
A. Through Observation
1. Checklists
2. Rating Scales
3. Anecdotal Records
4. Event and Time Sampling Methods
5. Case Studies
a. Advantages, Disadvantages, and Uses
B. Teacher-Designed Tests and Assessments
1. Performance Tasks
2. Criterion-referenced Tests
3. Steps in Test Design
a. Advantages, Disadvantages, and Uses
C. Performance-Based Evaluations
1. Inventories
2. Child Interviews
3. Portfolios
4. Work Samples
5. Scoring Performances
a. Advantages, Disadvantages, and Uses
IV. Formal Measures
A. Standardized Tests
1. Norm-referenced vs. Criterion-referenced
2. Reliable, Valid Assessments for Young Children
3. Typical Assessment Tools
4. Interpretation of Standard Scores
5. Issues in Use of Results with Young Children
V. Reporting Student Progress
A. Narrative Reports
B. Developmental Profiles
C. Ethical and Legal Considerations
VI. Special Issues
A. Assessing the Early Childhood Learning Environment
B. Individual Family Service Plans
Resources:
Abrams, F., Ferguson, J. & Laud, L. (2001). Assessing ESOL students. Educational
Leadership, 58(3), 62-65.
Arkansas Early Childhood Education Framework. (2002). Little Rock, AR: Division of
Child Care and Early Education.
Bishop, A., Yopp, R. H., & Yopp, H. K. (2000). Ready for reading: A handbook for
parents of preschoolers.
Bredekamp, S. & Rosegrant, T. (eds.) (1992). Reaching potentials: Appropriate practice
in early childhood programs. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Bryant, D., Maxwell, K., Taylor, K., Poe, M., Peisner-Feinberg, E., & Bernier, K. (2003).
Smart Start and preschool child care quality in North Carolina: Change over time
and relation to children’s readiness. Chapel Hill, NC: Frank Porter Graham Child
Development Institute.
Crosser, S, (2005). What do we know about early childhood education?. Clinton Park,
NY: Thomson Corporation.
Division of Child Care and Early Education. (2003). Arkansas better chance program
regulations. Little Rock, AR: Author.
Freeman, N. (2003). Ethics and the early childhood educator: Using the NAEYC Code.
Washington, DC: NAEYC.
Friedman, S.J. (2002). Andy’s right to privacy in grading and the Falvo versus Owasso
public schools case. Washington, DC: Heldref Publications.
Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of teacher
Education, 53(7), 106-116.
Glenn, H.S. and Nelsen, J. (2001). Raising self-reliant children in a self-indulgent world.
New York, NY: Capabilities, Inc.
Johnston, P.H., & Rogers, R. (2001). Assessment of literacy development in early
childhood. In S. Neuman, & D. Dickinson, D. (Eds.). Handbook of early literacy
research, New York: Guilford.
Kendall, J.S. (2003). Setting standards in early childhood education. Educational
Leadership, 60(7), p. 64-68.
Lyon, G.R. (2001). Measuring success: Using assessments and accountability to raise
student achievement. Statement before the Subcommittee on Education Reform
of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of
Representatives, 8 March 2001.
Montgomery, W. (2001). Creating culturally responsive, inclusive classrooms.
TEACHING Exceptional Children, 33(4), 4-9.
Nelsen, J., Lott, L. and Glenn, H.S. (2000). Positive Discipline in the classroom (3rd ed.).
Perlman, M. & Zellman, G.L. & Le, V.N. (2004). Examining the psychometric properties
of the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ECERS-R). Early
Childhood Research Quarterly 1(3), 398-41.
Popham, W.J. (2002). Classroom Assessment: What teachers need to know (4th ed.)
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Reynolds, A.J., Temple, J.A., Robertson, D.L., & Mann, E.A. (2001). Long-term effects
of an early childhood intervention on educational achievement and juvenile arrest-
a 15-year follow-up of low-income children in public schools. Journal of
American Medical Association, 285(18): 2339-2346.
Reed, A.J.S. & Bergemann, V.E. (2001). A guide to observation, participation, and
reflection in the classroom. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Thomas, M.D., and Bainbridge, W.L. (2001). All children can learn: Facts and fallacies. Phi Delta Kappan, 660-662.
Thurlow, M.L., House, A.L., Scott, D.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E. (2000). Students with
disabilities in large-scale assessments: State participation and accommodation policies. Journal of Special Education, 34 (3), 154-163.
Voke, H. (2002). What do we know abut sanctions and rewards?. ASCD Info Brief, 31
October, 2002.
Wiest, L.R. (2003). Twelve ways to have student analyze culture. Washington, DC: Heldref Publications,136-138.
Wortham, S.C. (2001). Assessment in early childhood education (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Yaden, Jr., D. B., Tam, A., Madrigal, P., Brassell, D., & Massa, J. (2000). Early literacy
for inner-city children: The effects of reading and writing interventions in English
and Spanish during the preschool years. Reading Teacher, 54, 186-189.
PROGRAM OUTCOMES— Pre-candidates and candidates demonstrate what they know and are able to do through the following ECED five Core Values aligned to NAEYC Standards:
1. Demonstrate that all human beings are able to grow, develop, and learn according to their characteristics, needs, and backgrounds by creating learning environments that are developmentally healthy, respectful, supportive, and challenging. (NAEYC 1, INTASC 2, 3, 5, & 7, ARKANSAS 1, 2, 3, & 4 Standards and Principles)
2. Provide learning opportunities for all children and their families, including inclusion settings, which maximize growth, development and connect parents to community resources. (NAEYC Standard 2, INTASC 3, 7, 10, ARKANSAS 3, 4, & 5 Standards and Principles)
3. Provide systemic and coherent assessments that are appropriate for all children, including children who have disabilities and/or cultural and linguistic diversities. (NAEYC Standard 3, INTASC 5, 7, 8, ARKANSAS 2, 3, & 4 Standards and Principles)