Issues in Selecting Assessments for Measuring Outcomes for Young Children Issues in Selecting Assessments for Measuring Outcomes for Young Children Dale Walker & Kristie Pretti-Frontczak ECO Center and Kent State University Presentation at OSEP Early Childhood Conference Washington, DC, December 2005

2 Why Assessment? Gather information about skills and capabilities to make decisions about practice To determine eligibility for services To determine if a child is benefiting from services or if changes need to be made To measure development over time To document outcomes

3 Purpose of Assessments – It’s all about the question(s) you want to answer Screening – Is there a suspected delay? Does the child need further assessment? Eligibility determination – Is the child eligible for specialized services? Program planning – What content should be taught? How should content be taught? Progress monitoring – Are children making desired progress? Program evaluation/Accountability – Is the program achieving it intended outcomes and/or meeting required outcomes?

4 Assessment Options Norm-Referenced Criterion-Referenced Curriculum-Based Direct Observation Progress Monitoring Parent or Professional Report Any combination of assessments…

5 Norm-Referenced Pros/Cons Provides information on development in relation to others Already used for eligibility in many states Diagnosis of developmental delay Standardized procedures Do not inform intervention Information removed from context of child’s routines Usually not developed or validated with children with disabilities Do not meet many recommended practice standards May be difficult to administer or require specialized training

6 Norm-Referenced Assessment Table Table consists of a review of 18 norm- referenced assessments Information regarding each assessment is provided including: Publisher information Areas of development assessed Test norms provided Scores produced Age range covered

7 Criterion-Referenced Pros/Cons Measure child’s performance of specific objectives Direct link between assessment and intervention Provides information on children’s strengths and emerging skills Helps teams plan and meet individual children’s needs Meets recommended assessment practice standards Measures intra-child progress May be used to measure program effectiveness Requires agreement on criteria and standards Criteria must be clear and appropriate Usually does not show performance compared to other children Do not have standard administration procedures May not move child toward important goals Scores may not reflect increasing proficiency toward outcomes

8 Curriculum-Based Pros/Cons Provides link between assessment and curriculum Expectations based upon the curriculum and instruction Can be used to plan intervention Measure child’s current status on curriculum Evaluate program effects Often team based Meets DEC and NAEYC recommended standards Represents picture of the child’s performance May not have established reliability and validity May not have procedures for comparing child to a normal distribution Generally linked to a specific curriculum Often composed of milestones that may not be in order of importance

9 Curriculum-Based Assessment Rating Rubric Evaluates the quality of CBAs for use with young children Composed of 17 quality elements Used to guide teams in selecting appropriate CBAs

10 Sample of CBA Rubric ElementUnsatisfactory (0)Basic (1)Satisfactory (2)Excellent (3) Adaptable for Special Needs No consideration of special needs Limited consideration of special needs through the assessment process and instrument does not allow for additional accommodations or modifications for special needs Upfront considerations for special needs are not comprehensive, but assessment allows for some accommodations and/or modifications for special needs Considers and provides specific strategies and procedures for accommodating and/or modifying the assessment for special needs Aligns with Federal/State/Agency Standards and/or Outcomes Does not align with Federal/State/Agency Standards and/or Outcomes Aligns with less than half of the big ideas or concepts from Federal/State/Agency Standards and/or Outcomes Aligns with more than half of the big ideas or concepts from Federal/State/Agency Standards and/or Outcomes Aligns with a clear majority or all of the big ideas or concepts from Federal/State/Agency Standards and/or Outcomes

11 Progress Monitoring Pros/Cons Used to monitor ongoing progress toward important outcomes over time Compare to children of similar ages over time Repeatable measures for monitoring progress Standardized administration Standards for technical adequacy Efficient to administer May also be used as a screening tool Indicators of progress may be viewed as not being comprehensive Not used for eligibility determination May not provide specific skills to teach but indicators of important skills

12 Parent & Professional Report Pros/Cons High social validity Provides diverse perspective Important for informing intervention, program, IFSP/IEP Parents and professionals know the child, the environments in which they interact Collaboration requires time and effort to establish May not be reliable across time Does not permit comparison across children May include personal bias

13 Using Multiple Sources of Data or Single Source to Measure Outcomes? Pros and Cons Recommended practices Need to summarize information generated Ways data can be used beyond reporting OSEP outcomes

14 Using Data Beyond OSEP Reporting Good assessment data can be used to…. Reveal patterns regarding children’s strengths and emerging skills Develop functional and meaningful IFSPs/IEPs Inform program staff and families about strengths and weaknesses Guide the development of intervention Monitor children’s progress to inform intervention efforts Enhance collaboration Inform providers, programs, districts/parishes, regions, and states regarding important trends

15 Ongoing work and challenges… Existing assessment tools were not developed to measure the three outcomes ECO’s response: “Cross-walking” or mapping frequently used assessments to the outcomes Work with publishers and state staff to develop guidance for how to use assessment results to generate OSEP- requested data

16 Work with Publishers and Developers Finalizing crosswalks Alignment with OSEP outcomes How to determine what is “typical” performance Age-anchored benchmarks to measures How scores can be summarized using the ECO Summary Form Possible recalibration of scores in a way that maintains the integrity of different assessments Pilot studies with GSEG and interested states Data summary report forms that assist users with alignment of information from assessment to OSEP outcomes

17 Example of Developing a Validated Crosswalk First align On the face of it – which items appear to align/match which outcomes? Second validate Do experts agree? Check for internal consistency Third examine the sensitivity of the assessment in measuring child change

18 Example of Interpreting the evidence Standard scores Residual Change Scores Goal Attainment Scaling Number of objectives achieved/Percent objectives achieved Rate of Growth Item Response Theory Proportional Change Index Stoplight model

19 Interpreting the AEPS for Accountability First administration (near entry) Is the child above or below a cut off score? If above – considered to be developing typically If below – development is suspect Which level of the AEPS was administered? Child is less than three and Level I is used Child is less then three and Level II is used Child is older than three and Level I is used Child is older than three and Level II is used

20 Interpreting the AEPS for Accountability Second administration (near exit) Use cut off scores again Examine which level was used Look for changes in area percent scores changes in scoring notes changes in which level was administered

21 Sample Cutoff Scores LevelAge Intervals (months)Cutoff Score Birth to three Three to six

22 Questions?

For More Information see: For More Information see: For More Information see: For More Information see: