Public expectations of accountability in our education system have increasingly focused on young children's development, in part because of Goal 1 of the National Education Goals (By the year 2000, all children in America will start school ready to learn). Few sensitive measurement systems have been developed, however, to monitor young children's growth over time. Building such a system requires a parsimonious but comprehensive set of developmental outcomes expected of children between birth and age 8. In the two studies presented here, investigators formulated a set of 15 general growth outcomes for young children, and conducted a survey of parents of children with and without disabilities and professionals in early childhood and early elementary education to validate the outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
2.
Allen, J. (1999, August 24). Accountability is key to reform. USA Today, pp. 13A.
3.
Bandler, J. (1999, August 10). Workshop prepares principals for a new era: Harvard center teaches accountability. The Boston Globe, pp. B1.
4.
Barnett, D.W., Pepiton, A.E., Bell, S.H., Gilkey, C.M., Smith, J.J., Stone, C.M., Nelson, K.I., Maples, K.A., Helenbrook, K., & Vogel, L.H. (1997). Evaluating early intervention: Accountability methods for service delivery innovations. The Journal of Special Education, 33, 177-188.
5.
Bennett, W.J. (1999, June 28). High grades for federal education reform . The Seattle Times, pp. B5.
6.
Benning, V. (1999, August 14). State tests fail 93% of schools in Virginia: Educators renew push for changes. The Washington Post, pp. A01.
7.
Billings, J.A. (1996). A chief state school officer's view of what's needed for comprehensive education reform. School Psychology Review, 25, 485-488.
8.
Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
9.
Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, D.C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
10.
Bricker, D. (1996). The goal: Prediction or prevention ? Journal of Early Intervention, 20, 294-296.
11.
Bricker, D., & Pretti-Frontczak, K. (Eds.). (1996). AEPS measurement for three to six years (Vol. 3). Baltimore : Paul H. Brookes.
12.
Brigance, A.H. (1991). Brigance Diagnostic Inventory of Early DevelopmentāRevised . North Billerica, MA: Curriculum Associates.
13.
Bruininks, R., Bielinski, J., Danielson, H., Davison, M., Erickson, R., Lock, M., Lydell, L., Norlin-Weaver, J., Seppanen, P., Thurlow, M., & Ysseldyke, J. (1996). Minnesota educational accountability reporting system: Feasibility and design study (Vol. 1). Minneapolis, MN: College of Education and Human Development, University of Minnesota.
14.
Carta, J.J., & Greenwood, C.R. (1997). Barriers to the implementation of effective educational practices for young children with disabilities. In J. W. Lloyd, E. J. Kameenui, & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities (pp. 261-274). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
Carta, J.J., Schwartz, I.S., Atwater, J.B., & McConnell, S.R. (1991). Developmentally appropriate practice: Appraising its usefulness for young children with disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 11, 1-20.
16.
Coles, G. (1998). Reading lessons: The debate over literacy. New York: Hill & Wang.
17.
Deno, S.L. (1985). Curriculum-based measurement: The emerging alternative . Exceptional Children, 52, 219-232.
18.
Deno, S.L. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement and special education services: A fundamental and direct relationship. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children (pp. 1-17). New York: The Guilford Press.
19.
Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development. (1998). Theoretical foundations of the Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development: An early childhood problem-solving model (Tech. Rep. No. 6). Minneapolis, MN: Center for Early Education and Development.
20.
Federal Interagency Forum on Child and Family Statistics. (1999). America's children: Key national indicators of well-being, 1999. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
21.
Fenson, L., Dale, P.S., Reznick, J.S., Thai, D., Bates, E., Hartung, J.P., Pethick, S., & Reilly, J.S. (1993). The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: User's guide and technical manual. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.
22.
Forgione, P.D. (1998). Early childhood education: Critical data needs for a critical period of child development. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics.
Furuno, S., O'Reilly, K., Inatsuka, T., Hosaka, C., & Falbey, B. (1993). The Hawaii Developmental Charts. Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
25.
Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
26.
Greenwood, C.R., Luze, G.J., & Carta, J.J. (2002). Best practices in assessment of intervention results with infants and toddlers. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (4th ed., pp. 1219-1230). Washington, D.C.: National Association of School Psychologists .
27.
Hart, B., & Risley, T.R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
28.
Hempenstall, K. (1997). The whole language-phonics controversy: An historical perspective. Educational Psychology, 17, 399-418.
29.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. Ā§ 1400 et seq. (1997).
30.
Johnson, J., & Aulicino, C. (1998). Summing it up: A review of survey data on education and the National Education Goals. New York: Public Agenda.
31.
Kagan, S. L., Moore, E., & Bredekamp, S. (Eds.). (1995). Reconsidering children's early development and learning: Toward common views and vocabulary. Washington, D.C.: National Education Goals Panel.
32.
Kagan, S. L., Rosenkoetter, S., & Cohen, N. (Eds.). (1997). Considering child-based results for young children: Definitions, desirability, feasibility, and next steps. New Haven, CT: Yale Bush Center in Child Development and Social Policy.
33.
Kaminski, R.A., & Good, R.H., III. (1998). Assessing early literacy skills in a problem-solving model: Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. In M. R. Shinn (Ed.), Advanced applications of curriculum-based measurement (pp. 113-142). New York: The Guilford Press.
34.
Kentucky State Department of Education. (1991 ). Overview of child development (Tech. Assistance Paper 1) . Frankfort, KY: Author.
35.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
36.
Luze, G.J., Linebarger, D.L., Greenwood, C.R., Carta, J.J., Walker, D., Leitschuh, C., & Atwater, J.B. (2001). Developing a general outcome measure of growth in expressive communication of infants and toddlers. School Psychology Review, 30, 383-406.
37.
Maryland Commission on the Early Learning Years. (1992). Laying the foundation for school success: Recommendations for improving early learning programs in Maryland. Baltimore : Maryland State Department of Education.
38.
May, M. (1999, August 18). State to reward, punish low-achieving schools. The San Francisco Chronicle, pp. A16.
39.
McConnell, S.R. (2000). Assessment in early intervention and early childhood special education: Building on the past to project into our future. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20, 43-48.
40.
McConnell, S.R., Priest, J.S., Davis, S.D., & McEvoy, M.A. (2002). Best practices in measuring growth and development for preschool children. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (4th ed., pp. 1231-1246). Washington, D.C: National Association of School Psychologists .
41.
National Commission on Excellence in Education. ( 1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
42.
National Education Goals Panel. (1991). Potential strategies for long-term indicator development: Reports of the technical planning subgroups (Report No. NEGP-91-08). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
43.
National Education Goals Panel. (1999). The National Education Goals report: Building a nation of learners, 1999. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
44.
National Education Statistics Agenda Committee. ( 1994). A statistical agenda for early childhood care and educatiuon: Addendum to a guide to improving the national education data system. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education .
45.
Neilsen, S., van den Pol, R.A., Guidry, J., Keeley, E., & Honzel, R.A. (1994). On track: A comprehensive system for early childhood intervention. Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
46.
Neisworth, J.T., & Bagnato, S.J. (1996). Assessment for early intervention: Emerging themes and practices. In S. L. Odom & M. E. McLean (Eds.), Early intervention/early childhood special education: Recommended practices (pp. 23-57). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Olson, L. (1999, January 11). Shining a spotlight on results. Education Week, pp. 8-10.
49.
Prince, C.D. (1992). Reactions to the Goal 1 technical planning subgroup report on school readiness: Report to the National Education Goals Panel (Report No. NEGP-92-03). Washington, D.C.: National Education Goals Panel.
Seppanen, P., Schaeffer, R., & Julian, N.R. (1995). Matching state goals to a model of outcomes and indicators for age 3 (Tech. Rep. No. 13). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
53.
Shepard, L., Kagan, S. L., & Wurtz, E. (Eds.). (1998). Principles and recommendations for early childhood assessments. Washington, D.C.: National Education Goals Panel.
54.
Shepard, L.A. (1994). The challenges of assessing young children appropriately . Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 206-212.
55.
Shepard, L.A., Taylor, G.A., & Kagan, S. (1996). Trends in early childhood assessment policies and practices. Washington, D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education .
56.
Shinn, M. R. (Ed.). (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: The Guilford Press.
57.
Snow, C.E. (1983). Literacy and language: Relationships during the preschool years. Harvard Educational Review, 53, 165-189.
58.
Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (Eds.). (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children . Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
59.
Sroufe, L.A., Cooper, R.G., & DeHart, G. (1992). Child development: Its nature and course (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
60.
Tirozzi, G.N., & Uro, G. (1997). Education reform in the United States: National policy in support of local efforts for school improvement. American Psychologist, 52, 241-249.
61.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (1998). Head Start: Challenges in monitoring program quality and demonstrating results (GAO Publication No. HEHS-98-186). Washington, D.C.: Author.
62.
Walker, D., Greenwood, C., Hart, B., & Carta, J. (1994). Prediction of school outcomes based on early language production and socioeconomic factors. Child Development, 65, 606-621.
63.
Ysseldyke, J.E., Thurlow, M.L., & Gilman, C.J. (1993a). Educational outcomes and indicators for early childhood (age 3). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
64.
Ysseldyke, J.E., Thurlow, M.L., & Gilman, C.J. (1993b). Educational outcomes and indicators for early childhood (age 6). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes.
