March/April 2005
Testing Goes to Preschool
Will state and federal testing programs advance the goal of school readiness for all children?
by Robert Rothman
Since the fall of 2003, teachers in Head Start preschool programs around the country have been sitting down with their students and having conversations like this:
I want you to look at some pictures with me. I'm going to say some words. For each word I say, point to the picture that best shows what the word means.
Let's try one. Put your finger on "ball."
Good! Let's try another one. Put your finger on "dog."
Using exercises like the one above, Head Start teachers across the country have been asking their students to demonstrate their understanding of certain words, to identify letters, to recognize geometric shapes, and to solve simple addition and subtraction problems as part of the National Reporting System (NRS), a standardized assessment for Head Start instituted by the federal government. The NRS reflects a nationwide movement toward testing in preschools that is gathering force state by state.
The rest of this article can be found in the current issue of the Harvard Education Letter. Buy this issue.
A Decades-Old Battle
The debate over Head Start’s National Reporting System is the latest skirmish in an often heated battle over testing young children. In the 1980s, as part of the education reforms enacted in the wake of the landmark report A Nation at Risk, states and school districts increasingly implemented testing programs for children as soon as kindergarten, or earlier. These programs included screening tests to determine whether children were ready to enter kindergarten or first grade and achievement tests for first and second graders, modeled on tests for older children, which were intended to hold schools accountable for student performance.
The rest of this article can be found in the current issue of the Harvard Education Letter. Buy this issue.
Maryland’s Work Sampling System
A 2003 statement by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) called for a comprehensive approach to early childhood testing that takes into account a variety of children’s developmental, cultural, and linguistic needs (see main article). Although the statement does not identify exemplary programs, one that appears to match many of the NAEYC criteria is Maryland’s. There, state officials began by identifying a set of outcomes for young children and developed intensive professional development around those outcomes. The state then selected an assessment, known as the Work Sampling System, that was aligned to the outcomes.
The rest of this article can be found in the current issue of the Harvard Education Letter. Buy this issue.
a closer look
Reinforcement, Richness, and Relationships: The Three R’s of One Model Afterschool Program
A Boston program looks beyond tutoring and homework help to build student success
by Andreae Downs
Three well-scrubbed eighth graders sit around a conference table at the Richard J. Murphy School in Boston and politely explain why they come to Prime Time, the Murphy’s afterschool program: homework help.
“My parents can’t really help me; the work is new for them,” says Gerald. If he couldn’t go to Prime Time, he adds, “I’d be frustrated at home. It would be difficult for me to do my work.”
Nick agrees: “All the teachers stay, so if you don’t understand the assignment, you can go talk to the teacher that assigned it.”
Stephanie says that if she went home to do homework she’d experience a lot more computer crashes, and she wouldn’t have the library nearby.
But is homework help the real reason these students come to Prime Time?
The rest of this article can be found in the current issue of the Harvard Education Letter. Buy this issue.
Can Quality Out-of-School Programs Run on a Shoestring?
Mary Russo, principal at the Murphy School, says the funding her school receives from outside sources is only a part of what it takes to make the Murphy’s out-of-school programs successful. In a recent interview with HEL, Russo discussed some of the other ways that school leaders—even those on shoestring budgets—can tap into existing school and community resources to help make out-of-school programming a reality.
The rest of this article can be found in the current issue of the Harvard Education Letter. Buy this issue.
research analysis
Can Brain-Based Software Help Kids Read Better?
A randomized study challenges the claims of a popular reading program and raises questions about how instructional software often is—and is not—evaluated
by Elizabeth Barrett Kidder
Can instructional software based on brain imaging help struggling students read better? That’s the hope of school administrators who invest in cutting-edge computer programs like Fast ForWord (FFW), a highly respected family of reading-intervention programs distributed by the Scientific Learning Corporation (SLC) and used by more than 120,000 students in the United States. To answer this question, Princeton University researchers Cecilia Elena Rouse and Alan B. Krueger recently conducted a randomized study of the effectiveness of reading intervention technology, using FFW as the subject.
The rest of this article can be found in the current issue of the Harvard Education Letter. Buy this issue.
|
