How are our children doing? This

question stays on the mind of

every Head Start and Early

Head Start staff member, manager, parent, and community partner. It is the

key question we seek to answer in our

national research and evaluation studies. And it led the Congress in 1998 to

enact new legislative mandates that

Head Start programs are beginning to

implement to assess children's progress

towards specific learning outcomes,

and to analyze and use information on

child outcomes in their local program

self-assessment process.

How are our children doing? A major way

we begin to answer this question is

through initial screening and ongoing

assessment of every child in Head Start

and Early Head Start. As mandated in the

Program Performance Standards, initial

screening of children is carried out to

identify evidence of developmental, sensory, or behavioral concerns and to

determine if children should receive a

more formal evaluation to identify disabilities. Ongoing assessment is also

required for each child to identify his

strengths and needs, to help tailor learning experiences and other services, and

to support staff in communicating and

working with parents and families.

This Bulletin provides a wide variety of

ideas and strategies on initial screening

and ongoing assessment; connections

between assessment, curriculum and

individualization; and ways to implement new policies on assessing and

analyzing information on child outcomes in your program. Authors from

the Head Start Bureau, research projects, state government agencies, and

local Head Start and Early Head Start

programs contributed the following

articles to help you think about and

work on new ways to improve your

program— 

• We begin with an article, by Judy

Jablon and Amy Dombro, experts in

early childhood education and

assessment, that reinforces the central importance of staff becoming

skilled observers of children and

using their observations to enhance

children's learning and development.

• Four articles describe efforts in local

Head Start agencies to improve

screening, assessment, and linkages

with program curriculum. Jan

Greenberg tells how East Coast

Migrant Head Start created their

current screening and ongoing

assessment approach—and how they

are planning to meet new mandates

to use child outcome data in program self-assessment and continuous

improvement. Leaders from Head

Start programs in Jackson, Michigan,

and Seattle, Washington, describe

efforts to improve and link curricula

and ongoing assessment efforts.

Larry Schweinhart and Ann Brown

Screening and Assessment in Head Start

By Tom Schultz, Head Start Bureau

continued on page 3

August 2000

Issue No. 69

HEAD START ®BULLETIN

enhancing head start communication

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ★ Administration for Children and Families ★ Administration on Children,Youth and Families

April 2001

Issue No. 70

www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/hsb

®
Screening & Assessment

2

Contents

Screening and Assessment in Head Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Using What You Learn From Observations:A Form of

Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

The Challenge of Assessing Children: One Migrant

Head Start’s Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Linking Assessment with Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

From Curriculum to Outcomes: Seattle Head Start’s

Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Using the High/Scope Preschool Child 

Observation Record (COR). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

How Screening and Assessment Practices Support 

Quality Disabilities Services in Head Start . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Family-Centered Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Environmental Evaluations:The Key to Quality 

in Early Head Start Classrooms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Using Assessment to Help Us Work with Families . . . . . . . . . . 30

Participating in a Research Project:A Head Start Program’s

Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Improving Quality in the Classroom: Observations 

and Recommendations from the Head Start Quality 

Research Centers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Getting Inside Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Five Steps to Assessing Child Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

The National Head Start Child Development Institute . . . . . . . 51

Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

The Head Start Bulletin is

published six times a year by the

Head Start Bureau, Administration

on Children, Youth and Families,

Department of Health and Human

Services. The Bulletin is a service 

of the Head Start Bureau’s Training

and Technical Assistance Branch. 

Its purpose is to enhance

communication among the Head

Start Bureau, Head Start programs,

and interested national, regional,

and state organizations and agencies.

Tommy G.Thompson

Secretary

Diann Dawson

Acting Principal Deputy 

Assistant Secretary

Administration for Children 

and Families

Pamela Carter

Acting Director

Office of Public Affairs

James A. Harrell

Acting Commissioner

Administration on Children, Youth

and Families

Douglas Klafehn

Acting Associate Commissioner

Head Start Bureau

JoAn Knight Herren

Chief, T/TA Branch

Head Start Bureau

Traci Hefner

Managing Editor

Head Start Bulletin

The Head Start Bulletin is

prepared under Contract No. 105-96-

2010 with PaL-Tech, Inc.

Deborah Hamilton Kremer

Co-Editor

Jean Swift

Co-Editor

Trish Warner

Co-Editor

Head Start Bulletin

Screening & Assessment

Issue No. 70

Our Guest Editor

Judy David began her career in early childhood education as a Head Start teacher

and supervisor. Judy has taught Associate of Arts classes in Early Childhood

Education and Child Development to Head Start staff, and has written extensively

for parents and teachers. She has co-authored books, including The Preschool Years:

Family Strategies that Work From Experts and Parents,by Ellen Galinsky and Judy David

(NY: Ballantine Books, 1991) and The Bank Street Curriculum Guide, edited by Anne

Mitchell and Judy David (Beltsville, MD: Gryphon House, 1992). Judy has conducted evaluations for early childhood programs and has been on the graduate faculty

at Wheelock College in Boston, Massachusetts, and Bank Street College in New

York City. She has also consulted with early childhood and primary school programs in the United States and Eastern Europe. Judy currently lives in Nairobi,

Kenya. E: dleavens@africaonline.co.ke.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 3

describe how the High/Scope Child

Observation Record system is being

utilized in Kalamazoo, Michigan, as

the foundation for an ongoing child

assessment system.

• Jim O’Brien of the Head Start Bureau

provides an article on how initial

screening and ongoing assessment

successfully supports children with

disabilities in Head Start and Early

Head Start.

• Leaders from Early Head Start programs in Vermont, Delaware, and

Missouri provide accounts of efforts

to involve parents as integral partners in the assessment process; to

use a research-based tool to assess

the quality of classroom environments to complement child assessment and internal program monitoring efforts; and to use an assessment

tool to improve the quality and outcomes of services by home visitors

to children and families.

• Head Start Director Gayle Cunningham shares her perspective on and

lessons learned from participating in

a Head Start Quality Research

Center Study. A summary of recent

HSQRC findings accompany her

interview.

• Two articles describe statewide collaborative efforts by Head Start

grantees in Rhode Island and Ohio to

develop common approaches for

assessing and analyzing information

on child outcomes.

• The Head Start Child Outcomes

Framework, which accompanied the

recent Information Memorandum on

Using Child Outcomes in Program SelfAssessment (IM-00-18),

is reproduced as an

additional resource for

readers.

• Dollie Wolverton of the

Head Start Bureau provides an overview of

the National Head Start

Child Development

Institute which provided more than 3200

Head Start managers

with a week-long professional development

experience keyed to

the goal of fostering and

assessing progress on

child outcomes and

school readiness.

How are our children

doing? This question was

a passionate concern for

Helen Taylor, Associate

Commissioner of the

Head Start Bureau from

1993 until her death on October 3,

2000. Helen worked tirelessly to

strengthen program quality, increase

funding, and enhance accountability. She

believed wholeheartedly in the importance of Head Start agencies using

state-of-the-art screening and assessment methods and using assessment to

improve curriculum, enrich learning

experiences, and engage families as

partners. She recognized the challenge

of demonstrating accountability for

child outcomes in new ways as critical

to Head Start's future.We dedicate this

Bulletin to her memory.

Tom Schultz is the Director of the Program

Support Division, Head Start Bureau.T: 202-

205-8323; E: tschultz@acf.dhhs.gov.

In memory of Helen H.Taylor
Screening & Assessment

4 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Screening

The screening process is the preliminary step used to determine if

sensory, behavioral, and developmental skills are progressing as

expected, or if there are causes for concern or a perceived need for

further evaluation.The screening itself does not determine a diagnosis or need for early intervention. However, it may suggest the need

for an in-depth evaluation that can make those determinations. To

ensure that children with special needs are identified early, Head

Start requires screenings to be conducted within 45 days from entry

into the program. Screenings are not one-time events—if a child is

suspected of having a developmental delay later in the program year,

a referral is made for a formal evaluation at that time.

Assessment

Assessment is an on-going process to determine a child’s strengths

and needs. It also assesses the family’s strengths, needs, resources,

concerns, and priorities. Information from the assessment is used to

determine strategies to support the development of the child within

the context of the classroom as well as his family, culture, and environment.Assessment is both a formal and informal process.The formal process includes the use of published developmental tests,

checklists, or structured observational procedures. Informal assessment includes discussions with parents or caregivers and casual

observation of children engaged in their daily tasks.

Formal Evaluation

A formal evaluation is performed by a qualified professional to diagnose a developmental, sensory, or behavioral condition or disability

requiring intervention. Most children will not be referred for formal

evaluations—only those children identified through the screening

and ongoing assessment processes as suspected of having a condition

or disability that might require intervention. The Early

Intervention/Part C agency or the Local Education Agency in the

community must be notified of a child who needs formal evaluation

to determine his or her eligibility for early intervention, special education, and/or related services as called for by the Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). When formal evaluation determines that a child does have a disability, programs work with families

and local partners to develop an Individualized Family Service Plan

(IFSP) or Individual Education Program (IEP) to address needs identified by the formal evaluation.

Key Concepts
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 5

Using What You Learn From Observation: 

A Form of Assessment

By Judy Jablon and Amy Dombro

Every decision you make about the environment, daily

routines, and learning opportunities in your classroom

affects children’s learning. By assessing children’s learning through ongoing observation, you gain insights into

children’s strengths, knowledge, interests, and skills.You

discover barriers that may be inhibiting their success.

You reflect on daily life in your program and make

adaptations that enable children to overcome obstacles

and build on what they know and do well. By using

what you learn from observation, you can foster each

child’s competence and success and create and maintain a high-quality program for children and families.

Some people think of assessment as an end point—

something you do to prepare a report for families or

to meet a program’s requirements. Actually, assessment should be used as an ongoing process to answer

questions about children’s growth and learning, and to

find ways of supporting their development.

Assessing to Find Answers About

Individual Children

There is always something new to learn about a child—

even children you think you know well. If you make a

habit of asking questions, you will get to know who a

child is and can keep track of who that child is becoming.

What are some of your questions about the children in your

care? Observing can help you learn about a child’s:

• Health and physical development.What kinds of large

motor and small motor activities does the child prefer?

How does the child manipulate scissors and crayons? Does

the family have concerns about the child’s health?

• Temperament. Can a child generally be described as

flexible? Slow to warm up or fearful? Feisty or intense? 

• Skills and abilities. What does the child do well? What

does the child find challenging? What skills is the child trying to achieve?

• Interests. What activities cause a child’s eyes to light up?

What does the child talk about? When given a choice, what

does the child choose to do?

• Culture and home life. How does the child express cultural or family traditions during play? How is discipline

handled and affection expressed at home? 

• Approach to learning. How does the child approach

new activity? How would you describe the child’s interaction with materials? 

• Use of verbal language. How much language does the

child have? Does the child talk to other children? Other

adults? What does the child talk about? 

• Use of body language. How does the child move? Does

the child use gestures? Is the child physically expressive?

• Social interactions with adults and peers. Does the

child interact with other children? How does the child initiate interactions? How does the child handle conflicts? 

• Cognitive skills. Does the child show interest in books

and other print material? Does the child notice similarities

and differences?
Screening & Assessment

6 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Asking specific questions can provide a

focus for observations and lead to solutions. You have repeated opportunities

to witness children practicing skills,

demonstrating knowledge, and exhibiting behaviors in a familiar and comfortable environment. Not only can you

observe what children know, but also

how they think and solve problems. By

collecting observations, you can find

answers to your questions and build a

picture of children’s performance and

progress without interfering with their

daily activities or usual behavior.

For example, when Laura, an infant

caregiver, senses something amiss with

five-month-old Kara’s fine motor development, she refers to the observational checklist she uses to monitor children’s development. Based on her

observations, she realizes Kara is not

bringing both hands to midline, while

Taylor, another child the same age, does

so frequently. Laura continues observing and decides to talk to the physical

therapist who consults with the program to request activities to help Kara

reach this milestone.

To assess four-year-old Kathy, the

teacher photographed Kathy and Josie

playing together in the block area.

Several days later, he made some notes

about the conversation Kathy was having with another preschooler. On yet a

third occasion, he saved a painting

Kathy made with Josie.When it is time

to evaluate Kathy’s performance and

progress, her teacher’s judgments

about her growing ability to interact

with her peers will be based on these

and other observations.

These examples illustrate how day-today assessment of young children can

help monitor their development and

learning and help you make meaningful

decisions about how to support their

continued progress.

Assessing to Inform

Decisions About

Programming and Teaching

Observing and reflecting lead to

insights and interventions that work.

You can apply what you learn from

observations to modify your program

in order to adapt your environment,

daily routines, and teaching strategies.

At the end of the day, Karlene, an infant

caregiver, reflects on what she has seen

this past week:

Over the past three days, Lynn, age

7 months, has been getting up on

her hands and knees and rocking

back and forth.Today, she put one

hand in front of the other, moved a

knee forward, rocked slightly back

and then crawled for several feet.

We are always mindful of

safety. Since we have a child

starting to crawl, I will crawl

around the floor and look for

potential hazards. That way

we’ll be able to let Lynn freely

explore the room.

Periodically observing daily routines

ensures that they get the same attention

and planning as all the other valuable

learning experiences in your program.

Jeff, a preschool teacher, observed rest

time was becoming difficult especially

with Nicholas, age 4 1/2.As Jeff writes at

the end of the week:

Nicholas whines when I dim the

lights and say it is time for a rest.

He tells me, “I want to play, not

sleep.” On Tuesday, he laid down on

his mat for a few minutes and

began fidgeting. Soon he rolled off

his mat and onto his neighbor’s.

My solution has been to

adapt rest time by letting

Nicholas—and other children

who don’t sleep or nap—

bring a quiet work activity

with them to their mats, such

as paper, crayons and books.

This seems to be working.

By observing, you learn about children’s

interests, strengths, and experiences.You

can use this information to individualize

instruction for the children in your program. A preschool teacher notes:

Leticia, age 3, whose home language is Russian, rarely speaks in

school. One day we were talking

about pets and Leticia didn’t say a

word. But the next day, she and her

mom came to school with Leticia’s

guinea pig from home.

I found out Leticia understands more English than I

thought she did. I knew I had

to build on this to help her

feel more comfortable speaking at school. So, we wrote a

story about Tiger, her guinea

pig. Leticia worked on an

illustration of what Tiger eats.

I always have a camera on

hand for moments like this so

I took some photos of Leticia,

her mom, and Tiger. I gave one

photo to Leticia to take home

and kept some in our class

photo album. After this,

Leticia began talking more to

me and other children.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 7

Assessing to Understand

Challenging Behavior

Every teacher struggles with challenging

behavior. Careful assessment of young

children can give you the clues to

address discipline issues. Asking questions, looking for strengths, and enlisting the support of families in positive

ways can benefit everyone involved.

This case study of Denise illustrates

how one teacher used these strategies

successfully.

Regina, an excellent classroom manager

and usually quite resourceful in finding

ways to support children, did not know

how to respond to Denise, a preschooler in her classroom. She explains:

When we’re sitting in circle, Denise

doesn’t seem to understand what is

going on. She doesn’t follow directions. I’m continually telling her to

settle down and to stop talking.

I decided to begin recording

mostly positive behaviors—

for myself and to share with

Denise’s grandmother, who

has had more than her share

of people complaining about

Denise’s behavior. I thought

by building our relationship

and strengthening the relationship between Denise and

her grandmother, she would

get the support she needs at

home and in school.

At first Regina had to work hard and

look carefully to find something to

write about. Over time it became easier. Here are a few observations she

recorded and sent home:

During a group discussion about

favorite foods,Denise looked around

and fidgeted as she waited for a

turn to speak. At her turn, she said

her favorite food was blueberry pancakes.She said she could eat 100 of

them. She smiled when three other

children agreed.

Denise’s face tightened when

another child crumpled the edge of

her painting. She moved her hands

as if to pinch him.Then she looked

over and called me for help. I asked

what happened. Paul explained he

crumpled Denise’s painting by accident when he hung his painting up

on the drying line. He told her he

was sorry. She smiled and said,

“That’s OK” to Paul.

Regina has used her observations not

only to build her relationship with

Denise, but also to strengthen Denise’s

relationship with her grandmother,

turning grandmother into an ally supporting Denise—at home and in

school. Regina explains:

Denise is starting to feel better about herself. She beamed

and told me her grandmother

is proud of her. Denise’s

grandmother has called me to

say how much she appreciates the positive notes. I have

come to care for Denise and

the way she grabs life so fully

– even though that means she

may disrupt circle time.

Assessing to Foster Each

Child’s Competence and

Success

Assessment can help teachers make

good decisions about how to intervene

in ways that support each child’s success as a learner. As you get to know

children and your respect and appreciation for them grows, it is more likely

your decisions about how and when to

intervene will be based on their interests and needs. This is the essence of

individualizing.

Sometimes the best thing you can do to

support a child’s learning is to step back
Screening & Assessment

8 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

to let the child experience something—

even if that means the child will take a

risk or make a mistake. Taking a few

moments to observe a child at play or

work may be just what you need to figure out if you should stay out of the

action.When you do step in, rely on your

observations to guide you.Ask the right

questions, make the appropriate comments, or offer materials that will stimulate and stretch the child’s thinking.

The chart on this page shows examples

of decisions teachers might make based

on their knowledge, appreciation, and

respect for the children under their care.

The next time you observe children,

think of a question you can ask about a

child or how you might intervene to support a child’s success.

We encourage you to conduct ongoing

assessments. Everyone will benefit.Your

work will be much more satisfying as

you ask and answer questions about

teaching and learning.Your relationships

with parents also will be enriched by

the stories you share with them. Finally,

you will encourage the development of

the children in your care as you create

an appropriate learning environment

and nurture each child’s individuality.

This article is adapted from the book,The

Power of Observation, by Judy Jablon, Amy

Dombro, and Margo Dichtelmiller (1999.

Washington, D.C.:Teaching Strategies, Inc.).

Judy Jablon is an Early Childhood Curriculum and Assessment Specialist and a

developer of the Work Sampling System.

T: 973-761-4118; E: judyjablon@aol.com.

Amy Dombro is a consultant to infant/toddler

and family day care programs and a trainer

of Head Start and child care staff.

T: 212-928-0545; E: amydombro@aol.com.

6-Month-Old Child:

Babbles back when you talk with

him

• Note his language development and

desire to communicate by describing to him what is happening during

his daily routines, such as diaper

changing and mealtimes.

• Pause to let him respond through

sounds and gestures.

22-Month-Old Child:

Cries lately when her grandmother

leaves in the morning.

• Be available to support her when it

is time for grandmother to say

good-bye.

• Show respect and let her know she

can share her feelings with you by

listening to and acknowledging her

feelings.

• Show her the picture of her 

family hanging on the wall.

3-Year-Old Child:

Told about making dumplings with

her parents over the weekend.

• Provide cultural continuity by 

talking about foods children eat 

at home during lunchtime 

conversation.

• Add books with pictures of foods

from different cultures to the

library corner.

• Invite Baili’s parent(s) to prepare

dumplings or another favorite dish

with the children.

4-Year-Old Child:

Arguing with Edward about who is

taller.

• Observe if they can problem solve

on their own. (In a few minutes,

Sarah gets a ruler to measure

Edward.)

• Make a growth chart with the class

to mark their changing heights.

5-Year-Old Child:

Built a barn complete with stalls and

a milking machine in the block area.

• Ask him to talk about how he helps

his older brother milk the cows in

the barn.

• Reinforce what he already knows

by hanging up pictures of the

interior and exterior of barns in

the block area.

Child’s Age

What You Observed

What You

Might Decide To Do 
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 9

The Challenge of Assessing Children: 

One Migrant Head Start’s Story

By Jan Greenberg

East Coast Migrant Head Start Project

(ECMHSP), like every other Head Start

program in this country, is actively

engaged in meeting the challenge of

implementing the legislative changes

concerning Head Start program and

child outcomes. These include, “establishing additional results-based educational performance standards and performance measures, and adapting these

standards and measures for use by programs in their self-assessments...”

(ACYF-IM-HS-00-18, 8/10/00).

This challenge offers us an opportunity to take a step back and look at

what we already are doing to measure

child outcomes, and what still needs to

be done. It entails reviewing our current

screening and assessment system, particularly our assessment tool and process.

For many years, ECMHSP centers

have used the Denver II to screen all

children, and the Early Learning

Accomplishment Profile (E-LAP: ages

birth to 3 years) and Learning

Accomplishment Profile (LAP: ages 3 to

6 years) for ongoing assessment and to

track children’s progress across a broad

range of skills.We are asking ourselves

a specific question: Does the ELAP/LAP provide adequate child outcome information? If not, what other

assessment tool does? 

This, of course, raises other questions:What criteria will we use to evaluate different assessment tools? How

would a change of assessment affect our

continuity system? What are the pros

and cons of changing our assessment system? If we change our assessment tool,

how will that impact programs that integrate the E-LAP/LAP into their curriculum framework? 

ECMHSP has established a Child

Assessment Committee composed of

ECMHSP, delegate agency, and center

staff to address these and other issues

and questions. This article provides

background information about ECMHSP, describes work the committee has

accomplished, and explains the questions and issues under discussion.

Who We Are

ECMHSP was established in 1974 to provide continuity of Head Start services to

the children of migrant farm workers and

their families along the East Coast of the

United States. It has evolved over the

years from a small, two-center program

in Florida, to a multi-state,

multi-agency, multi-center operation.

Currently, ECMHSP contracts with 20

delegate agencies in 12 states (AL,DE,FL,

GA,ME,MD,NC,NJ,NY,PA,SC,and VA).

There are a total of 88 centers serving

over 8,000 infants, toddlers, and

preschoolers in full-day programs.

The majority of ECMHSP children

and families are Spanish-speaking families

from Mexico, Texas, and Puerto Rico.

ECMHSP programs also serve children

and families from Haiti, Guatemala,

Canada (Mixtec Indians who cross the

Canadian border into Maine and work in

the blueberry barrens), and the United

States.

Programs seek staff members who

speak the children’s languages. Parents

often are hired as teacher’s aides for this

reason.Many of the families live in Florida

from October through May and travel

up-stream after the agricultural season is

over to work in northern states.Centers

open and close with the comings and

goings of migrant families, rather than

operating on a school year schedule.

Thus, ECMHSP programs share children

as their families move from place to place

to do agricultural work. Many of the children come into Head Start as infants and

stay within the ECMHSP system until

they transition into kindergarten.

What We Do: Screening and

Assessment

Within this context, ECMHSP has

developed and implemented a screening/assessment system to provide— 

• Important information about children’s competencies and skill development;

• Opportunities for family involvement

and input;

• Information for use by classroom

teachers in individualizing learning

activities and creating classroom lesson plans; and

• A communication and continuity link

between all the centers in the

ECMHSP system (for E-LAP/LAP).

All children are screened within

the first two weeks of enrollment using

the Denver II instrument. The first ELAP/LAP assessment is completed in

the next month.The results, along with

family input, are used to create individual Child Activity Plans (CAPs) for

infants, toddlers, or preschoolers.

The CAP identifies learning objectives and related classroom activities in

the following areas of development

(similar to the Domains in the Head

Start Outcomes Framework): language,

cognitive, gross motor, fine motor, prewriting (only in the LAP), social-emotional, and self-help. Information from

the CAPs is used to develop lesson

plans for toddler and preschool classrooms. E-LAPs/LAPs are updated

monthly, as are the children’s CAPs.

Programs that are open for eight weeks

or less only use Denver II screenings.

ECMHSP uses the E-LAP/LAP as a

key part of its communication and continuity system. Classroom teachers assess

each child each month and record the
Screening & Assessment

10 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

information on two identical

E-LAP/LAP forms. One copy is provided

to families when they inform the center

they are leaving; the other goes in the

child’s records folder, which contains

education,health,and family information.

Children’s records are sent back

to the ECMHSP main office when they

leave a center. When families come to

the next ECMHSP center, they give their

child’s E-LAP/LAP form to the classroom

teachers. The center also requests the

child’s records from the ECMHSP main

office.This information helps teachers at

the new center, as they continue the

assessment process and monthly

updates. Thus, the E-LAP/LAP form is a

communication tool that allows centers

to provide continuity of education

services as children move.

ECMHSP chose to use the Denver

II screening a number of years ago

because it met important criteria. It is

useful because—

• Hispanic children are included in

the re-standardization;

• It is a recognized screening tool;

• There are English and Spanish

versions;

• Training resources are locally available to centers;

• It covers children with ages ranging

from birth to six years; and

• It can be administered by paraprofessionals.

ECMHSP chose to use the E-LAP/LAP

for ongoing child assessment for many of

the same reasons.There are English and

Spanish versions, it can be administered

by paraprofessionals, it includes children

with ages ranging from birth to six years,

and it is a recognized assessment tool.

Both the Denver II and E-LAP/LAP are

relatively easy to administer once staff

understand the purpose of the tools, the

information they provide, and the

mechanics of administration.

With such a long-standing and

integrated systemwide screening and

assessment process in place, reviewing

our assessment tool/process to consider

change could be a daunting task!

However, ECMHSP looks at it as a

chance to strengthen our assessment

system, reinforce the connections

between assessment and curriculum,

and measure more accurately children’s

progress towards established goals and

outcomes.

Where We Are

The ECMHSP Child Assessment Team

has established a course of action.They

are gathering information on commercial assessment tools, reviewing Head

Start materials on child outcomes, program performance measures and

program self-assessment, and establishing criteria and indicators for evaluating

assessment tools.

The last activity has entailed quite

a bit of discussion to flesh out the indicators for each criterion. So far, our

global criteria include staff and training,

cost, age-range, play-based, correlation

with curriculum, and correlation with

the Head Start child outcomes.

One of the criteria—the need to

be culturally and linguistically appropriate—requires thoughtful consideration.

We ask ourselves, “What do we mean

by culturally and linguistically appropriate? How do we determine whether or

not an assessment tool is culturally and

linguistically appropriate?”
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 11

Since all assessment tools and

assessment developers are influenced

by culture, no assessment is entirely

free of bias. Assessment tools measure

what is thought to be important to the

developer and to the society at large.

For example, mainstream American

society values competencies in reading

and writing. Thus many assessments

emphasize related cognitive and fine

motor skills. Other cultures value oral

traditions and interpersonal relationship skills. Because our programs serve

children from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, we have developed

the following indicators and questions.

These preliminary indicators may be

refined as we apply them—

• Pilot/standardization studies.

Was the assessment tool piloted with

children similar to our population of

children? 

• Availability of tool in other languages. Is the tool available in

Spanish? Other languages? If yes, is it

a direct translation from the English,

or is it an adapted translation (i.e.,

items assess information similar to

the English version, but use words,

pictures, and concepts that are culturally familiar and relevant to Latino

or other cultures)?

• Protocol for item administration and interpretation of

responses. Do assessors have flexibility in administering items? If a child

gives a correct answer, but in his/her

home language, is that response

acceptable? What kind of latitude do

assessors have in interpreting children’s responses? Do assessors have

to use a prescribed kit of assessment

materials, or can they use materials

familiar to the children?

Where We Are Going 

The Child Assessment Team is ready to

begin the work of evaluating selected

assessment tools using our criteria and

indicators. Since our programs already

use the LAP,we will begin with that tool.

This will also entail correlating the LAP

with The Creative Curriculum used by

many migrant programs.

Once the committee has evaluated

all the assessment tools, ECMHSP senior

management staff will review the information and make an informed decision.

They will take into account the impact of

any change on our established continuity

system, staff training issues, the integration of assessment and curriculum, and

measurement of child outcomes as mandated by Head Start.

This is an exciting time for

ECMHSP. Our system review undoubtedly will have a profound effect on the

educational services we provide. While

we already know a great deal about children’s developmental and educational

status, this work will help us know better where we want our children to go

and how to tell when they get there.

This is a golden opportunity to create

and deliver an even stronger, sounder

educational experience for young children—one that will prepare them to

become lifelong, successful learners.

Jan Greenberg is the Training and

Development Associate at ECMHSP.

T:703-243-7522;E:greenberg@ecmhsp.org.

The following ECMHSP staff contributed to

the article: Leila Arjona, Clara Cappiello, Grace

Horsman, and Kim Stacy.
Screening & Assessment

12 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Developing a curriculum to help Head Start teachers ensure the highest quality education for theyoung children they serve is an important objective of our large and diverse program. We offer Head Start

for over 750 preschoolers, and Early Head Start for 95 infants

and toddlers, through the Community Action Agency in

Jackson and Hillsdale Counties, Michigan. Preschool program

options include half day, full day, extended day, and full year

center-based services.

The journey to our current curriculum began in 1997, when

we decided we were not satisfied with our curriculum. Like

other Head Start programs, we purchased and used several

different curricula over the past ten years. However, none

fully met the needs of our program and families. As we

looked at those available, cost was often a factor as was 

compatibility with the Head Start Program Performance

Standards. It became apparent that what we wanted did not

exist. We would have to take the leap and develop

our own.

As it turned out, the path to curriculum development was

not straightforward. At the same time we were discussing

curriculum, we were also struggling with priorities related

to assessment: how to develop outcomes, collect data, more

fully utilize the Performance Standards and integrate the

National Association for the Education of Young Children

(NAEYC) accreditation standards into our program.

Assessment was also a concern among our teachers. They

thought that our assessment system required too much

paperwork.They viewed it as an additional and unnecessary

burden. We wanted an assessment approach that met certain criteria: covers all areas of the curriculum; identifies the

skills and behaviors teachers need to look for; is a childfriendly approach and can be used during daily classroom

activities; and provides information to help teachers make

decisions about what to teach. We decided to begin the

process of change by looking for a new approach to assessment. After careful review, we concluded that the Work

Sampling System met our criteria and addressed our needs.

Learning to Use a New Assessment System

We phased in the Work

Sampling System over a twoyear period. This strategy

proved to be cost effective

and allowed staff time to

become fully knowledgeable

about the assessment system. We believed that by

moving slowly, we would

have greater success. Margo

Dichtelmiller, one of the

developers of Work Sampling,

trained our education staff.

Head Start training dollars

and program dollars paid for

this training.

The 1998 school year started with staff development focusing on general assessment principles, observation/documentation methods, and introduction of the Work Sampling

System. The consultant continued to meet with our educational staff every six weeks.Separate meetings were held with

teachers and teacher assistants.At the beginning of each session, the group reflected on their successes and challenges

using the assessment system and we encouraged teachers to

share solutions to challenges they encountered.

In October 1998, we created a Child Progress Report based on

the Work Sampling System Summary Report and trained staff to

use it.The report includes space for teacher evaluations of a

child’s performance and for a short narrative about the child’s

progress. At the first Parent-Teacher Conferences in

November, teachers shared this report with parents. Staff and

parents liked this new approach to reporting, which used

descriptive language to highlight the child’s competencies.

Using teacher input, the progress report form has been

revised several times to make it as clear and informative as

possible.

The following spring, the consultant met with each classroom

team for thirty minutes to review their Work Sampling materials. During these sessions, they examined observation

notes, developmental checklists, and progress reports and

discussed questions and concerns.This approach had several

important benefits. First, it allowed staff and consultants to

Linking Assessment with Curriculum By Margo Dichtelmiller, Mary Cunningham DeLuca, and Brenda Webster
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 13

become acquainted and build a level of trust. Second, it provided a safe environment to monitor how well teachers were

using the Work Sampling method and to answer questions

specific to each classroom.At this point, we focused on using

observation to complete the Work Sampling Developmental

Checklists.Although our staff were always watching and learning from children, they needed to learn how to make systematic and objective observations in order to make use of

the assessment process and materials.

In 1999, the second year, we made one significant change in

the staff development program in response to staff feedback.

Instead of meeting separately with teachers and assistants,

we convened smaller groups of classroom teams. The same

workshop was delivered four times so groups of 15-20 had

ample opportunity to ask questions.We introduced Portfolio

collection, the final piece of the Work Sampling assessment

system, during the 1999-2000 school year, but teachers were

not expected to use Portfolios until the next school year.

Turning the Focus to Curriculum

As teachers became familiar with Portfolio collection, we

concentrated on documenting Language and Literacy goals.

This was consistent with the emphasis in Head Start on

emergent literacy skills. However, we soon realized many

teachers were not familiar with the most recent research on

emergent reading and writing. More significantly, they needed concrete ideas for ways to promote literacy growth

through interactions with children in developmentally

appropriate ways. It was apparent that there was a need to

revamp the curriculum for three to five-year olds.

So the new assessment system led us back to curriculum!

We developed a preschool curriculum, Planned Play, that

reflects the assessment goals and meshed with Head Start

mandates.

The curriculum addresses the seven domains of child outcomes identified by the Work Sampling System: Personal and

Social Development, Language and Literacy, Mathematical

Thinking, Scientific Thinking, Social Studies, The Arts, and

Physical Development.These domains overlap with the eight

domains included in the Head Start Child Outcomes

Framework.

Each curriculum domain has components. For example,

Personal and Social Development has five components— 

A) Self-concept

B) Self-control

C) Approach to learning 

D) Interaction with others

E) Social problem solving 

Within each domain, curricular components are represented

by several indicators for four-year-olds taken from the Work

Sampling Developmental Checklist. These become 

child objectives.

For each indicator, we have identified specific behavioral

expectations for children,based on the rationale and examples

in the Work Sampling Developmental Guidelines, teacher knowledge, and classroom experience. Expectations for children are

also based on what we expect children to do by the end of

their participation in Head Start, before making the transition

to kindergarten. In some cases, we identified separate expectations for three-year-olds, where expectations differed significantly from four-year-olds. For example, in the domain of

Language and Literacy, under the component of Writing, one

indicator is: Represents stories through pictures, dictation, and play.

The expectations for children for this indicator include:

• Understands that pictures can represent objects

• Acts out stories or represents them with flannel board

pieces

• Draws a picture and tells a story about it

• Labels pictures with words

• Dictates to teacher a story about their picture

• Uses characters or information from stories in the

dramatic play

The curriculum lists teacher behaviors that support

this learning, including:

• Use props in dramatic play that allow children to act out

stories and their own experiences

• Ask children to tell you about their picture and write what

they tell you

• Give children many open-ended materials to explore and use

for representation

• Add props to the block and truck area to encourage 

representation
Screening & Assessment

14 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

In addition to outlining expectations for children and teaching strategies to support children’s development, the Planned

Play curriculum is based on the use of long-term thematic

units. Our teachers agreed that themes are appropriate for

young children; they promote in-depth investigation and reinforce children’s interests. Our teachers were also glad to

have more time to inform and involve parents in the longer

studies. During the 2000-2001 school year, teachers will participate in staff development activities related to the curriculum and use of thematic units.

We have worked hard to dovetail the curriculum with a

range of standards and outcomes we want our preschool

Head Start to address. A cover page for each curriculum

domain lists relevant program measures and Head Start

Performance Standards. In addition, the cover page lists the

related NAEYC Accreditation Criteria with examples, plus

the agency outcomes developed by the Community Action

Agency for children from birth to five. Ongoing staff development helps make our standards and outcomes meaningful

at the classroom level.

Getting to Know the New Curriculum

After initial drafts of several domains were completed, a

group of teachers reviewed the curriculum and met as a

focus group. They explained what they believed should be

included in a curriculum and how they thought the curriculum would be received. In response to their input, we added

lists of field trip possibilities and other useful classroom

resources.

The curriculum was presented to the teachers during a training session in August 2000. The entire group reviewed the

curriculum introduction. Each domain was reviewed by a

small group of teachers who summarized the major points

and reported to the larger group.The teachers’ response to

Planned Play was positive.They appreciated the well-defined

expectations and the examples of what a child should be able

to do typically by the end of Head Start.They made the following comments about the curriculum—

• “This is going to make planning easier and more organized.” 

• “I like having a framework for linking my planning to my

assessment goals.” 

• “I wish something like this would have been available when

I was new to the agency.”

We believe that involving the teachers in developing the curriculum and basing it on the already familiar assessment system, Work Sampling, diminished resistance to trying something new.

The Policy Council was directly involved in reviewing and

providing direction to the curriculum. Parent input included

the development of both an anti-bias statement and a transition plan from Early Head Start to Head Start. The Policy

Council approved the curriculum in August 2000.

Next Steps

The Planned Play curriculum is a living document.We want to

add input from teachers, such as descriptions of long-term

studies and activities they have used in their classrooms.We

also want them to note expectations that seem too

advanced or too easy for preschoolers. Future plans include

writing a parent guide to accompany the curriculum and

developing a birth-to-three curriculum so our program will

have a continuous curriculum from infancy through preschool.We will also be looking at how the curriculum meshes

with the Head Start Outcomes Framework.

The Early Head Start specialists are also piloting a new

assessment tool, the Ounce of Prevention Scale. When it is

adopted, we will link their assessment to curriculum activities,as we did for preschool Head Start.We hope to have this

work completed by September 2001.

Margo Dichtelmiller is an Assistant Professor at Eastern Michigan

University.T: 734-455-2059; E: mdichtel@online.emich.edu.

Mary Cunningham DeLuca is the Director for Children’s Services at

the Community Action Agency in Jackson, Michigan.

T: 517-784-4800; E: mdeluca@caajlh.org.

Brenda Webster is an Education Specialist with Head Start in

Jackson, Michigan.T: 517-784-4800; E: bwebster@caajh.org.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 15

From Curriculum to Outcomes: 

One Program’s Experience

An Interview with Mary Carr-Wilt

Guest Editor Judy David interviewed Mary Carr-Wilt for this article. Frances Jones-Baker, Children’s Services Coordinator, also

contributed information to this article.

Mary Carr-Wilt is the Program

Manager of the Seattle Public Schools

Head Start Program. For over four

years, she has been working with her

management team to improve the quality of their program, which serves 454

children in 13 schools. In this interview,

Mary describes the history of their

efforts, decisions they made, and ways

they involved teachers in changing their

curriculum and assessment system. She

is excited about the results she has

seen in classroom practices and

child outcomes.

Q: What prompted you to make

changes in the program?

I was newly hired in 1996 with a strong

background in early childhood education

and family literacy.At the time, Head Start

was anticipating newly revised Program

Performance Standards.Within our school

district, there were other changes as a

result of an internal monitoring and evaluation of our Head Start services.As a program, we were taking a close look at all of

our systems. Our management team took

the new Head Start regulations very seriously—particularly those related to child

outcomes. The State of Washington was

also defining language and literacy outcomes for children birth to five, plus the

school district was responding to state and

national requirements for K-12 educational

outcomes.The climate was one of change.

Q:Where did you begin?

It was clear to me that our long-term survival

would depend on demonstrating that Head

Start was the first important step in the 

educational experience for Seattle's 

low-income children. As we began to assess

the quality of our program, we realized there

was a disparity in our classroom practices.

While all of our lead teachers had CDAs

(1/3 of the teachers held an Associate or

higher degree), there was not a consistent

link between their education and the richness of their practice.

Our program lacked a

strong infrastructure for

monitoring and developing teacher competency.

We were not reflecting

the latest research findings about early childhood education or about

language and literacy

performance in lowincome children. We

believed that given the

emphasis on literacy outcomes at the federal,

state, and district levels,

the best place to begin

would be to study the mandated outcomes

and assess our own practice.

Six classroom teams volunteered to sit on

a Literacy Task Force in May of 1998 and

were charged with the task of exploring

the topics of literacy development and curriculum, language assessment, and prevailing practices in our Head Start classrooms.

Consultants on literacy development met

with the Task Force to present current

research ideas. The new Head Start

Program Performance Standards were

reviewed and the group concluded that

some standards were being addressed in

all classrooms but no class was addressing

all standards. We experimented with formal and informal language assessment in

a small sample of children.We found some

discrepancy in teachers' perceptions of the

children’s language skills versus their 

actual performance. Some teachers were

surprised that the sample of children 

generally fell below average in vocabulary.

The Leadership Team concluded that taken

together, this information indicated a need

to enhance our teachers' knowledge base
Screening & Assessment

16 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

in language and literacy as well as to

deepen our classroom practices. The fact

that about 38 percent of our children

come from families whose home language

is other than English and the fact that we

serve a high number of children with special education needs also called for taking

a special look at practices.

Q: Did the language assessment

lead to curriculum changes?

Yes, we realized that if we were going to

be able to provide the highest quality program for all our children, we would need

to develop a strong system for ensuring 

quality from classroom to classroom.That

system would have to link child assessment and goal setting to specific curriculum strategies and have a strong teacher 

training plan to support implementation.

In my former position with the State

Department of Education, I reviewed

many educational curricula. I believe that

the DLM Early Childhood Program offers

a comprehensive literacy-based approach

that addresses the needs and values of

our program and the district. DLM has 20

monthly curriculum units. Each unit has a

teacher's planning guide for activities, children's books, and an assessment tool to

mark children's progress. Materials are

adapted for use with children who speak

Spanish or have disabilities.

The editor of the materials was invited to

meet with our Leadership Team to discuss

the origins and scope of the materials.The

Team agreed that the materials would 

provide a comprehensive vehicle for us to

address and assess Head Start requirements consistently across our classrooms.

We asked the members of the Task Force

to field test a DLM unit—Friends and

Family—for a month and give us their

impressions.The Leadership Team wanted

to make sure that key players supported

the program’s adoption if we chose to 

move forward.

When the editor came back to guide the

Task Force on planning for the test unit,

we invited all staff, Region X representatives, our special education and mental

health partners, and other local early

childhood programs.At the end of the pilot

month, the Task Force listed their impressions of the DLM program strengths,

concerns they felt we would need to

address if we adopted the program, and

strategies for dealing with the concerns.

The classroom teams were largely pleased

with the materials—they were well organized, bright, fun, had lots of choices, and

were well received by the children. The

group consensus was to go forward with

the curriculum.

Q: What were the concerns and

how did you address them? 

The curriculum required a more detailed

level of planning from teachers, including

the identification of specific strategies

linked to individual objectives.The materials

called for regular and detailed review of

child progress.Time management for planning and documentation was different. To

provide some level of familiarity, several

members of the Task Force adapted our

current planning materials to use with the

new program. We began the 1999-2000

school year with a three-day institute on

the program, supporting staff to implement the first month's unit. There was a

steep learning curve for some teachers

and some were worried that having a

selection of recommended activities would

take away their creativity. Others were

worried that they might be evaluated on

their ability to use the materials. We

reassured them that the curriculum was

flexible and that they would have plenty of

time to learn about it.

Frances, our Coordinator for Children's

Services, met monthly with the teachers to

discuss concerns and support them in the

development of plans and materials for the

units. There was some level of discomfort

with the wide range of skill development (2

1/2 - 6 years) that the program addresses in

its Developmental Outcomes Checklist.The

staff went through this instrument framework and agreed upon the skills that they

felt were appropriate for our four-year-olds

when they leave Head Start. Staff adopted

the final draft last spring and we are testing

the outcomes this year.

Q:What assessment strategies are

being used in your program?

We use the DIAL as a screening tool when

children enter the program. DLM’s curriculum units are month-long and at the

end of each one, a unit checklist is used.A

child’s progress is noted across all areas of

development. So now, on a regular basis,

we collect data to use for curriculum planning and individualization and we have

consistent data across all the classrooms.

We have been using the DLM

Developmental Outcomes Checklist twice

a year to report on individual children’s

progress. We’re working on meshing the

monthly unit assessments, which are used

internally in the classrooms, and the

Developmental Checklist. Teachers also

record observations on six children every

week who are the focus of a weekly team

meeting. By the end of the month, each

child in the classroom has been discussed.

We’ve set up a research design to see if

our children are meeting the child outcomes on the DLM Developmental

Checklist. Five children from each classroom will be assessed at three points during the school year. We will analyze the

data by gender, home language, and special needs.We want to see if the indicators

are correct and if children are progressing

in every classroom.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 17

Q: How are these initiatives in 

curriculum and outcomes linked

to staff development?

We’ve revisited child development because

we knew that if the teachers could talk

about that, it would help them reflect on

their own practice. So we’ve set up on-site

tailor-made courses through a community

college. The courses, Applied Child

Development and Early Childhood

Education Curriculum Planning, use our

curriculum as a foundation for planning,

discussion, and analysis. One third of our

teachers don’t have their AA degrees and

they’re getting credit; other staff members

are taking the course to ensure that everyone is at the same theoretical level.We’re

also taking data from the research project

and based on the children’s outcomes,

giving curriculum support to our teachers

where it’s needed.

Q: What have been some of the

biggest challenges?

Change has been hard for all of us, particularly when we've been comfortable with

our original way of doing business, and the

change calls for developing new skills.

There is always a lot of fear that we may

not be able to meet the new requirements.

And then there's the reality that in the

learning stage, things take a lot longer to

get done than when you are proficient.That

learning curve period can be very frustrating.

Q:What changes have you seen in

the program as a result?

Although we are at the beginning of this

journey, early on we observed visible

changes in such areas as richness of the

classroom environments of our newer

teachers and a larger variety of language

experiences. Lesson plans across the program are much more specific.Activities are

clearly linked to curriculum and child goals.

Q: Where does the program

go next?

You could look at this process and think,

“Oh, this is just about adopting a new curriculum,” but that's only one element of a

larger process. It's been more about looking at what needs to be in place to truly

be able to ensure equitable high quality

assessment and instruction, and child

achievement across our program. The

materials we've adopted are very important because the careful alignment

between assessment and planning eliminates a lot of guesswork for staff. The

DLM curriculum offers a framework for

discussing child development, individual

differences, and best teaching methods.

That framework is the critical foundation

for supporting staff and children in this

challenge to ensure outcomes.We're working on comparing the DLM checklist with

the Head Start Outcomes.We're considering

whether an additional form of language

assessment is needed to complement 

the checklist.

This year is about getting comfortable with

the materials and process, reviewing our

child development knowledge, and reflecting on how the two work together. Next

year will need to be about monitoring and

coaching for consistency. The following

year, with a solid foundation of staff confidence and consistent practice, we'll be

able to focus on the critical questions

about the impact of our practice on

language, literacy, and school readiness.

In the meantime, we're beginning the conversations within our district about how

best to align our assessment and curriculum strategies with those of the K-12 system, so that it all clearly fits together for

families.

Q: What advice would you give

other programs grappling with

outcomes and assessment issues?

Take this opportunity to find support in

your community from people whose business is curriculum and assessment. We’ve

used researchers and consultants from the

beginning to inspire us because we don’t

have time to design it all ourselves.The regulations really require Head Start Directors

to know child development to make

informed decisions. Several of us got

together and set up a series of four seminars for fellow directors; we presented

information on curriculum, phonological

awareness, and other topics.There is a lot

of pressure on the federal and regional

offices to enhance an infrastructure for

training and support on curriculum, assessment, and staff development.

Mary Carr-Wilt and Frances Jones Baker can

be reached at T:206-252-0960; E:

mcarr@seattleschools.org and fjonesbaker@seattleschools.org.
Screening & Assessment

18 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

The High/Scope Preschool Child

Observation Record (COR) is a

tool for assessing the development of children two to six years old.

The COR meshes quite well with the

Head Start Performance Standards

and the new Head Start Child

Outcomes Framework. It is developmentally appropriate and widely

used in Head Start programs. Head

Start teachers who complete it several times a year can assess how

well their program contributes to

children’s development. Originally

developed for use with the

High/Scope curriculum framework, a Head Start grant ten

years ago enabled High/Scope to

further develop and validate the

COR for use in any early childhood program, whatever curriculum it uses.The manual for

COR presents evidence of its

reliability (i.e., the instrument’s ability to consistently

measure what it intends to

measure) and concurrent

validity (i.e., the instrument’s ability to

provide similar results for what is being

measured compared to other testing

instruments).

To use the COR,teachers begin by

observing children and writing notes to

describe their developmentally significant behavior.These notes provide them

with evidence to complete 30 items in

six areas of development—language and

literacy, logic and mathematics, initiative,

social relations, creative representation,

and music and movement. These areas

closely resemble the domains described

in the Head Start Child Outcomes

Framework. Each item has five specifically described levels, giving the assessment

tool a developmental perspective that a

simple checklist does not have. The 

levels are developmentally appropriate,

ranging from the easiest to the hardest

level, for preschool children two to five

years of age. Here, for example, are the

five levels for the item on demonstrating

knowledge about books—

1.Child does not yet pick up books and

hold them conventionally.

2.Child picks up books and holds them

conventionally, looking at the pages

and turning them.

3.Child picture-reads, telling the story

from the pictures on the cover or in

the book.

4.Child follows the print on a page,

moving his or her eyes in the correct

direction (usually left to right and top

to bottom).

5.Child appears to read or actually

reads a book, pointing to the words

and telling the story.

High/Scope recommends that teachers

participate in a two-day workshop on

how to use the COR and offers these

workshops throughout the country.

They provide training in how to recognize developmentally significant behavior and describe it in anecdotal notes,

how to select the item and item level

that each anecdotal note represents,

and how to report these results to

parents and program officials.

High/Scope is now planning and

preparing to expand the COR to both

younger and older children. We have

developed the High/Scope COR to be

used with children from six weeks to

three years (overlapping with the preschool version that begins at age two).

In the past few years, we have been

working with elementary educators to

develop a version of the COR for ages

five to seven.We are currently conducting studies of the reliability and validity

of each instrument and expect them to

be available in 2001.

Using the High/Scope Preschool Child Observation

Record (COR)

By Larry Schweinhart and Eileen Storer
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 19

To consider the COR from the

perspective of a director of a local program, we asked Ann Brown, director of

the Michigan School Readiness program

at the Learning Village, Inc., in Kalamazoo,

Michigan, to answer a few questions on

her program’s use of the COR. Here are

our questions and her responses.

Why did your program choose to

use the COR for the assessment of

young children?

The COR allows us to base our program on

what we know about individual children.

Teachers might think they already know

their children, but the COR goes beyond

that to organize our observations and

understanding of children. It helps us see

groups of children at different times of the

day to help us determine if some times

need to be planned more carefully. In addition, the COR facilitates our communication with parents. So many parents say,“All

the kids do in this program is play. The

teachers don't teach them anything.” But

they need to see the true picture. One of

the challenges to programs like Head Start

is to communicate to parents what their

children are learning.The COR is a deliberate and focused way to communicate with

parents about what their children are

learning in Head Start.

Using the COR also means improving our interactions with children. Lately, we

have been focusing on how well our

teacher practices support children's initiative. For example, one day on the playground, a child wanted to walk up the

stainless-steel slide. He was holding onto

the sides and no other kids were around.

His feet were slipping a little, but he was

doing it. Referring to the COR items for initiative helped us decide it was okay for the

child to do this as long as he was safe.

What do you think of the criticism

that the COR is time-consuming?

Teachers who are not used to systematic

observation of children’s development do

have to adjust to the added workload of

the COR, but the effort pays off handsomely in their greater knowledge of their

children’s development, their ability to

teach children developmentally, and their

ability to communicate with parents about

how their children are developing.

It takes time to learn how to implement the COR well; it cannot happen

overnight. It's taken our staff three years to

really feel that we had put all of the parts

of the COR together.The curriculum model

was in place, the staff were trained, then

we began attending to the COR – doing

observations and putting them together.

The first year, we only did the COR once on

each child. Another year, we went from

using the manual to the computerized system, which involved some learning. All of

the steps took time, but I knew we were

doing better than most other programs in

the assessment system we were putting

into place.

Do you think it is appropriate to

use the COR as a screening tool?

No. We use it to develop program plans,

and to get information about how to support children's development. We begin by

writing anecdotes, which helps us identify

issues to address. For example, we can

learn about a child's language skills at

meals over a period of time.The period of

time is required to distinguish a true language issue from a child's lack of comfort

in a new program. Observational evidence

that is consistent over a few weeks is

important to have before making a referral

for a formal evaluation.

How does the COR help you with

child outcomes?

One of my focuses this year has been to

share with staff the outcomes for children

by presenting them with pre- and post-program COR comparison data.The discussion

helps staff focus on areas of child development and answer the questions:What do

we need to know more about? What goals

do we want to develop? We use the COR to

assess child outcomes for reporting to the

government.We are systematically assessing children using an instrument that I trust

because it has proven reliability and validity.

It's not just a checklist or a homemade

assessment tool.The COR really focuses on

staff responsiveness to what they do every

day. It's feedback from the kids.

Information from the COR is a continual

topic of conversation.

Overall, the COR accomplishes three

things—

• You see children's actions in the context of

the classroom and the home.

• You see children not only alone,but also in

relationship to their peers and adults.

• The different parts of the COR inform you

about all areas of a child's development.

Head Start’s new requirement to assess

child outcomes has the potential to

radically transform the program. An

excellent way to ensure that the transformation will enhance children's educational experiences is to use an observational assessment tool of established

reliability and validity, and to ensure

that it is both developmentally appropriate to children and user-friendly.The

COR is such a tool.

Larry Schweinhart is the Research Division

Chair and Eileen Storer is a Research

Associate at the High/Scope Educational

Research Foundation. T: 734-485-2000,

E: LarryS@highscope.org, and EileenS@

highscope.org.
Screening & Assessment

20 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Head Start works with families and community partners to enable the early

detection of obstacles to children's

development and then intervenes to

reduce or eliminate these barriers.

For many children, enrollment in

Head Start provides the first indication that a disability or health condition may be affecting their development. To promote developmental

and learning outcomes for all children, Head Start programs must

plan and implement a sound,systematic approach for developmental

screening and ongoing assessment.

This screening and assessment system must include the careful selection and administration of instruments and procedures and the competent interpretation of results.The

system must be understood and used by

the program and parents as a means to

support developmental and learning outcomes for all children.

The Performance Standards

require that within 45 days of a child

entering Head Start, appropriate screening procedures must be completed to

identify any developmental, sensory

(visual and auditory),and behavioral concerns. These procedures should be

appropriate for the child’s age, cultural

background, and language and be conducted in collaboration with parents.

The Performance Standards also require

that, when appropriate, standardized

developmental screening instruments

exist, they should be used, and consultants to the program should be involved

in helping programs select procedures.

Sound screening instruments are

designed to have the sensitivity to identify children who need further assessment

and the specificity to exclude those who

do not.

For some children the results of

screening procedures, combined with

information available from the ongoing

assessment of progress required for

every child (1304.21), may indicate the

need for referral for a formal evaluation

by a professional. As the Performance

Standards (1308.6(b)) note, even standardized developmental screening is

insufficient to determine disability. This

screening merely identifies those children who require a referral.The formal

evaluation, utilizing multiple sources of

information from the family and program

(including the ongoing developmental

assessment of the child) will more fully

assess the child’s status, and determine

what intervention may be needed. (e.g.,

special education or related services).

A successful screening and assessment system requires appropriate

instruments and procedures.When staff

and parents are well-informed and supported to understand and act upon the

information the system provides, it will

positively affect child outcomes. When

staff and parents commit time and energy

to necessary procedures (e.g., documentation of parent permission, timelines, scores, etc.), they expect the program to act upon the information in a

timely and systematic manner to address

identified needs and concerns.A process

that responds to the child's needs can

reinforce the parents' expectations that

future screening and assessment will be

a meaningful activity for them and 

their child.

The remainder of this article

describes approaches to involving all the

stakeholders in the screening and assessment system and ways of increasing their

understanding and effective participation.

Engaging the Meaningful

Participation of Staff and

Parents

The planning and implementation of a

screening and assessment system requires

coordination and communication within

How Screening and Assessment Practices 

Support Quality Disabilities Services in Head Start

By Jim O’Brien

The Head Start Performance Standards

do not require that any particular

strategy, instrument or technique be

used.Appropriate procedures, however, should conform to sound early

childhood practice and be valid, measuring what they are supposed to

measure, and reliable, yielding consistent results over time and across

users. Agencies should consult with

the program’s content area experts in

health, child development, and mental

health, with parents, and with the

Health Services Advisory Committee

as they design and implement a developmental screening approach.

Guidance related to 45 CFR

1304.20(b)(1-3)
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 21

the program as well as with community partners. The Disabilities Services Coordinator

has the responsibility to provide leadership

to the Head Start team and others so that

their activities lead to effective parent

involvement and developmental services for

children with disabilities. (See box) But in

addition to these activities, the involvement

of the persons with the greatest day-to-day

influence on the child's development—the

parents and the teachers—is critical.

Guidelines for Screening and Assessment 

1. Screening and assessment should be viewed as services—as part of

the intervention process—and not only as a means of identification

and measurement.

2. Processes, procedures, and instruments intended for screening

and assessment should only be used for their specified 

purposes.

3. Multiple sources of information should be included in screening and

assessment processes.

4. Developmental screening should take place on a periodic basis. It is

inappropriate to screen young children only once during their early

years. Similarly, provisions should be made for reevaluation or

reassessment after services have been initiated.

5. Developmental screening should be viewed as only one path to

more in-depth assessment. Failure to qualify for services based on

a single source of screening information should not become a barrier to further evaluation for intervention services if other risk factors (e.g., environmental, medical, familial) are present.

6 Screening and assessment procedures should be reliable and valid

(i.e., consistent in their ability to measure what they are intended

to measure).

7. Family members should be an integral part of the screening and

assessment process. Information provided by family members is

critically important for determining whether or not to initiate

more in-depth assessment and for designing appropriate intervention strategies.Parents should be given complete informed consent

at all stages of the screening and assessment process.

8. During screening and assessment of developmental strengths and

problems, the more relevant and familiar the tasks and setting are

to the child and the child’s family, the more likely it is that the

results will be valid.

9. All tests, procedures, and processes intended for screening or

assessment must be culturally sensitive.

10. Extensive and comprehensive training is needed by those who 

screen and assess very young children.

Meisels,S.J.& S.Provence.1989.Screening and Assessment:Guidelines for

Identifying Young Disabled and Developmentally Vulnerable Children

and Their Families. Washington, DC: National Center for Clinical Infant

Programs, p. 24.

Some Important Activities

for Disabilities Services 

• Work with the program team to

ensure that parents are informed of

the screening's purpose, procedures

and results, and kept informed

throughout any formal evaluation that

may be required.

• Arrange for a formal evaluation of 

children who have been identified as

possibly having a disability. Make a

referral to the Local Education

Agency/Child Find/Part C Agency as

soon as the need is evident.

• Assist Head Start parents and program staff to take an informed and

active role in decision meetings

required by the Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

• Coordinate with managers and staff

implementing health services, ongoing

developmental assessments, and family

partnerships to assure that the full

range of information available is used

continuously to inform appropriate

program planning for children with 

disabilities.
Screening & Assessment

22 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Communication

Head Start staff may have limited experience in discussing the results of screening

and ongoing assessment with families.

When the evidence suggests that there

may be a developmental concern requiring

more formal evaluation, some staff may be

reluctant to present this information to

parents. For some Head Start families, this

may be the first time that a developmental

concern has come to their attention,

others may have had concerns but were

reluctant to discuss them, and still others

may have been trying to get information

about their concerns for some time.

Whatever the situation, the quality of the

communication between staff and families

will have an impact on a family’s willingness

to consider and act upon the screening

and assessment findings. Training 

and supervision must support this important function.

Programs need a well-planned system for communicating the screening and

assessment results to parents. When 

communication is not planned and purposeful, parents of young children with

disabilities often relate a common story of

suspecting a problem but being reassured

that the child will "grow out of it." Parents

are more likely to accept information

when they believe that they have good

communication with the person doing the

screening. Head Start, in its ongoing 

parnerships with families, has an opportunity to communicate screening and assessment results to parents in a manner that

recognizes the child’s strengths while systematically responding when a concern

warrants it.

Staff members also need opportunities to explore and discuss with

supervisors any reservations, questions,

and concerns about making a referral.

There are hidden costs to discounting screening findings—missed opportunities for early intervention may complicate

a problem. This issue is often present in

screening for emotional and behavioral

concerns that carry a stigma. If not

addressed, the child's behavioral difficulties

often produce rejection by peers.

Managers and consultants need to solicit

feedback from staff and parents on

whether the screening and assessment are

helping them support children's development. If staff perceive the procedure as

having consequences (e.g., a stigmatizing

“label") without resulting in useful guidance about how to address the behavioral 

concern, then they are less likely to

endorse the system.

Throughout the year, programs

should provide opportunities for feedback

from staff and parents on the screening and

assessment system. Inquire about what is

useful, confusing, or perhaps being rejected.

Provide feedback on what the system has

accomplished. Acknowledge that any

screening process will “detect” some 

concerns that, upon further evaluation, do

not warrant intervention; it will also fail to

detect some problems that do require

intervention. No screening instrument is

perfect but each is tested and retested to

be better than unstructured observations

and impressions.To the extent that families

and staff see that the system takes into

account their feedback, respects their

knowledge of their children's development,

and makes a difference for children, they

will be more supportive of screening 

and assessment.

Use Information Continuously 

Screening and assessment systems should

contribute to the Head Start program’s

ongoing efforts to help children reach

developmental and learning outcomes.

When implemented well, a system provides specific and timely information to

inform teachers and parents about each

child's progress and can support the

individualization needed to address developmental outcomes for each child. For

children with disabilities, the results of forCommon Pitfalls 

in Screening

• Scheduling a screening

when the problem is

already observable. When

trained staff report an obvious

problem,a referral for a formal

evaluation may be the appropriate first step.

• Ignoring screening results.

Some times, initial screening

test results are not taken seriously and a “wait and see”

attitude is adopted. Good

screening instruments are

usually right, and there is risk

of harm from delayed diagnosis

and intervention.

• Relying on informal methods. Informal tools such as

checklists often miss problems. Validated and standardized tools carry the burden of

proof that informal measures

lack. We would never select

tools for blood lead or other

medical screens with questionable or unknown levels of

accuracy. Why do this with

development? 

Adapted from: www.dbpeds.org/articles/dbtesting/pitfalls.html, F.P.Glascoe

and H.L. Shapiro, “Developmental and

Behavioral Screening",1999.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 23

mal assessments and the objectives from individualized plans

for special education and instructional supports provide guidance that must inform their daily experiences.

Remember that while ongoing assessment is, by definition, expected to occur throughout the program year, screening is most often associated with the child’s entry into the program. Given the rapid growth and changes which young children display, screening should occur on a periodic schedule

consistent with the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and

Treatment program (EPSDT) recommendations. For most children, the screening and assessment system offers reassurance

that the child is on track for achieving the expected developmental outcomes. Furthermore, staff and parents should be

provided direction and support to remain vigilant and

responsive to any concern that emerges after the initial screening period. Sound procedures have decision rules on when to

The Screening and Assessment Process

All Head Start

Children

Comprehensive

Screening

• Health Status

• Developmental

• Sensory (Vision and

Hearing)

• Behavioral

Ongoing Assessment

Documentation and recording of children’s

progress in order to plan and individualize for 

each child and identify any emerging concerns.

Formal

Evaluation

Evaluation and

determination of

eligibility for 

disability services

Individualized

Education

Program (IEP)

Plan for special education and/or related

services to meet child’s

needs

Meets 

disability

criteria

Concern

identified

Does

not

meet

disability

criteria

Concern

identified

No

concern

identified
Screening & Assessment

24 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

conduct a rescreening or additional

assessment.

Empower Parents of

Children with Disabilities 

Parents of children with disabilities can

benefit from Head Start experiences

that help them practice communication,

advocacy, and decision-making skills

using screening and assessment results

for their children. Parents of school age

children with disabilities often describe

their early experiences with assessment

reports and individualized planning as

confusing and intimidating. Head Start

can empower families with expectations

they will carry with them into their

child's school career—that assessment

procedures and results must be

explained to generate informed decisions, that parent concerns must be

addressed, and that resources, including

other parents, must be identified to provide support and guidance.

Parents of children with disabilities will need orientation to key concepts from the Individuals with

Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), such

as parental consent, evaluations, confidentiality of records, eligibility for special education and related services,

services in the least restrictive environment, and rights to due process.

Opportunities in Head Start for parent

education on their rights and on the

school's obligations under IDEA will

help them develop a sound foundation

for their child's school experience.The

Disability Services Coordinator should

play an important role in supporting

parents’ goals in these areas.

Ensuring Outcomes for All

Children

As Head Start programs focus attention on how their practices contribute

to developmental and learning outcomes, it is important to recognize that

the 1998 reauthorization of the

Individuals with Disabilities Education

Act (IDEA) specified that children with

disabilities should be included in state

and local efforts to measure educational

outcomes for children. Advocates for

children with disabilities make a convincing argument that excluding children with disabilities from measures of

child outcomes will reduce or deflect

from a school's expectation, and

accountability for ensuring, that all children make significant progress toward

the desired outcomes.

Similarly, in Head Start, an

approach that documents success only

for those children without disabilities is

not sufficient. All Head Start children,

including those with disabilities, should

receive ongoing assessment linked to

Child Outcomes Framework, curriculum planning, and communication with

parents. For most children with disabilities, the key to achieving positive outcomes will be the provision of needed

supports. When the progress of children with disabilities is included in a

program's self-assessment,the program

can develop information on best practices that support the achievement of

outcomes for children with a variety of

strengths and needs.

Jim O'Brien is a Program Specialist in the

Health and Disabilities Services Branch of

the Head Start Bureau.T: (202) 205-8646,

E: jobrien@acf.dhhs.gov.

Managing Child

Records in the

Screening and

Assessment System

Key features include— 

1.A record of the procedures

used for screening and 

assessment

2. Evidence that the child's

family provided information in

the screening process

3. A report on the results of

screening, including steps

taken if further assessment

was indicated (including

obtaining written permission

from the parents)

4. Evidence that screening and

any follow-up assessments

and actions were completed

in a timely manner

5. Evidence that information is

handled in accordance with

the program’s confidentiality

requirements and is readily

available for ongoing use by

staff members who need to

act on this information
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 25

Our Early Head Start program at Early

Education Services (EES) in Windham

County, Vermont, serves 107 infants

and toddlers.We work hard to ensure

the participation of families in the

assessment of their children. From the

outset of our program, several beliefs

have guided and informed our assessment process, including—

• Parents know more than anyone else

about their children and can provide

meaningful and reliable information.

Families’ observations, ideas, and

concerns must be central to planning

and performing assessments and

screenings.

• Parents benefit from taking part in

evaluations of their children. During

the screenings or assessments, when

parents focus on their child and get

support and information, they

increase their understanding of their

child’s development, strengths, and

needs.

• Parents should choose how they will

participate in the assessment process.

The more actively involved they are,

the better experience it will be for

them, their child, and the home visitor.

• Including families in the process, in

ways that they want to participate,

sends the message that they are an

important part of the assessment and

more importantly, of their child’s life.

If we exclude parents from the

process, we risk not only losing

important information about the

child, but parents may not fully

engage in goal setting, planning, or the

program itself—resulting in fewer

benefits for the child and the family.

Keeping these ideas in mind, we do

everything we can to include parents

and to make screening and assessment

interesting, fun, and worthwhile.

Parents: Partners in

Assessment

When a child is enrolled in the program, the home visitor's first task is to

get to know the family and the child.

The goal is to establish a mutually trusting and respectful relationship, which is

valuable because it enables parents and

home visitors to work together to support the child’s development and the

parent-child relationship.When parents

are active partners in the assessment

(and intervention) process, home visitors and families share an understanding or belief in what is best for the

child, the parents’ priorities are

acknowledged, and parents and professionals work toward shared goals.

In our program, observation 

and conversation are at the heart of

assessment. We 

provide ongoing

training and

supervision to

our home 

visitors in

observing and

recording infant

and toddler

behavior. We

also use training

materials and an

observation

guide that focus

on coaching 

parent-child

interactions.

Home visitors

become skilled

at observing the

subtle aspects of interaction that indicate

the quality of the parent-child relationship and the ways parents and their

young children communicate.

At the beginning of a home visit,

the professional might ask a question

like:“What kinds of things has Janie been

Family-Centered Assessment

By Leah Shatavsky Bratton
Screening & Assessment

26 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

doing since my last visit?” Noticing that

16-month-old Steven reaches for his bottle on the table and repeats “ba-ba”, the

home visitor may say,“What are some of

the ways he lets you know what he

wants?” His mother might begin to

describe his emerging language and how

talkative he is.These questions are openended, non-threatening and give parents

a chance to say what they want.There is

no right or wrong; the parent is the

expert. The home visitor is an active

listener and is skilled at engaging parents

in an easy conversation about their child.

When home visitors describe their

observations of the child’s development,

parents are delighted. It shows that the

professional knows the child and appreciates his or her growth. These observations also validate the parents’ competence as parents and their important role

in their child’s development. “I watched

how Rosa turns her head when she hears

your voice in the other room. She wants

to know where you are!” Such an observation can also be an opportunity for the

home visitor to talk about the social and

emotional development of infants. In this

way, parenting education is a natural outcome of ongoing assessment.

When parents and Early Head

Start staff share their thoughts and

observations of the child,it leads to planning and thinking about what goals to set

and which activities will enhance the

child’s development. In one family, the

toddler was taking great joy in his mobility—he was on the move all the time.

When the home visitor saw how much

the child wanted to practice his newfound skills, she and the family discussed

how to encourage him, even though it

was the middle of a very cold winter in

Vermont when outdoor activity was limited. She suggested several indoor places

in the community where he could walk

and run. As trust between the families

and the home visitors builds, the sharing

of information and observations increases between them.

Using the ASQ

Questionnaire 

To supplement ongoing assessment

based on observing the child and talking

with the family, EES uses the Ages and

Stages Questionnaire (ASQ), which is

designed for child monitoring. The

items represent milestones in five key

developmental areas: communication,

gross motor, fine motor, problem solving, and personal-social. There are six

items in each category and they are

checked as either: yes, sometimes, not

yet. Sample items at eight months

include— 

• Does your baby make sounds like

“da,” “ga”, “ka,” and “ba?” (communication);

• Does your baby pick up small toys

with only one hand? (fine motor);

• Does your baby feed himself a cracker or cookie? (personal-social).

At the end of the form, there are a few

Yes/No questions appropriate for the

child’s age. For example, the ASQ used at

eight months asks these final questions:

• Do you think your child hears well? 

• Uses both hands equally well? 

• When you help your baby stand, are

her feet flat on the surface most of

the time? 

Parents are asked to explain any “no”

answers. These last items can be used

for screening purposes to indicate areas

of concern.

Starting when the infant is 4

months old, the ASQ is used at designated intervals. We chose Ages and

Stages because it is simple to use and has

proven to be reliable and valid.The items

are easy to understand and illustrated.

The manual offers guidelines for determining whether children are at high or

low risk in the various developmental

areas. Concerns identified when completing the questionnaire are usually not

a surprise to parents and home visitors,

but most likely are questions and observations they have had on their minds.

Administering the ASQ is relatively simple and straightforward.

Although it was designed for parents to

use on their own, home visitors and

families do it together. It does not take

long to complete—maybe one half

hour—but the most important part is

that it is an opportunity to observe and

talk together.Whenever possible, natural observations are used as the basis for

filling out the ASQ. If one of the items

pertains to the child’s using the pincer

grasp (thumb and forefinger), the child

might be observed eating Cheerios

during lunch, picking up one at a time.

Sometimes our home visitors suggest

ways to elicit the child’s behavior, like

inviting a parent to clap her hands and

watch how the baby imitates.

Data from the ASQ are discussed

at a meeting between the supervisor

and the home visitor. At this time, the

child’s accomplishments and any areas

of concern are highlighted and next

steps can be planned. EHS has a large

resource library with many curriculum

books that staff can use to plan developmentally appropriate experiences for

individual children.

Information from the ASQ is

sometimes shared at the agency’s case

management meeting—referred to as

“Family Update in a Nutshell,” or F.U.N.

At this meeting, held quarterly for each

family, the group of EHS professionals

discusses the family. The home visitor

briefly updates the group and discusses

relevant issues about the child and

family. If necessary, interventions are

planned or a referral is made.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 27

Scales like the ASQ provide useful information about a child’s skills, yet

they can also cause undue anxiety for

some parents when a child has not yet

reached a milestone. Our home visitors

understand child development and can

reassure families that children develop

at different rates. They also provide

insight into the growth of the individual

child by explaining that sometimes a

spurt in one area of development

means a plateau or even backsliding in

another. A home visitor might explain:

“The reason Kayla is not talking much is

that most of her energy is going into

learning to walk. When she masters

that new skill, her verbal development

will probably take off."

Using the Ounce Scale

To better link assessment, planning, and

intervention, EES is piloting a new infant

and toddler assessment measure, The

Ounce of Prevention Scale, still in draft

form. It not only provides information

about what the child is doing but also

helps parents and providers understand

how children use those skills and abilities, and how the environment and parent-child relationship can support children. It focuses on everyday, naturally

occurring, practical behaviors and

accomplishments that are easily recognized by parents and others. The child’s

developing social competency and adaptive capacity are highlighted in the Ounce

materials.

The Ounce incorporates multiple

strategies of assessment, including an

observational record and accompanying guidelines with questions and examples of children’s behavior at different

ages. A family album enables family

members to become actively involved

in making observations about the

child’s development and offers suggestions about ways to

enhance the child’s development and strengthen

their relationship. Finally,

a summary record

assesses the child’s mastery across different

areas of functioning.

We may find that

the Ounce Scale complements the ASQ and use

both of them. It is too

soon to tell. We know

that any assessment in

our program must

involve parents and

strengthen their understanding and appreciation

of their children’s unique

characteristics and

progress over time.

Assessment must also

help home visitors understand and

adapt to the strengths of each family

and respond to their priorities and concerns. When families and professionals

are partners in assessment, everyone

benefits.

Leah Bratton is the Early Childhood

Coordinator for the home visiting program of

Early Education Services.T: 802-254-3742;

E: lbratton@sover.net

I would like to thank Mary Moran,

Director of EES, and Dot Marsden, codeveloper of the Ounce Scale, for their

help with this article.
Screening & Assessment

28 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Environmental Evaluations: The Key to Quality

in Early Head Start Classrooms

By Martha Buell

Recent advances in the study of brain

development clearly indicate that early

experiences dramatically shape the

brain’s structure and function. In particular, research indicates that the caregiving setting of young children (including

the adult-child interactions, daily routines, and equipment) affects their

development in profound and longlasting ways. In order to ensure that the

caregiving environment provides young

children with the best possible start, it

is critical to evaluate their environment.

In our program, Northern Delaware

Early Head Start (NDEHS), we take

environmental assessment seriously.

NDEHS serves 107 infants and toddlers

throughout New Castle County,

Delaware. Children and families receive

services from NDEHS in three ways: a

traditional center-based program (i.e.,

all of the services are provided through

a center funded by Early Head Start), a

home-based program (i.e., children

receive services through home visits),

and a Childcare Partnership model (i.e.,

visiting Early Head Start developmental

services are provided to local family

child care or center-based programs

combined with monthly home visits).

A child is served through one option at

any given time. However, the program

has built-in flexibility to allow children

to transition from

home-based services to centerbased services as

slots are available

and as family needs

change. What adds

further complexity

to our program is

that over 50 percent of our services

are offered through

subcontracts with

a Head Start program that offers

home-based and

child care partnerships services and

with two other

community agencies that deliver

center-based services. Given the range

and diversity of the NDEHS program’s

options, environmental assessments are

key to ensuring consistently high quality services.

Assessing the Environment 

The Head Start Performance Standards

and the PRISM monitoring tool are

used to ensure program quality. They

describe the features that must be

included in a program. However, since

they do not explain in detail how to

design and run a classroom or family

day care that meets the developmental

needs of infants and toddlers, NDEHS

uses other environmental measures as

guides to ensure program quality.These

measures include the Family Day Care

Rating Scale (FDCRS), the Infant and

Toddler Environmental Rating Scale

(ITERS) for center care, and the Health

and Safety Checklist for all out-of-home

care. These instruments are based on

sound principles that support optimal

development for young children.

NDEHS uses these measures to validate effective practices and offer guidance on ways to improve quality. All

out-of-home child care placements are

assessed at least once a year using the

appropriate instrument.The ITERS and

FDCRS use a seven-point rating scale: a

rating of 1 indicates unacceptable or

harmful, 3 indicates minimal quality, 5

shows good quality, and 7 represents

excellent quality. Depending on the significance of the particular item and its

score, we are able to prioritize needs

and designate necessary resources,

such as materials or staff training, for

the site. We ensure that all health and

safety items on the ITERS or FDCRS

are scored at a level 7 before we work

to improve the scores of other items.

We incorporate the instruments into

training and use the evaluation of the

environment as an important vehicle

for staff development. In this way,

providers receive information about

what is expected in a developmentally

appropriate program. These measures

also provide information about appropriate materials and how to use them

with infants and toddlers.

As staff members learn about environmental assessment, we identify training

areas needing more coverage and plan

future training accordingly. The staff

knows well in advance that environmental settings will be evaluated and
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 29

what criteria will be used. In fact, the

criteria themselves are useful teaching

tools.

It is important to help providers understand how the environmental assessments are tied to the outcomes we

want to achieve with children in our

Early Head Start program. This

becomes critically important for children with special needs because we

place them in natural environments

(i.e., in the same program or setting the

family would choose if the child did not

have a disability).

Because of our commitment to supporting early intervention in natural environments, we work to maximize the extent

to which IFSP (Individualized Family

Service Plan) goals are supported in the

Early Head Start classroom, family day

care, and the child’s home and 

community. Our environmental evaluations are a useful means of identifying

further modifications, materials, or

arrangements that support inclusion.

Using an ITERS item as an example, the

descriptor of a program getting a rating

of 7 (excellent) on Number 16 (Books

and Pictures) states,“Each infant/toddler

given opportunity daily for at least one language activity using books, pictures or puppets. Cozy book area set up for toddlers to

use independently.” This item requires us

to reflect on how we will modify a language activity with puppets for a child

with a visual or hearing disability. It may

also challenge us to assess how we can

make a book area accessible to a child

with limited mobility. The evaluations

are used to guide our program to meet

all the needs of all the children.

Challenges to Evaluation

NDEHS has offered services for only

two full years. We expect that many

challenges to effective environmental

assessment will be overcome as our

program matures. However, one of the

principal challenges remains the

amount of time—at least three

hours—it takes to complete each environmental assessment.

Currently, the assessments are conducted by the Early Care and Education

Coordinator with help from graduate

students from the University of

Delaware. Our goal is to establish a system of teachers and providers who

conduct their own assessments under

the supervision of the Coordinator.

Another challenge is changing negative

staff attitudes about assessment. Some

staff members believe the process will

focus on what is wrong with their

approach or program and result in faultfinding and blaming. We try to reframe

assessment as a tool to confirm best

practice and a way to target resources

that will make the providers' jobs easier.

Enabling the providers and teachers to

conduct their own assessments will help

them accept the process.

Long Range Plans

Through newsletters, parent committees, and policy council meetings, family

members are kept informed of the

improvements that result from our

environmental assessments and the

ways in which these additional

resources support their child’s development. In the future, we would like to

train family members to participate in

these assessments, as we do with the

child screenings.

In our program, parents and guardians

have been trained to use the child

screening tool, Ages and Stages, during

the child’s early years.They are responsive to being involved in this process

and find it both educational and

empowering. They gain valuable information about milestones in their child’s

development, acquire tools for child

observation, and learn ideas for ageappropriate activities. Involving parents

or guardians in environmental assessments would teach them about critical

features of their child’s learning environment and build rapport between

the family and caregivers.

Another long-range plan is to develop

or locate a measure to assess the

child’s home environment. Presently we

conduct a health and safety check of

each family’s home. We have reviewed

the H.O.M.E. instrument and concluded

that it does not entirely address our

needs. We have not yet found instruments comparable to ITERS and

FDCRS that offer guidance for

improvement and confirm current

practices.

Conclusions

Environmental assessments help ensure

a quality program for infants and toddlers. But the job of evaluation does

not end there.These measures are only

useful in conjunction with assessments

of program effectiveness for individual

children.When combined with individualized assessments, such as developmental portfolios, environmental

assessments contribute to ensuring

quality services for all children.

Martha Buell is an Assistant Professor in the

Department of Individual and Family Studies

and the Director of Northern Delaware

Early Head Start. T: 302-831-6032; E:

mjbuell@udel.edu.
Screening & Assessment

30 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Using Assessment to Help Us Work with Families

By Stephanie Hudson and Mary Sinur

Assessment is used not only to

monitor children’s progress relative to Head Start Child

Outcomes, but also to improve program services. The following article

describes, from the perspective of the

Coordinator of Early Childhood

Education and a Family Services

Advocate, how an Early Head Start program works with a staff development

assessment tool.

A Coordinator’s Story

Providing ongoing support and technical

assistance to home visitors in Early Head

Start programs takes a lot of knowledge,

insight, patience, and trust. As the

Coordinator of Early Childhood

Education (ECE) and Disability Services

for Project Eagle/University of Kansas

Medical Center in Kansas City, one of

my primary job responsibilities is to provide our Family Support Advocates

(FSAs) with technical assistance in the

areas of child development, parent-child

interactions, early education, and early

intervention. In addition to helping them

achieve certification in the Parents as

Teachers curriculum and the Denver II

screening instrument, I conduct four to

six training sessions a year. I work with

11 staff members and am responsible for

assessing their ongoing work with families and helping them build their skills.

One way I support the Family

Service Advocates is to work closely

with them on all aspects of their home

visits with families. I start out by helping

to identify major concerns, issues, and

goals prior to a family visit.We set aside

time to debrief after each visit. I am

required to make two home visits with

each FSA every six months. More frequently, I am invited on a home visit by

an FSA and I end up making closer to 25

home visits per quarter.When we make

a visit together, I look for evidence relevant to our earlier discussions

and evaluate the strengths and

areas needing improvement. If

appropriate during the home

visit, I may take advantage of a

“teachable moment” and model

an intervention strategy.

Our program has developed the Continuous Quality

Improvement Checklist (see

attached CQI) to help me assess

interactions during the family

visit. Sixteen items focus on the

Advocate’s behavior. Each one is marked

as either: 'needs improvement'; 'adequate'; or 'highly successful'. This tool

emphasizes instructive and positive feedback to families. When I am observing

the Family Service Advocates, I model

the same style of feedback to them. At

the end of the form, there is space for

additional comments or observations.

After the home visit, the FSA and I meet

to discuss the CQI checklist and my

overall observations and interpretations.

He, too, discusses what he thought was

happening during the visit and how he

felt about it. We brainstorm ways to

improve the quality of the visits and consider his next steps.We both sign off at

the end of the form.

This assessment process is a

strengths-based approach. I look at the

FSA’s abilities and learning style.

Together, we come up with an action

plan to help refine skills, deepen understanding, and increase confidence.

Looking across the program, the CQI

checklists help us plan staff development

for the team of Family Service

Advocates.

How we assess Family Service

Advocates is not much different from

how we assess children and their

families. Our goal is to identify their

strengths and competencies and from

there, address their needs.

A Family Service Advocate’s

Story

In Project Eagle Early Head Start, I work

with 14 to15 families every week. My

first responsibility is to develop a partnership with parents and help them

address their family’s needs. In turn, I

need ongoing support from the

Coordinator to do my job well. What

follows is a “family story” about how I

work with a parent and her children,

and how the Coordinator and I work

together to meet the individualized

needs of this family (whose names have

been changed).

At the time of enrollment,May was

22 years old and a single parent.Her son,

Tae, was one year old and she was

expecting her second child in a few

months.May was experiencing a high-risk

pregnancy due to medical complications.

She was living in a rent-assisted housing

project and receiving cash assistance and

medical coverage through the Medical

Assistance Program. May’s original goals

were to have a full-term baby, find childcare for Tae (she was confined to bedrest

during her pregnancy),and once the baby

was born, work on her employment

goals. May, a high school graduate, wants

to go on with vocational training. She is

very motivated to improve her family’s

conditions, and she has a close network

of family members.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 31

Our home visits occur weekly at

May’s apartment. We also have two

agency-sponsored parent-child socialization play-groups each month. I have

observed May with her children and the

children with their fathers. May has

good parenting skills. She is able to

describe her children’s development,

understands their temperament, and

sets appropriate limits. She maintains an

open relationship with the children’s

fathers so that they can be involved in

family life.The family is very interested

in the motor development of the baby,

Journie.They want to help her learn to

move, roll over, and hold her head up.

We talk about all areas of development,

but motor development continues to

be the one they consider most important. I think there is an underlying concern about Journie’s motor development because of her mother’s undetermined seizure disorder. In my role, I

have to be aware of parental worries

and how they can affect parent-child

interactions.

When Journie was just a few

months old, I invited the Coordinator,

Stephanie, to attend the child-parent

socialization group to help me identify

more home visiting strategies. I asked

her to help me observe Tae’s and

Journie’s overall development and

specifically to focus on the baby’s motor

development. Stephanie evaluated me

by observing the first seven items on

the CQI form. We sat together after

the playgroup and reviewed the interactions I had with the family and she

gave me feedback on the items.

Stephanie pointed out that I listened

carefully to May while she discussed

Journie’s motor movements during the

playgroup. She also noted that I talked

to May about the next developmental

stages she should expect to see now

that Journie is rolling over. Stephanie

made me aware that I had pointed out

to May that she had read Journie’s cues

correctly when the baby wanted to be

picked up. Based on her CQI observation, Stephanie praised me for all the

positive feedback I gave May. One area

that I needed to improve on was asking

more open-ended questions to find out

from May what kind of progress and

accomplishments Journie had shown

during the past week. I found this suggestion very helpful and a reminder of

how to improve my future interactions

with May.

Stephanie also recommended

additional ways I could support the family during our weekly visits. She pointed

out that children like to be in different

positions. The parents might try having

Journie bear some weight on her legs

and supporting her in a sitting position.

Also, she talked about dangling a toy and

moving it to the side to really encourage

Journie to explore and move in that

direction. We talked about how these

activities could be incorporated into the

family’s routines, maybe during bathing,

mealtimes or diapering. Using the CQI

observation form to guide our discussion is non-threatening and useful; the

items are specific and Stephanie finds a

number of behavioral examples to back

up her comments.

In Project Eagle, we use the

Parents as Teachers curriculum and supplemental resources to individualize

lesson plans for each family. It is up to

me to understand developmentally

appropriate practice and adapt the curriculum if needed.The Coordinator has

helped me look at child-initiated play

and the routines of the family to work

out a program that promotes a “goodness of fit” between the parents and

the child. The parents, in this case, like

activities where they interact in active,

hands-on ways.Though May likes to do

things, her baby is more passive. We

have tried to show how important it is

to let Journie struggle just a little to

build new skills. Journie’s parents read

her cues well and do not let her struggle too long.

It is also imperative that the

Coordinator looks at the

Advocate/parent “goodness of fit”

when developing an appropriate plan

for the family. Stephanie has encouraged me to let May’s family “struggle”

with new skills and give them time to

explore new ideas. She has helped me

to look for the family’s cues indicating

they have reached their limit and, in

response, reduce or change activities.

During one visit, she showed me how

to address a family’s concern by listening, offering suggestions, and providing

immediate feedback. She has also

shown me that flexibility during a visit is

sometimes more important than following a specific plan.

The Coordinator is invaluable for

helping me rethink the situation and

think “outside the box.” This process of

learning results in changes in my ways

of interacting during home visits and

sharing information with the family.As I

work closely with the Coordinator, my

skills are enhanced so that I am able to

provide family-centered, culturally sensitive, and individualized lessons for the

child and family. When assessment is

not a scary experience, but an opportunity for me to grow and learn, I benefit—and so do the families.

Stephanie Hudson is the Early Childhood/

Disabilities Services Coordinator for Project

Eagle.T: 913-281-2648;

E: shudson@kumc.edu.

Mary Sinur is a Family Services Advocate

with Project Eagle. T: 913-281-2648;

E: MSINUR@kumc.edu.
32 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

ECE Home Visit—

Continuous Quality Improvement Checklist 

Date: ________________ Advocate: _________________________

________ Advocate is able to listen carefully to parents/primary caregivers (PCG) needs in the area of child development and parent-child relationships.

________ Advocate asks “open-ended” questions that are helpful in gaining more information about the parentchild relationship or about the child’s development.

________ Advocate uses “instructive feedback” (i.e.,Advocate responds to something specific that she/he observes

while the parent-child are interacting) which points out why the parent/PCG’s behavior is important to

their child’s development.

________ Advocate uses “positive feedback” (i.e., positive, specific & contingent on the parent’s/PCG’s appropriate

nurturing behavior with their child during the home visit) with the parent/PCG.

________ Advocate demonstrates knowledge of child development and is able to review and discuss developmental domains with parents/PCG’s.

________ Advocate is able to observe parent-child interactions, read infant/toddler and parent/s or PCG’s cues.

________ Advocate is able to guide, coach and model appropriate intervention strategies that support the parent/PCG’s interactions with their child and may be integrated into their daily routines.

________ Advocate is able to administer a screening and an assessment in a developmentally and culturally appropriate manner.

________ Advocate is able to review the ECE Recommended Practices/Outcomes with the parent/s or PCG and

write individualized family and child action plans with them.

________ Advocate describes which PAT lesson plan is being used and why with the parent/s or PCG.

________ Advocate clearly states the objectives of the activity/lesson.

________ Advocate presents the individualized lesson plan in a clear, concise and friendly manner.

________ Advocate asks the parent or PCG how the “follow-up” activity worked for them.

________ Advocate explains and reviews the focus of the next PAT lesson with the parent/s or PCG.

________ Advocate provides parent/PCG with options for a “follow-up” activity.

________ Advocate encourages parent/s or PCG to assess their child’s developmental progress and to complete

the observation and comment sections of the lesson plan.

Further comments/observations:

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________________ 

–Needs Improvement Adequate + Highly Successful

COORDINATOR of ECE ________________ ADVOCATE_______________

Source: Project Eagle/University of Kansas Medical Center, 2000
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 33

Gayle Cunningham is the

Executive Director of the

Jefferson County Committee

for Economic Opportunity (JCCEO)

located in Birmingham, Alabama, and

Director of the agency’s Head Start and

Early Head Start programs. There are

over 1300 children in 70 classrooms in

both urban and rural sites. From 1995

to 2000, the Head Start program

worked in partnership with the

Georgia State University (GSU)

Research Center on Head Start

Quality. GSU is one of four Quality

Research Centers funded to address

the influences on quality and the impact

of quality on children and families.They

have used a number of different instruments to assess quality, including observations in classrooms, parent surveys,

and staff interviews. The new Head

Start mandates require that programs

use information on child outcomes in

local self-assessment. Outcomes information from this research project has

been used for that purpose at JCCEO.

Gayle was interviewed for this Bulletin

and asked to describe what it has been

like to have Head Start participate in a

research project. She describes how

her program has used the research

findings to improve classroom practice

and Head Start services. For many programs, the notion of research is threatening to administrators, teachers, and

parents. But in the case of Gayle’s program, the collaboration has been very

successful and helpful to Head Start.

Gayle explains why.

Q:Why did you decide to join the

research project on quality in the

first place?

We’d had a successful research experience

before. Over ten years ago, our Head Start

program participated in the Transition

Project, funded by the

ACYF/HSB.At that time,my

interest in research was

very small; rather, I was

interested in continuing the

Head Start services from

kindergarten to grade 3,

which was part of the project. I thought evaluation

was just a necessary evil. I

came to appreciate the

value and methods that

Dr. Martha Abbott-Shim,

the primary investigator,

and the other researchers

used to work with the

Head Start staff, children,

and families. When that

research project ended,

there was a new research

Request for Proposals out

on Head Start quality.

Martha and I each read it

and immediately thought of another collaboration. She was awarded the grant at

Georgia State University and we partnered

with her.From the very beginning,I was clear

about my goals – to use the research findings to enhance staff development and our

own internal processes for improvement.

Q:What has the research involved

for your local program?

At various times during the program year,

evaluators came into the classrooms to collect data. They observed, using the

Assessment Profile for Early Childhood

Programs II, which is similar to NAEYC

accreditation criteria. They also interviewed

staff and parents.The research project paid

for a Research Coordinator on site. She was

responsible for hiring and training the

testers, collecting the data, and coordinating

between Georgia State and our program.

There was also a part-time researcher who

collected data from our parents.

Q:What are the key elements that

have made this research partnership so successful?

The on-site Research Coordinator helped

everything work smoothly. The research

project was not perceived as an extra burden by Head Start staff because she took

care of the research tasks. She made

friends with the staff and became part of

our Head Start family. Staff was willing to

cooperate because they trusted her. My

message to my staff and parents was that

we were privileged to participate in the

research undertaking because it also

would help us improve our program. We

have shared results with staff, so this has

been an open, aboveboard process.

Q:What have been the significant

research findings?

Our Quality Research Center has found

that Head Start teachers with more 

individualized teaching practices tend to

promote greater overall developmental

Participating in a Research Project: 

A Head Start Program’s Experience

An Interview with Gayle Cunningham

Guest Editor Judy David interviewed Gayle Cunningham for this article.
Screening & Assessment

34 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

gains, and higher cognitive and social functioning for children. Also, these teachers

reduce the effects of maternal depression

on children’s social behavior. An important

finding for us was that the educational level

of staff relates to their beliefs about children, their instructional activities, and, in

turn, the quality of the classroom. The

research also found that the teacher training we have offered positively affected

classroom practice.

Q: How did you share the findings

with the Head Start staff?

We discussed the research results at our

management meetings first, and then presented summary findings at training sessions with teachers and aides. We never

discussed the data on the individual classroom or cluster level (a grouping of several

classrooms). The management staff knew

the breakdown, but we did not want competition among the staff.We didn’t want to

reward or punish teaching staff for what

the research found in their classrooms.We

also shared the findings with the Policy

Council so that the governing group of parents and community representatives would

be well informed. Martha also came to several full staff meetings to talk in general

about the results. Our focus has been on

communicating what staff, teachers, and

parents need to know to make improvements in the delivery of services. Since

research findings are still coming out,this is a

continuous process for us.

Q: Have the research results

affected your program operation

and classroom practices?

Definitely.We have used the results to plan

staff development.The research has helped

identify the areas where we need to

improve. For example, when the children’s

data indicated that they were weak in

some early literacy skills, we strengthened

a variety of experiences in the classrooms.

Now we see many more instances where

teachers are inviting children to write,

teaching children rhymes, sending books

home with children, and creating print-rich

environments. Data also showed that parent literacy is closely linked to children’s literacy, so we started a number of initiatives,

including a reading program for fathers

and their children, and GED preparation.

When the findings indicated that the children were not doing well in math, we

beefed up that area of the curriculum by

adding new materials and training.We also

found that the better-educated teachers

did more individualizing in classrooms. So

we’ve encouraged,supported,and rewarded

staff taking more teacher training courses

at local colleges. Overall, the research findings have raised our expectations for

teachers and the kinds of curriculum experiences they plan for children.

Q: How do you think the Head Start

Outcomes will affect assessment in

your program?

In reality, all programs already collect data

because they do screenings and assessment. But they don’t necessarily use the

information effectively.That’s because there

have not been clear expectations about

what to do with the data. With the new

regs and Head Start Outcomes, there are

clear expectations.We have to review and

revise our assessment instruments to

ensure that we obtain the required information. Our program has just begun to

look at the Outcomes. We’ll see if the

domains and indicators plot back to our

instruments, and we’ll tailor them accordingly. Martha helped us develop our instruments and our teachers find them easy to

use. They are flexible and we can adjust

them. I believe they already measure most

of the Outcomes.

Q: What advice would you give other

Head Start programs that are considering whether to participate in a

research project?

Make friends with the researchers and

develop a comfort level with them. Find out

exactly what you’re getting into—how

often they’ll be visiting the classrooms, talking with parents, etc. Most important,

make sure the research findings will be

useful to your program. Research is a

shared activity; it should not take away

from your program, but add to it. As we

approach the new Head Start Outcomes,

program and evaluation folks need each

other even more. Program staff should call

on them for help with their instruments

and data collection and analysis, using their

expertise to improve the quality of services

to children and families.

Gayle Cunningham is the Executive Director

of the Jefferson County Committee for

Economic Opportunity.T: 205-290-9251; E:

gcjcceo@aol.com.
National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 35

In 1995, the Head Start Bureau funded four Quality Research

Centers (QRCs) to work in partnership with local Head

Start programs to define, assess, and verify the effectiveness

of high quality program practices in Head Start programs.

The four centers are—

• Georgia State University (Principal Investigator: Martha

Abbott-Shim);

• High/Scope Educational Research Foundation (Principal

Investigator: Lawrence Schweinhart);

• Frank Porter Graham Child Development Center,

University of North Carolina (Principal Investigators:

Donna Bryant, Ellen Peisner-Feinberg); and 

• Education Development Center for Children and Families,

with partners at Harvard University, Boston College, and

Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to

Children (Principal Investigator: David Dickinson).

A total of 16 Head Start programs were involved in the QRC

effort. Research studies included 1,306 children in 367 classrooms.This article summarizes the findings of all four QRC

projects.

What Did We Learn About Program

Quality?

QRC researchers assessed program quality by observing

classroom environment, curriculum activities, teaching

strategies, and staff interactions with children. Classroom

quality was defined as including the following elements—

• Learning environments that have a variety of materials that

are accessible to children and support diverse learning

experiences.

• Daily schedules that balance active and quiet activities,

small and large group experiences, and child-directed and

teacher-directed experiences.

• Developmentally appropriate curriculum that includes

alternative teaching strategies and opportunities for children to guide their own learning.

• Positive interactions initiated by teachers, responsiveness

towards children, and consistent behavior management.

• Individualizing efforts that use developmental assessments

and purposeful efforts to support language and literacy

development in children.

Key findings on classroom quality include—

• Close to one-half of the classrooms score in the “good”

range or above.

• Measures of ‘learning environment,’ ‘scheduling,’ ‘curriculum,’ and ‘individualizing’ improved over three years while

‘interacting’ remained stable.

• Head Start teachers are stronger in general early childhood education practices than they are in language, literacy, and curriculum practices.

How Is Program Quality Linked to Child

Outcomes?

Quality classrooms matter because of the relationship

between classroom quality and children’s cognitive, language,

and social skills development.

Cognitive and Language Development:

The QRCs assessed children by observation, direct assessment, and teacher ratings. Aspects of language development

that were measured included: receptive vocabulary, communication skills, phonemic awareness, literacy skills, and 

letter-word identification. Cognitive measures included: general developmental status, math and reasoning skills, and

school readiness.

Research findings related to cognitive and language development included—

• Children show growth over the Head Start year in language, math, and cognitive abilities.

• Child phonemic awareness and literacy skill scores

increase over the Head Start year.

• Spanish-speaking children increase more in receptive language

over the Head Start year than English-speaking children, but

remain below the levels of English-speaking children.

• Children in better quality classrooms score higher at the

end of the Head Start year than children in lower quality

classrooms.

• More individualized classroom practices are related to better cognitive development and fewer age-related differences.

• Better language and literacy support in the classroom is

related to greater literacy knowledge, phonemic awareness, and better math and reasoning skills.

Improving Quality in the Classroom: Observations and

Recommendations from the Head Start Quality Research Centers

Adapted from a presentation at the National Head Start Association Conference in Washington, D.C. on April 28, 2000.
36 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

• Closer teacher-child relationships are related to greater

phonemic awareness, higher developmental ratings, and

better language skills in children.

Social Development 

The QRCs measured five aspects of children’s social development: positive behavior, prosocial behavior, problem behavior, positive initiative, and children’s attitude/perception

about Head Start and feelings about their competence.These

aspects were measured via direct observations, teacher ratings, parent reports and child self-reports.

Research findings related to social development in quality

classrooms include—

• An increase in children’s attempts to organize interaction

with peers

• A decrease in children’s behaviors to accommodate others

because they are better able to plan their interactions and

have less conflict as a result

• An increase in children’s task completion rates

• An improvement in children’s social skills

• Even after controlling for age, gender, and language, classroom quality still makes a difference for Head Start children as follows—

• Fewer problem behaviors and more positive behaviors

among children outside the Head Start classroom

• More pro-social behavior among children

• Less “purely social” play among children that is not goaloriented 

• Developmentally appropriate curriculum is 

related to—

• More positive initiative and fewer problem behaviors 

among children

• More positive attitudes about Head Start and self 

• Close positive teacher-child relationships are 

related to— 

• Fewer problem behaviors 

• Positive attitudes and perceptions about Head Start and

self 

Conclusions

In summary, we have learned the following about classroom

quality—

• Head Start classroom quality makes a difference in children’s growth and development and readiness for 

kindergarten.

• Children in higher quality classrooms are doing better at the

end of the Head Start year in cognitive, language, and social

skills.

• Different aspects of classroom quality, namely, teacherchild relationships, global classroom practices, and specific

classroom practices are related to different areas of child

development.

• Quality improvement efforts need to consider both classroom practices and teacher-child interactions as well as

provide training in implementing a variety of specific teaching practices.

• There is a need for special emphasis on developing language and emergent literacy skills because observational

evidence indicates that classroom practices related to

developing language and literacy skills are weaker than

other early childhood education classroom practices.

We have also learned that quality is affected by a number of

attributes, including—

• There is an indirect influence of teachers’ formal education

on classroom quality through teachers’ beliefs.

• Experience in teaching in Head Start programs is not in

itself sufficient to guarantee high classroom quality.

• Teachers who have more developmentally appropriate

beliefs and practices tend to have higher quality classrooms and higher quality interactions with children.

• Teachers of high quality classrooms tend to hold more

positive views of children’s parents.

• Classrooms with higher quality adult-child and other interactions tend to have fewer children per class and fewer

children per adult.

• Several factors are related to teacher job satisfaction,

which in turn influences program quality.These include the

perception among teachers that policies are clear, that

administrators are supportive, that communication with

administrators is possible, and that well-qualified teachers/aides are hired.

• Staff turnover also is related to job satisfaction. Features of

the job that are related to lower turnover are feelings that

the center is a collegial, innovative environment and that

one's supervisor is supportive.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 37

The Rhode Island Child Outcomes

(RICO) Project is a new statewide initiative,created in 1999,to define and assess

outcomes across children’s programs.

The initiative involves collaboration

among teachers and administrators in

Head Start, the Department of

Education, the Department of Human

Services, the Head Start Quality

Improvement Center,and RI Kids Count.

Efforts to date have moved the groups

closer together to develop a shared

vocabulary and a general agreement on

important areas of development for

Rhode Island’s children.

The three key functions of the project

are—

• Assisting local programs in developing

a common set of practical, relevant

outcomes that can be used to

determine the impact of classroom

practices on Head Start children.

• Drawing on the knowledge of teachers

to identify indicators of learning and

achievement as children exit Head

Start and enter school prepared to

learn.

• Using data on child outcomes to guide

efforts to improve teaching practices

and to target plans for staff development

The RICO Project predates the development of the Head Start Child Outcome

Framework but the efforts overlap the

intent of the Head Start Bureau to

develop a picture of child competency.

Developing Outcomes:Three

Phases

Over a four month period, from April –

June 2000, the Project evolved in three

phases:

Phase 1: Defining Developmental

Domains and Child Outcomes 

Phase 2: Gathering Data as Examples

of Indicators 

Phase 3: Pilot Study of RICO

Outcomes

Phase 1: Defining

Developmental Domains

and Outcomes

The project began in April 2000.At the

first meeting a group of Head Start

teachers and Education Coordinators

reviewed a preliminary list of assessment items extracted from the Head

Start Performance Measures and from

a survey of assessment instruments

used in Rhode Island programs. After

analyzing the assessment items, the

group agreed on four general domains

for outcomes: Literacy and Language

Skills, Cognitive and Numeracy

Development, Attitudes toward Learning,

and Social and Emotional Well-being, along

with a set of subcategories within each

domain. The process of synthesizing

developmental domains and subcategories from formal, validated assessment tools ensured that the RICO

inventory was consistent with established knowledge and practice in the

field. The preliminary list of RICO

domains and subcategories was then

compared to the child assessment

measures used by local programs and

found to be compatible.

The participants were asked to translate the RICO domains and subcategories into a form that would be useful

in a Head Start program. They defined

each general domain and subcategory

in terms of specific outcomes and indicators evident in a Head Start classroom. For example, in discussing the

domain of Attitudes toward Learning, the

indicator ‘Initiative’ was described as,

“The child plans for and makes choices

about learning.” The indicator,

‘Investigates’, under Cognitive and

Numeracy Development, was further

defined as, “The child explores, investigates, asks questions and makes predictions about the surrounding environment.” The collaborative process

involved in crafting the RICO definitions required participants to articulate

the competencies they considered

essential in the development of young

children and their school readiness.

Phase 2: Gathering Data as

Examples of Indicators 

The group left the first meeting with

the task of working with teachers in

their programs to collect classroom

observations illustrating how a child

might demonstrate competence

according to the RICO indicators.

Teachers from seven rural and urban

Head Start agencies gathered examples

of child activity, along with information

about the elements of teaching that

contributed to the child’s behavior.Each

teacher noted how the classroom environment, the activities taking place, or

specific interactions with the child may

have affected the child’s behavior. This

phase tied the process of developing

outcomes to teachers’ observations

and reflections.

Once observations were collected

across programs, the teachers and

Education Coordinators analyzed the

data at a second statewide meeting.

They matched behavior episodes to

indicators. For example, behavior that

related to the Cognitive and Numeracy

Development subcategory ‘Investigates’

included: types of questions children

ask, how children explore measurement at the sandbox, and categorizing

collections of materials from a nature

walk. The subcategory ‘Initiative’ was

exemplified by: how children negotiate 

Getting Inside Outcomes

By Barbara B. Rosenquest
Screening & Assessment

38 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

the choice board, assume roles in the

housekeeping area, and direct stories at

a puppet show.

Because the observation data were collected by teachers, the examples were

immediately familiar, useful, and specific

to the experience of Head Start classrooms. When similar observations

related to one indicator were collected

from different programs, the overall

understanding of the indicator was

reinforced. In other instances, the contribution of unique examples of child

activity led to a deeper, more broadly

defined indicator.

Phase 3: Pilot Study of

RICO Outcomes

At the third and final statewide meeting,

project participants met to devise ways

to pilot the RICO.They suggested integrating the RICO instrument into the

local assessment tools as a first step. As

a result, programs will be able to identify specific RICO domains and indicators

that are exceptionally challenging for

teachers to observe and conceptualize.

Then statewide or local program training can address these needs.

It was also decided that pilot studies

will map the RICO domains and indicators onto the eight Domains and related Elements of Domains of the Head

Start Child Outcomes Framework.

Once data on children are collected

using the RICO, it will be possible to

determine other training needs related

to program improvement.

Benefits of the RICO

Approach to Defining

Outcomes

The impact of the RICO Project was

immediate. After the first meeting, participants were surprised to realize that

everyone approaches assessment from

different perspectives. As a result, several made changes in their program’s

child assessment instrument to address

gaps identified from a comparison of

their system with the expanded list of

RICO outcomes and indicators. Other

participants realized that some assessment items on their program’s instruments were too broad to assess effectively.They drew upon the list of RICO

indicators to further define and narrow

those items.

The process of developing outcomes

also became an informal needs assessment related to teacher training.

Several participants acknowledged that

requiring the teachers to reflect upon

their teaching had helped staff realize

that many small decisions are made

each day to support children’s learning.

Some teachers were able to gather rich

observations and to make the connection between their teaching strategies,

the child activity they observed, and the

RICO indicator. Other teachers recognized that they needed assistance in

collecting observations or in articulating the impact of their decisions on

child development and learning.

Involvement of Head Start teachers,

administrators, state personnel, and

researchers and consultants in the

RICO Project created a multilayered

applied research project. At each level,

participants worked alongside each

other to clarify their understanding of

developmental theory, articulate their

priorities for how children learn and

develop, and analyze the teaching

required to realize outcomes.This was

a positive learning experience for all.

Including data from observations of

Head Start children considered “typically

developing” ensured that the process of

determining outcomes was grounded in

and enhanced by teachers’ knowledge.

Teachers became part of the process of

identifying significant child outcomes

rather than acting simply as agents of

assessment.

Conclusion

In sum, the RICO Project represented a

collaborative team approach to understanding outcomes that extended from

the state level into the classroom. The

process will surely lead to improvements in program outcomes and child

progress. At the conclusion of the

RICO pilot studies, Head Start programs will decide whether to use the

RICO as the assessment tool with the

Head Start Child Outcomes.

Barbara B. Rosenquest is an Assistant

Professor of Education at Wheelock College.

T: 617-879-2158; E: brosenquest@wheelock.edu.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 39

Introduction

Three years ago the Ohio legislature mandated that all statefunded Head Start programs measure the progress of the

children they serve using a common assessment instrument.

The responsibility for designing the measurement system fell

to the Office of Early Childhood in the Ohio Department of

Education.

In Ohio, we are serving over 80 percent of the children who

qualify for Head Start services. We are able to serve this

many children due to gubernatorial and legislative support to

expand state Head Start funding from less than $14 million

per year in 1990 to over $100 million this year. Along with

this funding came an underlying concern about accountability.

Legislators began asking: How well are the children doing in

the programs we fund? Did Head Start give children a head

start? Did the children enter kindergarten better off than

they would have been if they had not been enrolled? For a

long time, we avoided addressing the “results” questions.We

should have listened more carefully and reacted more quickly than we did. In 1996, one of the research arms of the Ohio

State Legislature conducted a study that found little positive

evidence of the impact of Head Start on children’s literacy

and social competency skills.We had very little information

to refute the findings.

The handwriting was on the wall.We had to put a system in

place that would provide the data to demonstrate the impact

of Head Start on children.At the same time, we determined

that we were also going to include our public preschool programs and preschool special education services in our outcomes system.This meant that, eventually, we would be collecting data for approximately 80,000 children in over five

hundred local programs.

The system we developed is based on the Measurement and

Planning System (MAPS) child assessment section of the

Galileo software application. Teachers collect observational

data on children's work in the areas of language and literacy,

early math, social development, self help, and nature and science and enter the information into a computer. Data are

collected at the beginning of the year to document skills the

children have at entry.Teachers update the information as the

year progresses and then enter data at the end of the year.

This system gives teachers, parents, administrators, and legislators a comprehensive picture of the progress children are

making over time in their early childhood program.

The purpose of this article is to describe the five key steps

we took in Ohio to set up this assessment system.We believe

our experience can help local Head Start grantees as they

plan for and implement requirements from the Head Start

Bureau to gather, analyze, and use information on child outcomes in new ways.

Five Steps to Assessing Child Outcomes

By Mary Lou Rush, Dawn Denno, Edith Greer, and Ann Gradisher

Step 1 — Getting the Help You Need

It would be a big mistake to enter into the task of starting an

outcomes measurement system thinking that you have all of

the answers.Asking for help maximizes the potential for positive consequences and minimizes the potential for negative

consequences. So, deciding who to ask, how to ask, and what

to ask is an important part of this process.

Some of the best help we got was by reading books and articles on assessment.A key message from our reading was to

be clear on the purposes for assessment and to be sure the

system serves those purposes.Thus, before we did anything

else, we decided our two central purposes were to report on

the overall levels of progress of children in Head Start in

Ohio, and to provide assessment information that would be

useful to teachers.That is, we wanted our new statewide system to reinforce what good teachers were already doing on

a daily basis—observing and assessing children’s progress to

help make instructional decisions. Finding out what a child

knows and is able to do helps teachers plan new experiences

to advance learning. We wanted the assessment to fit into

these daily routines, to provide a common approach to documenting progress of children, and to assist teachers in promoting progress.

A second major source of help in our planning was to draw

on several stakeholder groups to help design our system.We

convened a series of discussion sessions with groups including
Screening & Assessment

40 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

legislators, advocates,

program directors, staff,

parents, and state

department staff—particularly those with

expertise in assessment

and information technology. Each group was

asked the same question, “What outcomes

do you expect from a

quality early childhood

program?”

Next, we held a synthesis meeting with representatives from each

group of stakeholders

to get a consensus on

the final child outcomes

and to begin developing

a continuous improvement system for measuring and using outcome data.The synthesis meeting was scheduled for two days, but into the second day, we were still not agreeing on much.We were sensing resistance or reluctance from some Head Start staff

members. Finally, one Head Start Director, Mary Hodge from

Toledo, stood up, faced the group, and asked,“Why is this so

difficult? We are talking about our bragging rights! Our early

childhood programs work and we are deciding which of

these outcomes we want to brag about! These are indicators

of our successes!” Thus, the project was and will forever be

called the Indicators of Success Project (although our personal preference was to call it the Early Childhood Bragging

Rights Project!)

In addition to reviewing literature on assessment and conducting our public engagement strategy,we also sought as much

technical assistance as we could find. For instance, we attended

a meeting hosted by the National Early Childhood Technical

Assistance System with other states that were wrestling with

early childhood program outcome measures. This meeting

helped us in conceptualizing an outcomes-based continuous

improvement system for programs in our state.

Our advice is to get help from the beginning of your planning

and decision-making process. We learned valuable things

from reading, widespread involvement of stakeholder groups,

and technical assistance services. The people and resources

you identify may be different from those we used. Starting

with the purposes of your child outcomes effort,we urge you

to seek out help from experts and involve the people who

will implement and use your child assessment system.

Step 2 — Selecting an Assessment

Instrument

Once we had agreement on the purposes of our assessment

initiative and the content areas of child outcomes, we began to

work on selecting an assessment instrument for programs to

use on a statewide basis. We worked with our stakeholder

groups and experts to develop a set of criteria for choosing an

assessment instrument.The full set of criteria looked like this—

Purpose of Assessment

• Provide information to stakeholders about expectations 

• Be useful to teachers for planning instruction

• Be useful to administrators for improving programs 

• Identify children who may require special interventions

• Track child progress toward fourth grade curricula outcomes

• Provide information for program accountability

Early Childhood Values

• Collect data by observing children in a natural setting

• Used with children from birth to age eight – all ability levels

• Categorize observations in content areas and developmental

domains

Technical Requirements

• Provide data on individual children that can be aggregated

at the classroom, program, and state levels

• Provide descriptive statistics and gain scores

• Available in computerized and paper formats

• Compatible with the State of Ohio Education Management

Information System

After an extensive review, we found the MAPS section 

of the Galileo software application most appropriate, given

our criteria.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 41

Many local Head Start agencies are currently reviewing their

assessment instrument and evaluating other options, based

on the new Head Start Child Outcomes Framework.As you

look around to decide how to measure outcomes, we recommend developing a set of criteria, based on input from

staff and other knowledgeable people, to guide your decisionmaking.

Step 3 – Aligning Curriculum and

Assessment for Continuous Improvement

Once we had selected the MAPS assessment system, we

turned our attention to connecting the assessment effort

with curriculum in local Head Start and preschool programs.

We began by “Ohio-izing” the MAPS assessment scales so

that they directly measure the Ohio Department of

Education's goals and expectations for preschool curricula.

Then staff members from the Office of Early Childhood

Education traveled around the state working with programs

to align their curricula with the expectations.

Local programs worked to compare their curricula with the

MAPS assessment framework. They reviewed their formal

packaged curricula, and, in a number of programs, also convened work groups to analyze teachers’ actual lesson plans

to determine whether what goes on in the classrooms

reflects the comprehensive scope of the outcomes they are

hoping to achieve. Essentially, they are asking, “Are we providing the learning experiences to help our children reach

the outcomes set forth for Head Start programs in Ohio?” 

Two issues surfaced. First, some curricula did not adequately

address all of the areas of child outcomes included in the

MAPS assessment framework. Mathematics learning was the

area most commonly found to be inadequately addressed in

local curricula.The second issue was the reverse – some curricula addressed outcomes that were not measured by the

Ohio outcomes system. For example, one of our programs,

Miami Valley Child Development Centers, has made a significant investment to implement the High Scope curriculum.

Education staff carefully compared the High Scope curriculum with the outcomes measured in the MAPS assessment

system.They found that the outcomes in science measured

by the MAPS tool were more comprehensive than those in

the High Scope curriculum. However, in the art, music and

movement content areas, they found that the outcomes in

the High Scope system were more comprehensive. (Art,

music, and movement are not content areas for which the

State of Ohio requires outcome measures.) Miami Valley

decided to collect data required by the state of Ohio and

information about the areas of art, music, and movement that

they believe are important goals for children in their

community.

Spending time to analyze information on child outcomes is

worthwhile if it helps programs answer key questions like,

“How are our children doing?” “Is what we are doing working?”

and “How can we be even more effective in preparing children

for school?” Making sure your curriculum and assessment systems are lined up with a common set of goals for children is

crucial to answering these questions in useful ways.Then you

can use information on children's progress to plan for continuous program improvement. It is also important to be sure that

your curricula reflect the values and priorities of your staff,program managers, families, and community.

Step 4— Testing Your System

We knew that we had a lot to learn about how this assessment system would work for all of our programs.We decided to field test the system to be sure we were getting what

we needed and that the system was not overly burdensome

on our programs. Fifteen Head Start programs, three public

school preschool and three preschool special education programs volunteered to participate in the field test.

The field test allowed us to try out approaches with a manageable number of motivated programs.They were our practice group for funding, technical assistance, training, implementation, and reporting.We convened another broad-based

advisory committee of forty stakeholders to meet quarterly

to receive updates and advise us on the policies and procedures.To evaluate our field test, we conducted focus groups,

interviews, and surveys of teachers, education administrators, directors and parents. Results indicated that the teachers and administrators were satisfied with the system.They

believed the system was useable, the items on the scales

were meaningful and the system provided useful reports.

Parents of children also said that the reports were useful and

understandable.
Screening & Assessment

42 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

We found some areas that needed improvement—

• Teachers and assistant teachers reported that they needed

more training.

• Teachers found that it was difficult to document progress

using this system for children with very involved disabilities. For example, teachers of children diagnosed with

autistic spectrum disorder complained that their children

would not be likely to show any improvement on the language scale assessment items in an entire year.

• Teachers reported that they were concerned about the

amount of time they spent on assessment.Teachers reported

spending an average of 2.5 hours per week on assessment,

although the amount of time decreased as they became

familiar with the system.

To address the areas of need, revisions have been made in the

frequency and type of training offered. In addition, a committee to support children with complex disabilities came

together to design a system which will provide teachers with

more finely differentiated information about the progress of

their children.

We believe it is valuable for local agencies to test changes in

ongoing child assessment and procedures for analyzing

information on children's progress and accomplishments.

Implementing new efforts in a limited set of classrooms and

centers can uncover problems and help fine-tune your

system, and contribute to more successful implementation.

Step 5 — Ongoing Implementation and

Problem Solving

This year, approximately 30,000 children are being assessed

in the Indicators of Success Project. We have learned a lot

over the last three years.We are continuing to work hard to

build a system that will work for teachers and children during this period of rapid expansion and implementation. Our

priorities focus on training, equipment, and continuing to

communicate. We need to be sure that staff have the computers and training they need to use the system. To keep

communication open, we set up committees on curriculum,

the MAPS assessment scale, supporting children with complex disabilities, training, and technology.

One simple lesson we learned from implementing this project is that data on child outcomes at the beginning of each

year are the most important and useful information to guide

program improvement efforts.These data can help programs

make better decisions in allocating resources, staff development, and technical assistance to improve the progress of

children.

Another important lesson we learned is that when a system

begins to hold programs accountable,teachers feel pressure to

reach the specified outcomes. One program director reported that she observed her teachers walking around the room

with clipboards documenting what was going on rather than

facilitating learning. Another director told us that teachers

were using “drill and kill” teaching strategies because they felt

pressure to prepare children for state assessment efforts.We

have communicated with teachers around the state, helping

them understand that good instruction will be the deciding
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 43

factor in improving child outcomes – not good paperwork.

To clarify our support for developmentally appropriate practices, we created a User’s Manual with many, many examples

of how to observe and foster progress on outcomes in a

developmentally appropriate way.

Conclusion

The implementation of the Ohio child outcomes assessment

system has depended on relationships.Thousands of individuals have walked these five steps with us.We have continued

to develop close partnerships that hold us responsible for

the goals we all have for children.We have gained consensus

on what outcomes to assess and how to measure them.And

we have begun to be better able to communicate the very

real impact our programs have on the lives of children and

families.

When will our indicators begin to indicate success? Our hard

work to document progress is already paying off. One large

urban district has been able to document significant progress

on some meaningful indicators. In the fall, they reported that

24 percent of their Head Start children could name ten or

fewer letters. In the spring, 62 percent were documented as

having done so. In the fall, 8 percent of their children could

name eleven or more letters; in the spring, 40 percent could.

In the fall,one percent of the children could write using some

complete words; by the spring, 15 percent could do so.

Probably the comment that makes us the most proud came

from a parent working on a committee to adapt our system

to fit children with complex disabilities. She said that she

believed that what we are doing in this area is very important because the system is strengths-focused. Her son has a

significant brain injury and during the development of his

Individual Education Plan, the school psychologist had written “Not applicable” in the section used to list a child’s

strengths. She said,“You are giving them something to write

in that section.” 

We are far from finished with the design of this system. In

fact, we do not intend to reach a point of completion.As we

use data on children's progress to guide further improvements in programs and classrooms, we will continue to strive

towards higher and more meaningful goals.

Mary Lou Rush is the Interim Director at the Ohio Department of

Education, Office of Early Childhood.T: 614-466-0224;

E: marylou.rush@ode.state.oh.us.

Dawn Denno is a consultant for the Ohio Department of

Education, Office of Early Childhood.T; 513-874-1771;

E: ece_denno@ode.state.oh.us.

Edith Greer is an Assistant Director at the Ohio Department of

Education, Office of Early Childhood.T: 330-364-5567;

E: ece_greer@ode.state.oh.us.

Ann Gradisher is an Assistant Director at the Ohio Department of

Education, Office of Early Childhood.T: 330-220-6410;

E: ece_gradisher@ode.state.oh.us.
Screening & Assessment

44 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework

This Framework (see pp 45-

50) is intended to guide Head

Start programs in their ongoing assessment of the progress and

accomplishments of children and in

efforts to analyze and use data on child

outcomes in program self-assessment

and continuous improvement. The

Framework is composed of 8 general

Domains, 27 Domain Elements, and

100 examples of more specific

Indicators of children's skills, abilities,

knowledge, and behaviors. The

Framework is based on the Head Start

Performance Standards, Head Start

Performance Measures, provisions of

the Head Start Act as amended in

1998, advice of the Head Start Bureau

Technical Work Group on Child

Outcomes, and a review of documents

on assessment of young children and

early childhood program accountability

from a variety of state agencies and

professional organizations.

• The Domains, Elements and

Indicators are presented as a

framework of building blocks that

are important for school success.

The Framework is not an exhaustive list of everything a child should

know or be able to do by the end

of preschool. The Framework is

intended to guide assessment of

three- to five-year-old children—

not infants, toddlers, and pregnant

women enrolled in Early Head

Start or Migrant Head Start programs.

• The Framework should guide agencies in selecting, developing, or

adapting an instrument or set of

tools for ongoing assessment of

children’s progress. It is not intended to be used directly as a checklist

for assessing children.

• Every Head Start program should

have a well-balanced child assessment system, aligned with their

curriculum, that gathers data on

children's progress in each of the

eight Domains of learning and

development. In addition, because

they are legislatively mandated, programs must gather and analyze data

on four specific Domain Elements and

nine Indicators in various language, literacy, and numeracy skills, as indicated in bold type in the following chart.

• Information on children's progress

on the Domains, Domain Elements,

and Indicators can be obtained

from multiple sources, such as

teacher observations, analysis of

samples of children’s work and performance, parent reports, or direct

assessment of children. Head Start

assessment practices should reflect

the assumption that children

demonstrate progress over time in

development and learning on a

developmental continuum, in forms

such as increasing frequency of a

behavior or ability; increasing

breadth or depth of knowledge and

understanding; or increasing proficiency or independence in exercising a skill or ability.
National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 45 1. LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

DOMAIN DOMAIN ELEMENTS INDICATORS

■ Demonstrates increasing ability to attend to and understand

conversations, stories, songs, and poems.

■ Shows progress in understanding and following simple and

multiple-step directions.

■ Understands an increasingly complex and varied vocabulary.

■ For non-English-speaking children, progresses in listening

to and understanding English.

Speaking 

and 

Communicating

■ Develops increasing abilities to understand and use

language to communicate information, experiences,

ideas, feelings, opinions, needs, questions and for other

varied purposes.

■ Progresses in abilities to initiate and respond appropriately in

conversation and discussions with peers and adults.

■ Uses an increasingly complex and varied spoken

vocabulary.

■ Progresses in clarity of pronunciation and towards speaking in

sentences of increasing length and grammatical complexity.

■ For non-English-speaking children, progresses in speaking

English.

2. LITERACY

Phonological Awareness

■ Shows increasing ability to discriminate and identify sounds in

spoken language.

■ Shows growing awareness of beginning and ending sounds of

words.

■ Progresses in recognizing matching sounds and rhymes in familiar

words, games, songs, stories and poems.

■ Shows growing ability to hear and discriminate separate syllables in

words.

■ Associates sounds with written words, such as awareness that

different words begin with the same sound.

Book Knowledge 

and Appreciation

■ Shows growing interest and involvement in listening to and

discussing a variety of fiction and non-fiction books and poetry.

■ Shows growing interest in reading-related activities, such as asking

to have a favorite book read; choosing to look at books; drawing

pictures based on stories; asking to take books home; going to the

library; and engaging in pretend-reading with other children.

■ Demonstrates progress in abilities to retell and dictate stories from

books and experiences; to act out stories in dramatic play; and to

predict what will happen next in a story.

■ Progresses in learning how to handle and care for books; knowing

to view one page at a time in sequence from front to back; and

understanding that a book has a title, author and illustrator.

Print Awareness 

and Concepts

■ Shows increasing awareness of print in classroom, home and

community settings.

■ Develops growing understanding of the different functions of forms

of print such as signs, letters, newspapers, lists, messages, and

menus.

Listening 

and 

Understanding

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework
DOMAIN DOMAIN ELEMENTS INDICATORS

46 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Early Writing

2. LITERACY (continued)

■ Develops understanding that writing is a way of communicating for

a variety of purposes.

■ Begins to represent stories and experiences through pictures,

dictation, and in play.

■ Experiments with a growing variety of writing tools and materials,

such as pencils, crayons, and computers.

■ Progresses from using scribbles, shapes, or pictures to represent

ideas, to using letter-like symbols, to copying or writing familiar

words such as their own name.

3. MATHEMATICS

Numbers and Operations

■ Demonstrates increasing interest in and awareness of numbers and

counting as a means for solving problems and determining

quantity.

■ Begins to associate number concepts, vocabulary, quantities and

written numerals in meaningful ways.

■ Develops increasing ability to count in sequence to 10 and beyond.

■ Begins to make use of one-to-one correspondence in counting

objects and matching groups of objects.

■ Begins to use language to compare numbers of objects with terms

such as more, less, greater than, fewer, equal to.

■ Develops increased abilities to combine, separate and name "how

many" concrete objects.

Alphabet Knowledge

■ Shows progress in associating the names of letters with their

shapes and sounds.

■ Increases in ability to notice the beginning letters in familiar words.

■ Identifies at least 10 letters of the alphabet, especially

those in their own name.

■ Knows that letters of the alphabet are a special category

of visual graphics that can be individually named.

Geometry and 

Spatial Sense

■ Begins to recognize, describe, compare and name common shapes,

their parts and attributes.

■ Progresses in ability to put together and take apart shapes.

■ Begins to be able to determine whether or not two shapes are the

same size and shape.

Print Awareness 

and Concepts (cont.)

■ Demonstrates increasing awareness of concepts of print, such as

that reading in English moves from top to bottom and from left to

right, that speech can be written down, and that print conveys a

message.

■ Shows progress in recognizing the association between spoken and

written words by following print as it is read aloud.

■ Recognizes a word as a unit of print, or awareness that letters

are grouped to form words, and that words are separated by spaces.

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework
National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 47 4. SCIENCE

■ Begins to use senses and a variety of tools and simple measuring

devices to gather information, investigate materials and observe

processes and relationships.

■ Develops increased ability to observe and discuss common properties, differences and comparisons among objects and materials.

■ Begins to participate in simple investigations to test observations,

discuss and draw conclusions and form generalizations.

■ Develops growing abilities to collect, describe and record information through a variety of means, including discussion, drawings,

maps and charts.

■ Begins to describe and discuss predictions, explanations and generalizations based on past experiences.

Scientific Knowledge

■ Expands knowledge of and abilities to observe, describe and

discuss the natural world, materials, living things and natural

processes.

■ Expands knowledge of and respect for their body and the

environment.

■ Develops growing awareness of ideas and language related to

attributes of time and temperature.

■ Shows increased awareness and beginning understanding of

changes in materials and cause-effect relationships.

Music

■ Participates with increasing interest and enjoyment in a variety of

music activities, including listening, singing, finger plays, games, and

performances.

■ Experiments with a variety of musical instruments.

■ Enhances abilities to recognize, duplicate and extend simple patterns using a variety of materials.

■ Shows increasing abilities to match, sort, put in a series, and

regroup objects according to one or two attributes such as shape

or size.

■ Begins to make comparisons between several objects based on a

single attribute.

■ Shows progress in using standard and non-standard measures for

length and area of objects.

3. MATHEMATICS (continued)

Geometry and 

Spatial Sense (cont.)

■ Shows growth in matching, sorting, putting in a series and

regrouping objects according to one or two attributes such as

color, shape or size.

■ Builds an increasing understanding of directionality, order and positions of objects, and words such as up, down, over, under, top, bottom, inside, outside, in front and behind.

5. CREATIVE

ARTS

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework

Patterns and Measurement 

DOMAIN DOMAIN ELEMENTS INDICATORS

Scientific Skills 

and Methods
48 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin 5. CREATIVE ARTS

Art

■ Gains ability in using different art media and materials in a variety of

ways for creative expression and representation.

■ Progresses in abilities to create drawings, paintings, models, and

other art creations that are more detailed, creative or realistic.

■ Develops growing abilities to plan, work independently, and demonstrate care and persistence in a variety of art projects.

■ Begins to understand and share opinions about artistic products and

experiences.

Movement

■ Expresses through movement and dancing what is felt and heard in

various musical tempos and styles.

■ Shows growth in moving in time to different patterns of beat and

rhythm in music.

Dramatic Play

■ Participates in a variety of dramatic play activities that become more

extended and complex.

■ Shows growing creativity and imagination in using materials and in

assuming different roles in dramatic play situations.

6. SOCIAL & EMOTIONAL 

DEVELOPMENT

Self-Concept

■ Begins to develop and express awareness of self in terms of

specific abilities, characteristics and preferences.

■ Develops growing capacity for independence in a range of activities,

routines, and tasks.

■ Demonstrates growing confidence in a range of abilities and

expresses pride in accomplishments.

■ Shows progress in expressing feelings, needs and opinions in difficult

situations and conflicts without harming themselves, others, or

property.

■ Develops growing understanding of how their actions affect others

and begins to accept the consequences of their actions.

■ Demonstrates increasing capacity to follow rules and routines and

use materials purposefully, safely, and respectfully.

Cooperation

■ Increases abilities to sustain interactions with peers by helping, sharing and discussion.

■ Shows increasing abilities to use compromise and discussion in

working, playing and resolving conflicts with peers.

■ Develops increasing abilities to give and take in interactions, to take

turns in games or using materials, and to interact without being

overly submissive or directive.

Self-Control

DOMAIN DOMAIN ELEMENTS INDICATORS

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework
National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 49 6. SOCIAL & EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT 7.APPROACHES TO LEARNING

Social Relationships

■ Demonstrates increasing comfort in talking with and accepting

guidance and directions from a range of familiar adults.

■ Shows progress in developing friendships with peers.

■ Progresses in responding sympathetically to peers who are in need,

upset, hurt, or angry; and in expressing empathy or caring for others.

■ Develops ability to identify personal characteristics including gender, and family composition.

■ Progresses in understanding similarities and respecting differences

among people, such as genders, race, special needs, culture,

language, and family structures.

■ Develops growing awareness of jobs and what is required to

perform them.

■ Begins to express and understand concepts and language of geography in the contexts of their classroom, home and community.

■ Chooses to participate in an increasing variety of tasks and

activities.

■ Develops increased ability to make independent choices.

■ Approaches tasks and activities with increased flexibility, imagination

and inventiveness.

■ Grows in eagerness to learn about and discuss a growing range of

topics, ideas and tasks.

■ Grows in abilities to persist in and complete a variety of tasks,

activities, projects and experiences.

■ Demonstrates increasing ability to set goals and develop and follow through on plans.

■ Shows growing capacity to maintain concentration over time on a

task, question, set of directions or interactions, despite distractions

and interruptions.

Reasoning and 

Problem-Solving

■ Develops increasing ability to find more than one solution to a

question, task or problem.

■ Grows in recognizing and solving problems through active exploration, including trial and error, and interactions and discussions

with peers and adults.

■ Develops increasing abilities to classify, compare and contrast

objects, events and experiences.

Engagement and Persistence

Initiative and Curiosity

Knowledge of Families 

and Communities

DOMAIN DOMAIN ELEMENTS INDICATORS

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework
50 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin 8. PHYSICAL HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT

Fine Motor Skills

■ Develops growing strength, dexterity and control needed to use

tools such as scissors, paper punch, stapler, and hammer.

■ Grows in hand-eye coordination in building with blocks, putting

together puzzles, reproducing shapes and patterns, stringing beads

and using scissors.

■ Progresses in abilities to use writing, drawing and art tools

including pencils, markers, chalk, paint brushes, and various types of

technology.

Gross Motor Skills

■ Shows increasing levels of proficiency, control and balance in walking, climbing, running, jumping, hopping, skipping, marching and galloping.

■ Demonstrates increasing abilities to coordinate movements in

throwing, catching, kicking, bouncing balls, and using the slide and

swing.

Health Status and Practices

■ Progresses in physical growth, strength, stamina, and flexibility.

■ Participates actively in games, outdoor play and other forms of

exercise that enhance physical fitness.

■ Shows growing independence in hygiene, nutrition and personal

care when eating, dressing, washing hands, brushing teeth and

toileting.

■ Builds awareness and ability to follow basic health and safety rules

such as fire safety, traffic and pedestrian safety, and responding

appropriately to potentially harmful objects, substances and

activities.

DOMAIN DOMAIN ELEMENTS INDICATORS

Head Start Child Outcomes Framework

For more information on how to use the Outcomes Framework, see IM-00-18 on “Using Child Outcomes

in Program Self-Assessment,” August 10, 2000.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 51

More than 3,200 people gathered in

Washington, D.C., in December to participate in the National Head Start

Child Development Institute, which was

sponsored by the Head Start Bureau.

The Institute brought together education leaders from Head Start and Early

Head Start programs around the country to increase knowledge and leadership skills, and to support participants in

developing vision and action plans to

improve local program quality, management systems, and child outcomes.

Participants and planners alike are calling the Institute a tremendous success.

One participant said,

"This has been one of the

best learning experiences

on child development.

Thank you for bringing us

the best of the best in

the field...and making

them available to us later

in the evening for more

discussion. I couldn’t get

enough!" Another stated, "As a Head Start staff

member for 15+ years,

this is the best training

that I have ever experienced . . . ."

Program Highlights

Institute participants received advance

reading materials and assignments,

including a guided review of their own

local program services and quality in the

five priority themes of the Institute:

curriculum and assessment; social and

emotional development; mathematics

and science; language development;

and literacy.

During the Institute, participants heard

nationally recognized experts address

each of these themes. (See the chart on

pages 52–53 for an overview of the

Institute program and faculty.)

Participants then had the opportunity

to meet for small group discussion.

Affinity groups offered facilitated discussion among education leaders from different communities on interpreting and

implementing the ideas, research, and

effective practices offered in 

plenary presentations. Leadership Team

Planning sessions gave local teams the

opportunity to develop vision and

action plans for program improvement

using the Implementation Planner.

Dialogues with Experts sessions

enabled participants to meet with

Institute faculty for more in-depth discussion of the issues raised in their plenary presentations. Western Kentucky

University is awarding three units of

graduate or undergraduate credit for

work successfully completed.

The Implementation

Planner

The Implementation Planner was developed as a guide for participants to use

before, during, and after the Institute. Its

design reflects the Institute content and

structure, and includes the following

elements—

• The Head Start Child Outcomes

addressed in the plenary sessions

each day

• Some of the applicable Head Start

Program Performance Standards for

each session

The National Head Start Child Development Institute

Ensuring Quality and Accountability 

Through Leadership

By E. Dollie Wolverton

(continued on page 54)

Douglas Klafehn, Acting Associate

Commissioner, Head Start Bureau;

E. Dollie Wolverton, Chief, Education

Services Branch, Head Start Bureau;

and Tom Schultz, Director, Program

Support Division, Head Start Bureau.
52 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

The Institute is a week-long learning experience for

Head Start and Early Head Start managers with

oversight for child development, education, and

disabilities services through center-based, homebased, and family child care program options.

The Institute is grounded in the Head Start

Program Performance Standards and the Head Start

Child Outcomes Framework.

Institute participants received advance reading

materials and assignments, including a guided

review of local program services and quality in the

five priority themes of the Institute. An Institute

Implementation Planner guided participants in

developing a vision and action plans to improve

local program quality, management systems, and

child outcomes.

Saturday Sunday

CURRICULUM AND

ASSESSMENT

PLENARY SESSION

Welcome and Institute 

Overview

The Head Start Bureau 

“School Readiness and 

Our Children”

Barbara Bowman

Erikson Institute

“Curriculum, On-going Assessment and Child Outcomes”

Sue Bredekamp

The Council for Professional Recognition

BREAK – 10:30 a.m.

PANEL

“Curriculum: Birth to Five”

Diane Trister Dodge

The Creative Curriculum

Ann Epstein

The High/Scope Curriculum

Eileen Borgia

The Project Approach

LUNCH – 12:30 p.m.

PLENARY SESSION

“Screening and Child

Assessment”

Samuel J. Meisels

University of Michigan

BREAK – 3:30 p.m.

PANEL 

“Assessment: Birth to Five”

Jacqueline Jones

Graduate School of Education

Harvard University

Larry Schweinhart

High/Scope Educational 

Research Foundation

Edward de Avila

Linguametrics

DINNER BREAK – 5:30 p.m.

DIALOGUES WITH EXPERTS –

7:30 - 9:00 p.m.

An opportunity to meet today’s plenary presenters and to ask questions

Monday

REGISTRATION AT HILTON WASHINGTON

CONCOURSE

2:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.

REGISTRATION AT HILTON WASHINGTON

EXHIBIT HALL

10:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.

FACILITATORS’ MEETING 

HILTON WASHINGTON, LINCOLN ROOM

3:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

INSTITUTE GOALS

To increase the knowledge and leadership

skills of local program managers in: 

• Supporting child development and learning in the

domains of language development, literacy, mathematics, science, creative arts, social and emotional development, approaches to learning, and physical health

and development; 

• Supporting school readiness and positive child outcomes in Early Head Start and Head Start through

comprehensive child development services, age-appropriate, meaningful curriculum; child observation and

assessment; and family involvement and partnerships;

and

• Enhancing the quality, intentionality, and effectiveness of staff interactions with children and families.

9:00 a.m. 11:00 a.m. 4:00 p.m. 7:30 p.m. 2:00 p.m.

WELCOMING RECEPTION

HILTON WASHINGTON, INTERNATIONAL BALLROOM

6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 53

The National Head Start Child Development Institute

“Ensuring Quality and Accountability Through Leadership”

December 3-8, 2000 Washington, D.C.

MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE

PLENARY SESSION

VIDEO

“Discoveries of Infancy: Cognitive

Development and Learning”

Veronica Rodriguez

WestEd – Far West Lab

“Mathematics for 

Young Children”

Kathy Richardson

Mathematical Perspectives

Doug Clements

State University of New York at Buffalo

BREAK – 10:30 a.m.

“Science in the 

Early Childhood Years”

Carolyn Edwards

University of Nebraska

Karen Lind

University of Louisville

LUNCH – 12:30 p.m.

INTERACTIVE AFTERNOON

Performing Arts Stage

2:00 - 3:30

Hilton Washington 

International Ballroom

2:00 - 5:30

• Poster Sessions

• Resources

• Children’s Art Gallery

• Video Theaters

ICE CREAM BREAK – 3:30 p.m.

4:00 - 5:30

• Showcasing Practices in Head

Start and Early Head Start

• Dialogues with Experts

CLOSING – 5:30 p.m.

Open evening for exploring 

Washington, D.C.

SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL

DEVELOPMENT

PLENARY SESSION

“The Importance of Social and

Emotional Attachment”

Tammy Mann

Zero to Three – Early Head Start 

National Resource Center

Ron Lally

WestEd – Far West Lab

BREAK – 10:30 a.m.

“Establishing Environments 

in Which Children 

Can Succeed and Develop 

Positive Behaviors”

Mary Louise Hemmeter

University of Kentucky

Phil Strain

University of Colorado at Denver

LUNCH – 12:30 p.m.

SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS

Affinity Groups

Facilitated discussion among education

leaders from different communities on

interpreting and implementing the ideas,

research, and effective practices offered

in plenary presentations

BREAK – 3:30 p.m.

Leadership Team Planning

Work sessions for local teams of 

managers to develop a vision and action

plans for program improvement using the

Implementation Planner

DINNER BREAK – 5:30 p.m.

DIALOGUES WITH EXPERTS –

7:30 - 9:00 p.m.

An opportunity to meet today’s 

plenary presenters and to ask questions

LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT

PLENARY SESSION

PANEL

“Language Development, Including

English Language Learners”

Jerlean Daniel

University of Pittsburgh

Patton O. Tabors

Graduate School of Education

Harvard University

Kathy Escamilla

University of Colorado at Boulder

BREAK – 10:30 a.m.

PANEL

“Meeting the Needs of English

Language Learners and 

Preserving Native Languages”

Nila Rinehart

Central Council of Tlingit & Haida, Alaska

Graciela Italiano-Thomas

Centro de la Familia de Utah 

Maryann Cornish

Higher Horizons Head Start

LUNCH – 12:30 p.m.

SMALL GROUP DISCUSSIONS

Affinity Groups

Facilitated discussion among education leaders from different communities on interpreting and implementing

the ideas, research, and effective practices offered in plenary presentations

BREAK – 3:30 p.m.

Leadership Team Planning

Work sessions for local teams of managers to develop a vision and action

plans for program improvement using

the Implementation Planner

DINNER BREAK – 5:30 p.m.

DIALOGUES WITH EXPERTS –

7:30 - 9:00 p.m.

An opportunity to meet today’s and

tomorrow’s plenary presenters and to ask

questions

LITERACY

PLENARY SESSION

“Fostering Early Literacy in

Classrooms and Homes”

Dorothy Strickland

Rutgers University

Susan B. Neuman

Center for the Improvement of

Early Reading Achievement

University of Michigan

BREAK – 10:30 a.m.

“Approaches to Effective 

Family Literacy”

Sharon Darling

National Center for Family Literacy

Gerie Cruz

Former Head Start Parent

CLOSING LUNCHEON – 1:00 p.m.

KEYNOTE ADDRESS

AND RECOGNITION OF 

PARTICIPANTS

“Educational Leaders in 

Head Start and Early Head Start: 

A Privilege and Responsibility”

Maurice Sykes

Early Childhood Leadership Institute

University of the

District of Columbia

ADJOURN – 4:00 p.m.

Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

®
Screening & Assessment

54 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

• Examples of Head Start systems as

they affect the education leader’s role

• Space to record information on the

participant’s own program

• Sections for noting important points

from pre-Institute readings, plenary

presentations, and discussion sessions

• Space for developing ideas for

improving child development and

education services in the participant’s

own program

• Space to reflect on the question,

"What do I need to do as an education

leader to affect positive change?" 

• The Head Start Child Outcomes

Framework (See Framework 

on pages 45–50 of this Bulletin.)

The Implementation Planner was very

useful because it is linked to the Head

Start Program Performance Standards,

as well as to management and leadership roles. It focuses attention on ways

to improve current management systems in order to support more effective program services and positive child

outcomes. It also poses questions to

help leaders consider ways to improve

the child development and educational

aspects of their programs.

Next Steps

The Institute was a powerful learning

opportunity for the thousands of Head

Start managers who participated, and it

was a first step in the larger initiative to

enhance program quality and outcomes

for children. The next step is to carry

what was gained at the Institute into

local team planning efforts that engage

all Head Start and Early Head Start

staff, parents, and community partners.

To support this work, the Head Start

Bureau is developing a training strategy

that will support a continuous cycle of

local program improvement. This

includes promoting professional development; implementing an appropriate

curriculum; implementing programming

that supports optimal child outcomes;

maintaining accountability for child outcomes based on sound curriculum

implementation and appropriate child

assessment; establishing a common

understanding and commitment to

achieving new legislative mandates in

child and family literacy; and enhancing

the professional qualifications of staff —

associate and bachelor’s degrees in

early childhood education for teachers

of children ages birth to five years.

By the end of May 2001, multimedia educational materials based on the National

Head Start Child Development Institute

will be distributed to Head Start and

Early Head Start grantees and delegate

agencies.The package will include—

• A set of six edited videotapes of 

the Institute faculty presentations

• A companion guide to the 

videotapes that provides an 

introduction to each program 

segment; key speaking points of 

each presenter; some of the 

relevant Head Start Program 

Performance Standards and Child 

Outcomes applicable to each 

segment; bibliographical 

references and resources; and 

handouts distributed at the 

Institute

• A copy of the Institute 

Implementation Planner

The Quality Improvement Centers and

Quality Improvement Centers for

Disability Services, along with the

Regional Offices, will organize training

events in each region to continue the

work of the Institute. The multimedia

materials will also be featured at the

National Head Start Association’s 28th

Annual Training Conference, which will

be held May 16–19, 2001, in Orlando,

Florida.

Putting It to Work

Developing specific goals for program

improvement is the responsibility of

each local Head Start and Early Head

Start program.The Head Start Bureau is

committed to supporting local programs with information, materials, and

technical assistance as they proceed to

develop and implement their program

improvement plans. It is our way of

showing respect for each of you, and

for the work that you do in meeting the

changing needs of families and enhancing outcomes for children.

E. Dollie Wolverton is Chief of the

Head Start Bureau’s Education

Services Branch; T: 202-205-8418; E:

dwolverton@acf.dhhs.gov.
Screening & Assessment

National Head Start Bulletin ▼ Screening & Assessment 55

Resources Available from the Head Start

Publications Management Center:

Observation and Recording: Tools for

Decision Making This technical guide

enhances the skills of education staff so

that they can accurately and objectively

record young children’s behavior and make

appropriate decisions about program planning for each child.

Enhancing Children’s Growth and

Development This technical guide expands

on the concepts developed in Nurturing

Children.It is designed to enhance the skills of

education staff so that they can apply their

knowledge of how children grow and develop to planning, implementing, and evaluating

activities and experiences on-site, at home,

and during group socialization sessions.

You may order publications through Head Start Information and

Publication Center by calling 703-683-5767, faxing 703-683-

5769, or visiting their Web site at www.headstartinfo.org.

Resources Available from Zero to Three:

National Center for Infants,Toddlers and

Families 

“Developmental Screening, Assess-ment, and

Evaluation: Key Elements for

Individualizing Curricula in

Early Head Start Programs,”

Technical Assistance Paper No. 4 (October

2000).This paper describes the differences

between screening, assessment, and evaluation, and their relationship to curricula and

planning. It also includes a list of resources,

definitions of common terms, and a review of some common

screening and assessment tests.

New Visions for the Developmental Assessment of

Infants and Young Children, Samuel J. Meisels and Emily

Fenichel, editors (1996). This publication discusses the principles and guidelines of appropriate developmental assessment, how parents and professionals share responsibility for

the assessment process, the importance of sociocultural

background, and a number of other valuable topics.

New Visions for Parents Materials

This family information packet about developmental assessment includes a letter to parents, New Visions:A Parent’s Guide

to Understanding Developmental Assessment, Planning and

Preparing for Your Child’s Developmental Assessment, and List of

Terms:Terms Frequently Used in Developmental Assessment. Most

of this information may also be downloaded from the Zero

to Three Web site.

You may order publications through Zero to Three by calling 

1-800-899-4301, faxing 202-638-0851, or visiting their Web site

at www.zerotothree.org

Selected Web sites with useful information

include:

http://ericae.net — ERIC Assessment and Evaluation

Clearinghouse.

http://www.ericeece.org/pubs/books/fivepers.html — The

entire text of Five Perspectives on Quality in Early Childhood

Programs, by Lilian G. Katz—a book that is now out of print.

http://www.apa.org/ — The American Psychological

Association. Search for “early childhood assessment.”

http://www.nichcy.org/pubs/newsdig/nd23txt.htm —

National Information Center for Children and Youth with

Disabilities.

http://www.naeyc.org — National Association for the

Education of Young Children.

http://headstartinfo.org — Head Start Information and

Publication Center.

http://zerotothree.org — Zero to Three: National Center

for Infants,Toddlers and Families.

This list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of on-line

resources for Head Start programs.

Resources
Screening & Assessment

56 Screening & Assessment ▼ National Head Start Bulletin

Put us on your mailing list!

We’d love to keep in touch with what’s happening in your programs and communities.

Head Start Bulletin • 330 C Street, S.W. • Washington, DC 20447

U.S. Department of

Health and Human Services

ACF/ACYF/HSB

Washington, DC 20201

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for private use $300

The “Early Head Start” issue of the Head Start Bulletin (October 2000, No. 69, p. 31) listed Regional Coordinators for the

Hilton/EHS Training Program.A corrected list appears below—

Director of the Hilton/EHS Training Program

Dr. Linda Brekken, California Institute on Human Services,

Sonoma State University

Regional Coordinators

Regions I, II & III...............................................Theresa Bologna

Region IV...........................................................Pat Franco

Regions V,VII & XI ..........................................Jerry Hindman

Regions VI,VIII & XI ........................................Cathy Liles

Regions IX, X & XI..........................................Aracelly Valverde

Region XII .........................................................Katrina Montaño White