**
**Reconsidering Children's Early Developmentand Learning: Toward common Views and Vocabulary**
**

**BACKGROUND**       In 1990 the President and 50 state Governors establishedNationalEducation Goals, the first of which is that "by the year 2000 allchildren inAmerica will start school ready to learn." In the ensuing years, thisGoal hasbeen colloquially dubbed the "readiness" Goal and has generatedpublic policydebate at the federal, state, and local levels; in the public and privatesectors; and in the media, schools, and homes.            Much attention has been focused both on the Goal itself and on thethree objectives accompanying the Goal statement that reflect a broad concernwith children's early development and learning.  The objectives, concernedwith the conditions of the institutions that affect such developmentfamilies, preschool programs, health care systems, schools  are as follows:      "All children will have access to high quality and developmentallyappropriate preschool programs that help prepare children for school;      "Every parent in the United States will be a child's first teacheranddevote time each day helping his or her preschool child learn, and parentswill have access to the training and support parents need;      "Children will receive the nutrition, physical activity experiences,and health care needed to arrive at school with healthy minds and bodies,andto maintain the mental alertness necessary to be prepared to learn, andthenumber of low-birthweight babies will be significantly reduced throughenhanced prenatal health systems."        Taken together, the Goal and the objectives represent an importantdeparture from past thinking about "readiness" in several ways. First, theypublicly acknowledge that the well-being of America's young children isashared responsibility of family and society, and that only by workingcollaboratively across sectors and institutions will America be able torealize its "readiness" vision.       Second, the Goal and its attendant objectives acknowledge that allchildren  not simply some  are entitled to early experiences that willfoster their optimal development.       Third, the Goal and objectives tacitly acknowledge that narrowlyconstructed, academically-driven definitions of readiness  heretofore widelyaccepted  need to be broadened to incorporate physical, social, and emotionalwell-being.  Finally, the Goal and its objectives affirm the connectionbetween early development and learning, and children's later success inschooland in life.       As could be expected, such a landmark statement  which carriesPresidential and gubernatorial sanction  has also provoked considerableactivity.  Some efforts have been devoted to the improvement of directservices for young children and their families, including initiativesundertaken by the National Governors' Association, executive branches offederal and state governments, schools, communities, professionalassociations, and parent groups.  Other efforts have attempted to improveandintegrate the systems that affect children's early development.  Stillothershave sought to delineate more clearly what is meant by optimal outcomesforchildren.  And finally, some have sought new approaches to chroniclechildren's development appropriately and inventively.        Although committed to fostering all four approaches (improving directservices, improving systems, delineating optimal outcomes, and chroniclingprogress), the work of the National Education Goals Panel has been focusedonthe third and fourth approaches.  In fact, the National Education GoalsPanelhas been charged with chronicling the nation's progress toward meetingall ofthe Goals over a ten-year period, from 1990 to 2000.  To that end, theNational Education Goals Panel has established a Resource Group and atleastone Technical Planning Group for each Goal.         Working with these Groups, the Goals Panel publishes an annual reportthat provides a picture of the nation's status in meeting the Goals.  Moreasnapshot than a completed portrait, the report, specifically, and the workofthe Goals Panel and its groups, generally, are designed to generate politicalwill and stress the urgency for action.  Data in the Panel's first fourreports (1991, 1992, 1993, 1994) regarding the well-being of young childrensounded a call for action.  Although no direct outcome indicators ofchildren's well-being were reported, direct indicators of children's accesstoservices reflected glaring deficiencies and inequities in our nation'sservicedelivery to its young.  **GOAL 1  RESOURCE AND TECHNICAL PLANNING GROUPS' WORK TODATE**       The Goal 1 Resource and Technical Planning Groups wereasked to suggestdata by which progress towards Goal 1 could be measured.  Two kinds ofinformation were recommended:  first, direct indicators of the Goal,reflecting how children are doing, and capturing their welfare and resiliencyin the face of risk; and second, direct indicators of the objectives,reflecting the quality of services afforded young children.  The Groupsrecognize the importance of both kinds of information and have been workingtoput mechanisms in place that will collect such information at three pointsintime:  before school, upon entry to school, and in school.  To hasten therealization of these efforts, the Technical Planning Group was asked bytheGoals Panel to focus its work on conceptualizing an in-school assessmentthatfocused on child outcomes.        In preparing its initial report for the Panel, the Technical PlanningGroup was guided by several assumptions that framed its recommendations.First, because the purpose of the in-school assessment was to provideinformation regarding the collective state of young children that wouldhelpguide public policy  not to assess or make decisions regarding individualchildren or specific programs  a sampling strategy was recommended.  Suchanapproach is not only appropriate to the purposes of the assessment, butalsosafeguards against the misuse of information, so as not to label, stigmatize,or place any child.         Second, recognizing that development and learning are highly episodic,multi-faceted, and influenced by diverse contextual factors, the TechnicalPlanning Group recommended the development of an assessment system thatwouldcollect data (1) at multiple points in time; (2) from multiple sources,including parents, teachers, and children themselves; and (3) using multiplestrategies that are respectful of, and appropriate to, children's development.       Third, recognizing the wide range of abilities and experiences uponwhich early learning and development rests, the Technical Planning Groupsuggested that early development and learning embrace five dimensions: (1)physical well-being and motor development; (2) social and emotionaldevelopment; (3) approaches toward learning; (4) language development;and (5)cognition and general knowledge.  Preliminary conceptualizations of thedimensions were offered in the Goal 1 Technical Planning Subgroup ReportonSchool Readiness (National Education Goals Panel, 1991b, pp. 10-11):       1.     Physical Well-Being and Motor Development  A strong bodyofresearch links maternal and child health to performance in school.  Weknowthat conditions such as very low birthweight and poor nutrition may havelong-term effects on a child's preparedness for school.  Basic informationabout the child's health history is vital for understanding the conditioninwhich children come to school.  In addition, early childhood educatorsemphasize the importance of optimal motor development in children, fromlargemotor movements that occur on the playground to small motor work requiredforholding a crayon or putting together puzzles.          2.     Social and Emotional Development  This dimension serves asthefoundation for relationships that give meaning to school experience.  Itinvolves a sense of personal well-being that comes from stable interactionsinchildren's early lives and interactions that enable children to participateinclassroom activities that are positive for themselves, their classmates,andtheir teachers.  Critically important conditions of social and emotionaldevelopment include emotional support and secure relationships that engenderthe child's acquisition of such characteristics as self-confidence andtheability to function as a member of a group.        3.     Approaches Toward Learning  Approaches toward learning refertothe inclinations, dispositions, or styles  rather than skills  that reflectthe myriad ways that children become involved in learning and develop theirinclinations to pursue it.  Approaches to learning that vary within andbetween cultures must be respected, making a uniform or "cookie cutter"approach to early childhood education  with the Goal of all children comingout the same  undesirable.  A child can be successful in school in manyways,and families and teachers should understand the various ways that childrenbecome engaged in learning in order to know how to enhance and not discouragetheir engagement.  Curiosity, creativity, independence, cooperativeness,andpersistence are some of the approaches that enhance early learning anddevelopment.        4.     Language Development  Language empowers children to participatein both the cognitive and affective components of the educational program.Experience with language, in both written and oral form, provides childrenwith the tools to interact with others and to represent their thoughts,feelings, and experiences.  Communicating effectively with other childrenandadults and having emergent literacy experiences with diverse forms of languageare fundamental elements of this dimension.        5.     Cognition and General Knowledge  A foundation for laterlearning is provided when children have opportunities to interact withindividuals and materials and, as a result, are encouraged to learn fromtheirsurroundings.  Children's transitions to formal schooling are eased whenchildren have been provided with a variety of play-oriented, exploratoryactivities, and when their early school experiences continue these activities.       Cognition and general knowledge represent the accumulation andreorganization of experiences that result from participating in a richlearning setting with skilled and appropriate adult intervention.  Fromtheseexperiences children construct knowledge of patterns and relations, causeandeffect, and methods of solving problems in everyday life.  **THE PURPOSE OF THIS DOCUMENT**       Admittedly brief, the above statements were designedto convey theflavor of the dimensions presented.  They were intended to be suggestive,notdefinitive.  Acclaimed for their inntent by a national review process andlater adopted by the Goals Panel, these dimensions require elaborationif theyare to describe more fully the elements of readiness and to capture whatprograms and policies should strive to nurture.          The purpose of this document, then, is to lend greater specificitytoeach of the dimensions with the goal of ultimately achieving a commonvocabulary that expresses current knowledge and common views about theneedsof children and the nature of their development.  It is hoped that suchamplified definitions will further the dialogue regarding how best to fosterchildren's healthy development.  This paper uses as points of departuretheavailable research (though the document is not intended to be a reviewof theresearch), a series of commissioned papers, and synthesis of the TechnicalPlanning Group's work.  Where research is incomplete, this paper reflectsthecollective best judgment of the members of the Group.       This document represents not only the work of the Goal 1 TechnicalPlanning Group, but the input of hundreds of individuals who took the timetocomment on the original draft.  Many of their comments have been incorporated,and the Technical Planning Group wishes to acknowledge the thoughtful inputofthe reviewers of this document.**CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE DOCUMENT**The Interrelatedness of the Dimensions       Though presented separately for the sake of clarity, the fivedimensions are inextricably linked.  Attempts to clarify distinctions inthedimensions underscore their interrelatedness.  For example, the readerwillnote that several defining variables (e.g., temperament) appear under morethan one dimension, and that development in one dimension often influencesand/or is contingent upon development in other dimensions.  It is thereforeimperative that the dimensions be considered as a totality, with no singledimension acting as a proxy for the complex interconnectedness of earlydevelopment and learning.  Variation in Information Available Regarding the Dimensions        The availability of scholarly work to assist in amplifying thedimensions varies tremendously by dimension.  For example, and notunexpectedly, much work has been done on specifying variables related tocognition and general knowledge, enabling us to render a greater levelofprecision in this dimension than in some others.  Where data are relativelysparse, the limitations of the knowledge base are acknowledged, and theinformation provided is based on the best judgment of those advising theTechnical Planning Group.Defining Versus Measuring the Dimensions        Offering amplified definitions of the dimensions of early developmentand learning should not be equated with assessing the dimensions.  Thoughbothefforts are linked, defining involves the specification of attributes,variables, and criteria; assessing involves, in part, consideration ofthetasks, observational methods, and conditions that lead to quantificationofeach dimension.        While the primary challenge of this document is to further thespecification and discussion of variables associated with children's earlydevelopment and learning, the Technical Planning Group is also concernedaboutthe assessment of early learning and development.  The Group does not believethat there is a single magic threshold above which children are deemeddevelopmentally fit (ready) and below which they are deemed unfit (unready)for school entrance.  It is for this reason that this report assiduouslyavoids use of the term "readiness"  a word that often impliesa singledimension and single standard of development and learning.  To the contrary,because individual child performance is multi-dimensional, highly variableacross the dimensions, episodic, and culturally and contextually influenced,the establishment of any single "readiness" threshold is misleadinganddangerous.  Rather than advocating any such developmental threshold orauni-dimensional approach to assessment, this effort must beunderstood as one that attempts to amplify the range of variables associatedwith early development and learning.  It offers universal domains pertinenttoall children during their early years, recognizing that healthy developmentonall of these dimensions is heavily contingent upon the services and supportsto which children and families have access.   The Importance of Families and Communities        No document considering children's early learning and developmentcanoverlook the critical importance of families and communities in thatdevelopment.  Families and communities shape the context in which childrengrow, framing children's most important early experiences and encounterswiththeir environments.  Because of the transcendent importance of familiesandcommunities to children's development, families are discussed throughoutthedocument, with emphasis on the rich variation in family attitudes, beliefs,cultures, child-rearing practices, and resources.  The document alsounderscores the profound importance the community plays in supporting childrenand in supporting parents as they engage in their demanding roles as nurturersand providers.Individual, Cultural, and Contextual Variation        It is widely recognized that children vary on every measurablecharacteristic.  Youngsters demonstrate individuality related to genetic,cultural, and contextual factors.  Despite the rhetorical acceptance ofsuchvariability, conventional definitions of early development and learninghavebeen more attentive to genetic and/or developmental variation than to culturalor contextual variation.         Such a focus on genetic and developmental variability has had importantand often negative consequences.  In some cases, access to differingeducational opportunities has been determined by assessments that ignorecultural competence and that use majority-culture norms to determinecompetence on a single dimension.  For example, a cognitively normal butphysically disabled or non-English-dominant child might be consigned tospecial education as a result of such assessments.  Conversely, a giftedpreschooler who comes from a low-income neighborhood might not have hisor hertalents recognized.  Indeed, normative definitions of competence haveprevailed, with cultural and contextual differences often misinterpretedasdeficiencies (Garcia & Figueroa, 1993).  Developmental equivalenciesare oftennot understood, and variation within cultures is often neglected.        Individual, cultural, and contextual variables influence how childrenpresent themselves, understand the world, process information, and interpretexperiences.  As such, individual, cultural, and contextual variables cannotbe attributed to any single dimension.  Because of their pervasivenessandtheir centrality to a new understanding of each dimension, they are discussedwithin each dimension and not treated separately. Societal Willingness to Accept Responsibility for Children's Well-Being        Focused on dimensions of children's well-being, this report wouldbeincomplete if the Technical Planning Group did not make explicit itscommitment not only to assuring more robust definitions of the dimensions,butalso to fostering the implementation of services and supports known toincrease the chances of children's full development.  Though outside thespecific purview of this document, the Goals Panel and the Technical PlanningGroup are working to foster broader societal commitment to all young children.Both Groups recognize that responsibility for children's early developmentandlearning entails not only academic analyses, but must also pervade societalinstitutions, including government, corporate America, the media, schools,andfamilies.  For America to achieve its first Education Goal, its schoolsmustbe ready  for diverse children; its families aware of  and able to supportyoungsters in their first critical years of life; and its political,communication, and corporate sectors poised to meet the challenge thatsuchcommitment demands.  As we turn to amplify the dimensions of children'searlydevelopment and learning, let this effort be recognized as one step ina longseries of efforts (1) to elevate children to their rightful place on theAmerican social agenda, and (2) to foster society's willingness to acceptresponsibility for children's well-being.Introduction to the Dimensions         Building on the initial report of the Technical Planning Group,fivedimensions are discussed below: (1) physical well-being and motor development;(2) social and emotional development; (3) approaches toward learning; (4)language development; and (5) cognition and general knowledge.  The discussionof each specific dimension begins with an introduction that is followedby arationale and general definition.  Each section also includes a discussionofindividual, cultural, and contextual variation, and ends with a summarystatement that highlights the major points addressed.  Following discussionofthe five dimensions, the document ends with a conclusion section thatdelineates issues underlying the discussion, implications, and action steps.**DIMENSION I  PHYSICAL WELL-BEING AND MOTOR DEVELOPMENT**Introduction        Long-acknowledged as a cornerstone of early development and learning,the physical well-being and motor development of young children has receivedsubstantial attention in medical, educational, and developmental literature.Much of this literature has focused on discerning developmental milestones,often manifest as specific behaviors or capacities that indicate whetherachild's growth is "on target" with normal development.  Whilea normativefocus is helpful under certain conditions, the Technical Planning Grouphassought to amplify the definition of physical well-being and motor developmentby adopting a more inclusive approach  one that does not define abilityordisability in terms of deviation from given norms.  Rather, in the followingdefinition, the Group has tried to address the various conditions thataffectthe trajectory of development and to broaden the conception of what isconsidered in addressing the well-being of the nation's young children.Rationale       Healthy children enjoy a freedom that allows them to focus on oractively engage in experiences crucial to the learning process.  Conversely,children with significant physical or developmental problems are forcedtoaccommodate to discomfort, dependence, or special arrangements.  They maydevelop a sense of being "different" from other children  whichcan lead toproblems in adapting to the school environment  and their specialcircumstances or restrictions may inhibit their ability to develop anappropriate level of independence (Shonkoff, 1992).  Ill health may alsoleadto increased absenteeism from school due to physical symptoms or medicalappointments, and this can exacerbate the problems associated with theuniversal challenges faced by all children and the further obstaclesencountered by socially or economically disadvantaged children.  For thesereasons, any amplification of early development and learning should commencewith attention to physical health and motor development. General Definition        Numerous researchers have attempted to identify the majorcharacteristics of health.  By assimilating the overlapping variablespresented, as well as making accommodations for the wide range of "normal"individual differences, physical well-being can be assessed in childrenusingthree categories of criteria.  The first category addresses children'sphysical development, and includes:  (1) overall rate of growth; (2) levelofphysical fitness; and (3) body physiology.  The second category addresseschildren's physical abilities, including:  (1) gross motor skills; (2)finemotor skills; (3) oral motor skills; (4) sensorimotor skills; and (5)functional performance.  The third category addresses background andcontextual factors, focusing on the conditions under which developmenttakesplace and including:  (1) perinatal context; (2) caregiving environment;and(3) health care utilization (Shonkoff, 1992).I.  Physical Development       Children's physical development can be measured against the followingcontinua:       Rate of Growth       A child's rate of physical growth is comprised of three measures:height (linear growth), weight gain, and physical maturation.  Normal growthin these areas varies from individual to individual and covers a widespectrum.  Growth abnormalities do exist, sometimes resulting from asignificant chronic illness, severe malnutrition, or a severe impairmentinthe early caregiver-infant relationship (Dawson, 1992).  Children withgrowthabnormalities may feel or be perceived as different from other children,whichcan lead to problems in adapting to the school environment.  Furthermore,growth deficits that are associated with chronic health problems can interferewith children's ability to participate in physical activities, formappropriate peer relationships, develop an appropriate level of independence,and attend school regularly.       Physical Fitness       Stamina, energy, strength, flexibility, and percentage of body fatarethe major elements of physical fitness.  As in adults, fitness among childrenis affected by nutrition, illness, and lifestyle factors such as sleepingpatterns and level and types of physical activity.  In this regard, a majoremerging concern is the lack of activity in many children's lives due toover-reliance on television, video games, and other passive activitiesasentertainment.  Poor fitness resulting in reduced stamina and energy canprevent children from participating in group activities and maintainingattention to and interest in tasks necessary to the learning process. Thoughfew studies of the physical fitness of preschoolers have been conducted(Poest, Williams, Witt, & Atwood, 1990), some research indicates thattoday'schildren are less physically fit than were children twenty years ago(Gallahue, 1987).       Body Physiology       Another aspect of health and well-being is the optimal functioningofthe body and its organ systems.  For example, a healthy respiratory systemsupplies oxygen to and removes carbon dioxide from the blood in an efficientmanner; a healthy urinary system effectively extracts chemical wastes andexcess water from the blood; and a healthy musculoskeletal system supportsandprotects the internal organs and makes possible appropriate voluntary andinvoluntary movements.  These and the other organs and organ systems mayfunction at a less than optimal level if affected by injuries, toxicsubstances, infections, degeneration, or structuraldefects.       Adverse conditions, including disease and disability, can inhibitchildren's ability to take full advantage of the classroom experience. Theearly prevention and identification of these conditions and the provisionofappropriate services are critical to minimizing deleterious effects ondevelopment.         Diseases.  There are myriad common diseases  such as diabetes, asthma,ear infections, and respiratory allergies  that can be debilitating forchildren if untreated.  Furthermore, long-term use of medications withmood-altering properties by children with chronic health problems caninterfere with their ability to learn.  For example, corticosteroids, commonlyprescribed for chronic inflammatory conditions such as asthma, possessknownmood-altering properties (Shonkoff, 1992).  Malnutrition, anemia, or toxicinsults such as lead poisoning can also result in greater fatigue, increasedirritability, decreased motivation, shortened attention span, and deficitsinintellectual performance (Dienard, List, Lindgren, Hunt, & Chang, 1986;Lozoff, Wolf, Urrutia, & Viteri, 1985; Oski, Honig, Helu, & Howanitz,1983). Similarly, these ailments can impede the development of motor skills iftheydeny children the opportunity to engage in the activities requisite tomastering a wide variety of physical movements.         Disabilities.  The extent to which pain, discomfort, and/or functionallimitations associated with adverse health conditions affect a child'sdailyfunctioning should be assessed.  Hearing loss, poor vision, and disordersofthe nervous system can impede children's ability to receive or processinformation.  Neuro-motor disorders such as cerebral palsy can, among otherthings, interfere with a child's gross or fine motor skills or his or heroralmotor skills.  Persistent impairments can have a negative impact on children'sself-concept, sense of autonomy, and peer relationships, as well as resultingin developmental and behavioral problems (Shonkoff, 1992).  II.  Physical Abilities       Children's physical skills have traditionally been measured by fourtypes of motor skills: gross, fine, sensorimotor, and oral.  These fourskillareas form the foundation for functional performance in a range ofage-appropriate activities.  These skills develop through the interactionofmaturation and experience, and are influenced by level of parentalencouragement and guidance and available opportunities to practice suchskills.         Gross Motor Skills       Gross motor skills  movements of the entire body or large portionsofthe body  include the abilities to walk, run, jump, and climb.  Lags inthedevelopment of gross motor skills can impact young children socially,emotionally, and physically.  Children with significant deficits are morelikely to be excluded from games which require these skills (Poest, etal.,1990), and are more likely to experience problems in peer relationships,self-esteem (Brown, 1982; Seefeldt, 1980), and physical fitness.       Fine Motor Skills       Fine motor skills require precision and manual dexterity (e.g.,cuttingwith scissors or fastening buttons).  Researchers have identified a sequenceor progression of manual skills in infants and toddlers which begins withtouching and holding objects, proceeds to coordinating the thumb and fingersin a pincer movement (Halverson, 1931; 1936), and progresses to more advancedskills such as turning the pages of a book or filling a cup with cubes(Landreth, 1967).  Clearly, fine motor skills are essential to a successfulclassroom experience in kindergarten and the early grades.  Motor developmentis known to proceed at varying and uneven rates, so young children shouldnotbe excluded from school or retained in grade because they have not yetmastered these skills.       Sensorimotor Skills       Vision, hearing, touch, and kinesthesis are crucial determinantsoffine and gross motor coordination.  Coordinated movement requires the abilityto use sensory information to guide motions.  For example, considerablevisual, perceptual input is required in order for a child to kick a ballthatis rolling in his or her direction.  The child must be able to distinguishtheball from other stimuli, focus attention on it, determine his or her distancefrom the ball, and assess the speed at which the ball is moving.   Allof thisinformation must then be coordinated to guide movement, and, as the movementprogresses, must continue to be coordinated with incoming perceptualinformation.  One of the key aspects of sensorimotor development for classroomachievement is the development of eye-hand coordination, necessary forwritingand drawing.       Oral Motor Skills       The ability to suck  one of many oral motor skills  is the onlywell-developed motor skill with which a child is born (Comer & Poussaint,1992).  Over the first few years, however, the child develops and refinesother oral skills  involving the coordination of breathing with movementsofthe vocal cords, tongue, lips, jaw, and palate  to produce speech soundsnecessary for verbal communication (Tittnich, Bloom, Schomburg, & Szekeres,1990).         Functional Performance       Age-appropriate physical competencies (e.g., independent mobilityandbowel and bladder control) and the ability to perform age-appropriate taskswhich may involve a number of motor skills (e.g., dressing or feeding oneself)are the two major measures of functional performance.  Just as there arevariations in children's physical development at the time of schoolentry,normal ranges in functional performance are also broad, varyingaccording to  physical functioning as well as prior practice of specificskills.  In the majority of children, by the age of six or seven years,basicmotor skills are developed.  However, children continue to improve thequalitywith which they perform these skills, and they gradually integrate basicmovements into more complex sequences as they mature and practice executingvarious movement patterns (Epenschade & Eckert, 1974).III.  Background and Contextual Conditions of Development        Physical well-being and motor development are dramatically influencedby multiple individual, social, and environmental factors that can be dividedinto three major components: (1) perinatal context; (2) caregivingenvironment; and (3) health care utilization (Shonkoff, 1992).       Perinatal Context       Adverse conditions around the time of the birth of a child can pointtoincreased vulnerability to physical problems.  Children who have beenprenatally exposed to alcohol, tobacco, or drugs are at greater risk fordevelopmental and other health problems.  Those born with low birthweightarenearly twice as likely as their peers to suffer severe developmental delays,congenital anomalies, cerebral palsy, autism, mental retardation, visionandhearing impairments, and other developmental disabilities (Public HealthService, 1990; Shapiro, McCormick, Starfield, Krischer, & Bross, 1980).Furthermore, premature children score significantly lower than full-termchildren on gross motor scales at age two and one-half years.  This maybe theresult of delayed physical and neurological development as well asneurological damage due to complications of pregnancy or delivery (Cutler,Heimer, Wortis, & Freedman, 1965).         Caregiving Environment       There are numerous variables related to the child's environmentwhichcan impinge on his or her health and motor development.  Environmentalriskswhich deserve special attention include accident hazards, toxic wastes,pesticides, lead, and other pollutants, drug ingestion, inadequate orunhealthy water supplies, and violent crime.  Many of these environmentalrisks are linked to societal problems that require community action.         Parental behavioral and lifestyle choices that have immediate effectson children's health as well as long-term implications for their developinghabits include smoking, drinking, illegal drug use, diet, dental hygiene,exercise, and coping/stress management skills (United States DepartmentofHealth and Human Services, 1981).  Other important factors include theinternal cohesion and adaptability of the family unit, the availabilityofexternal supports, the health of parents and siblings, and the age andcompetence of parents.         Children from low-income families are particularly at risk for adversehealth conditions because their parents' lack of resources can interferewiththe ability to provide adequate food, clothing, and shelter.  Such shortagescan deny children opportunities to engage in activities that would enhancetheir motor development.  Poor nutrition  another variable hindering healthydevelopment  is a condition that disproportionately affects children fromlow-income families.  United States survey data have measured factorsincluding the percentages of food energy from protein, fat, and carbohydratesas well as nutrient intakes related to percentages of the Recommended DietaryAllowances (United States Department of Agriculture, 1993).  These dataindicate that most poor children are receiving adequate nutrition; however,"advocates contend that the federal surveys do not measure hunger,and that asubstantial fraction of children in poor families go hungry fairly often.There are some data indicating that poor children under 6 are more likelythanother children to exhibit signs of poor nutrition, such as growth retardationand anemia" (Klerman & Parker, 1990).         Health Care Utilization       Inadequate prenatal care and the unavailability of systematic healthpromotion and disease prevention services is another major risk factor. Thelack of access to and utilization of primary care services such asimmunizations and acute care services puts children at risk of developingpreventable conditions or having existing conditions needlessly worsened.Underlying barriers to health care utilization include the inaccessibilityofadequate and affordable health insurance coverage as well as deficienciesinthe number, quality, type, culture, and language of health care providersinthe community.         Health care utilization poses a considerable challenge for low-incomefamilies, who may not be able to afford services or secure transportationtohealth care facilities.  Preventive care and early detection may beparticularly inaccessible for poor families.  "A substantial minorityof youngchildren in low-income families have undiagnosed conditions that are onlydiscovered when they reach school . . . .  Children with these conditionscould well benefit from earlier diagnosis and treatment of their disorders"(Zill, 1991).Relationship to Individual, Cultural, and Contextual Variation        The above definition refers to multiple contributors to variabilityinthe physical well-being and motor development dimension, among individuals,cultures, and contexts.  Indeed, similar health conditions and barrierstophysical development may have opposite effects on different children. Manychildren with health problems are able to do well, and conversely, somechildren with excellent health do not progress as rapidly in theirdevelopment.  It has even been postulated that routine childhood illnessmayhave certain "benefits" for children  facilitating emotionaland intellectualdevelopment, prosocial behavior, and the capacity for empathy (Parmelee,1986).  Shonkoff (1992) summarizes the diverse effects of health problemsasfollows:"Ultimately, the extent to which a child's developing competence andreadinessfor school is influenced by health factors depends upon a complex interplayamong inherent adaptive capacities, the presence and severity of adversesymptoms, and the quality of his or her caregiving and social supports. Forsome children, ill health may be a major risk factor for poor schooladjustment.  For others, the process of coping with the stresses associatedwith illness may be a growth-promoting experience that serves as a sourceofresilience and translates into positive adaptation."         The definitions of physical well-being and motor development offeredherein suggest the need to gather information from a wide variety of sourcesin order to assess aspects of both developmental progress and the contextfordevelopment.  It has become clear that both "objective" and "subjective"dataor perceptions are useful in developing a complete assessment of a child'shealth.  Objective data are relatively easy to collect but not necessarilyvery informative.  Subjective or descriptive data are informative  especiallyin determining the relationship between perceived health and the impactondevelopment  but it is difficult to quantify, particularly due to theindividual's knowledge, interpretation, and cultural values.  A varietyofmethods can be employed to collect these data, including children's selfreports, parental reports, physicians' reports, administrative records,laboratory tests, and others' reports of observed behavior.       While it is important to recognize that children fall into variousriskcategories, the damage often associated with labeling children may be oneofthe greatest risks to their education and development.  Educators shouldseekto optimize each child's growth and development, with high expectationsforall children regardless of prenatal conditions, family characteristics,andsocioeconomic status.       In the area of motor skills and functional performance, there isacritical need to move away from inappropriate assessment and labeling."Although norms help us to understand the approximate rate and natureof humandevelopment, it cannot be emphasized too strongly that it is unwise toapplygroup averages uncritically to any one individual case" (Liebert &Wicks-Nelson, 1981).  Not only is the development of children's motor skillshighly individualized, but it is often uneven.  Therefore, it is imperativethat young children's progress within the school system not be unnecessarilydelayed because of a temporary lag in motor development or functionalperformance.  Summary        The physical well-being and motor development of young childrenarecentral to their entire early learning experience.  Variation in ratesofdevelopment exist and are subject to environmental and biological influences.Given individual variation and considerable work in this dimension, assessmenthas taken many forms, including a wide variety of sources and elicitingbothobjective and subjective information regarding children's health.  Childrenwho deviate significantly from normative patterns of physical developmentmaypossess strengths inother areas and demand close attention from schoolsandother social institutions to maximize their learning potential.  **DIMENSION II  SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT**Introduction        More elusive than variables related to physical well-being and motordevelopment, those related to social and emotional development have interestedscholars for decades.  For example, in seeking to define social and emotionaldevelopment, the Head Start Measures Project noted first, that there isnoagreement on the particular characteristics that constitute desirable socialand emotional development, and second, that "any definition of theconstructand dimensions of Social-Emotional domains  even more than with the otherdomains  entails selective judgments that are less guided by prevailingtheory or patterns of practice" (Mediax Associates, 1980, p. 66).       This difficulty exists for several reasons.  First, attempts todefinesocial and emotional development require the delineation of characteristicsthat are related both to social concept development and to social behaviordevelopment (Carew, 1978)  those characteristics that are comprised ofknowing and understanding social concepts, as well as those that are actuallymanifest as behaviors or actions.  Lacking appropriate measures to gaugechildren's internal emotional states, social and emotional behavior hasbecomea proxy for social and emotional knowledge.  We attribute social and emotionalstates to what children do, not to what they know.  The second difficultyisthat such attribution is made without sufficient regard for the demandsof thesocial and cultural environment in which the child lives.  Bowman &Zvetina(1992) note that competence is contextualized and highly variegated, dependingupon the individual's appreciation of the social setting and the behaviorcalled for in that setting.  Understandings of the social and emotionaldimension, then, must include not simply what the child does, but whatthechild knows and does with respect to cultural and situational variables(McLoyd, 1990).  Rationale        Despite the historic difficulty and the challenges associated withcodifying definitions of social and emotional development, scholars, teachers,and practitioners recognize the intimate relationship between children'ssocial and emotional competence and overall achievement in school and inlaterlife.  Moreover, they recognize that these domains, while understudied,may bequite malleable and receptive to intervention.  To that end, scholars haveturned their attention to examining social-emotional development, and althoughstill elusive, a consensual definition and potential markers are emerging. General Definition        Emotional and social development, though entwined conceptually andpractically, can and need to be separated for this discussion.  Thus, thisreport shall regard emotional characteristics as those that involve theindividual's feeling states regarding the self and others.  In contrast,social characteristics are those that involve the interaction of two ormorepeople, especially interactions with peers and adults.  Social functioning,then, refers to the interpersonal relationships and behavior that theindividual establishes with others.I.  Emotional Development       Scholars agree that the cornerstone of both social and emotionaldevelopment is children's self-concept.  We consider self-concept as apart ofemotional development, because it involves the internal feeling state ofthechild, though such a state is framed by children's social interactions.Self-concept consists of the traits, habits, abilities, motives, socialroles,goals, and values that define how we perceive ourselves.  Unlike self-esteemwhich can be determined to be positive or negative (e.g., a positive senseofself-confidence, a negative sense of self-worth)  self-concept is regardedascomplete or incomplete, clear or diffuse.         For everyone, some parts of the self are more central and otherpartsmore peripheral, so self-concept also entails how we "weight"or attributevalue to the various dimensions that constitute the self.  Further, dimensionsof self may be highly integrated or somewhat dissonant, suggesting thatself-concept may also be integrated or fractured.  Finally, there is atemporal dimension to self-concept, with some variables fluctuating overtimeand others being more stable.        Emotions do not exist in isolation; indeed, emotional developmentiscontoured by a variety of situations that frame our affective responsesandour sense of self.  Primary emotions include joy, fear, anger, and grief;emotions pertaining to sensory stimulation include disgust, delight, andhorror; and emotions that pertain to self-appraisal include shame, pride,andguilt.        Early parent-child interactions are an important influence onchildren's emotional development.  Children initially learn to expressandinterpret emotions through interactions with primary caregivers.  In infancy,caregivers influence emotional development by the extent to which theyprovideemotionally arousing stimuli at appropriate times, reinforce and encourageemotional displays, and respond to subtle variations in the child'sexpressions.  As children mature, positive regard, love and support withoutstrings attached are key for healthy emotional development (Rogers, 1961).       Self-efficacy  the belief that one can successfully accomplish whatone sets out to do  is another important aspect of the emotional well-beingcentral to the confidence to undertake learning at home and school (Bandura,1977).  Where young children are concerned, positive emotions and feelingsofself-efficacy are evidenced even among low-performing children.  Youngchildren tend to optimistically over-estimate their abilities (Stipek &Tannatt, 1984).  Such unrealistically positive self-esteem tends to shieldthevery young as the realities of the external world are integrated into thechild's emerging self-concept.       Children's ability to express their feelings appropriately isconsidered crucial to their overall health, behavior, and well-being. Suchexpression may manifest itself as the ability to communicate one's attitudesand feelings effectively, which involves possession of the knowledge andskills to communicate verbally and non-verbally.         Beyond expression of their own feelings, children's sensitivityto thefeelings of others also characterizes emotional well-being.  Inherent inthischaracteristic is the ability to comprehend the feelings of others andtheability to communicate sensitively to others.  Factors related to suchsensitivity include children's understanding that their actions affectothers,the ability to praise others, their acceptance of others' differences,theiravoidance of ridiculing behaviors, and demonstrations of empathy towardchildren in pain.  Empathy is the ability to participate in the feelingsorideas of others, to feel bad about their unhappiness and good about theirjoy. In order to develop empathy, a child must be able to feel attachment toanother person and must care if that person is hurting.  The developmentofempathy, and corresponding guilt and shame when one harms or fails to helpanother ensures prosocial behavior and altruism, even and preferably intheabsence of external rewards and punishments.II.  Social Development       The ability to form and sustain social relationships with adultsandfriends is central to children's preparedness for school.  Such ties aregrounded in children's earliest relationships with parents and families,andare strengthened by the social supports experienced by the child and familydyad (Howes, 1992).  In general, where perceived social support is higher,behavior problems are lower and social adjustment greater.  For example,children who report a warm relationship with at least one parent are lesslikely to act out than children who do not have such a relationship (Rutter,1979).  Parent-child relationships also socialize children's orientationtoward school.  Parents who have had positive orientations toward schoolaremore likely to socialize their children to expect a positive school experiencethan those who have not (Howes, 1992).        While such experiences may frame children's social behaviors, theirinteractions with adults including teachers are usually malleable overtime. Understanding the nature of children's social relationship with adultsinvolves chronicling their ability to communicate with adults and theirability to understand and identify adult roles.            Children's social interactions with peers are another crucial componentof their social development.  Indeed, children who at the end of thekindergarten year were considered to have made a positive adjustment toschoolalso had more friends in the classroom, were able to maintain thesefriendships, and had established new friendships over the course of theyear(Ladd, 1990).  Conversely, poor peer relationships correlate with childaggression, poor social skills, and lack of empathy for the thoughts andfeelings of other children.  Problematic peer relationships in the earlyyearsalso are related to later emotional and mental health problems, schooldropout, and delinquency (Harter, 1983; Marshall, 1989).          Moreover, peer socialization influences children's attitudes towardschool and learning.  Studies of older children, for example, suggest thatchildren's attitudes regarding school achievement change to match thoseoffriends (Brown, 1989).  Ladd and Price (1987) note that children who enterclassrooms with familiar peers experience more positive attitudes towardschool and lower levels of school avoidance.  Howes (1988) found thatpreschool children who changed child care centers with familiar peers asopposed to moving alone were more socially competent.        Social competence with peers is considered to have two aspects (Howes,1988):  (1) the social skills necessary to cooperate with peers, and (2)theability to form and sustain reciprocal friendships.  Establishing the socialskills to cooperate with peers implies understanding the rights of others,theability to interact with others without being overly submissive or directive,the ability to distinguish between incidental and intentional actions,thewillingness to give and receive support, and the ability to treat otherchildren as one would like to be treated.  It involves the ability to balanceone's own needs with those of others in group activity (National CenterforClinical Infant Programs, 1992).  Such characteristics emerge when thechildis emotionally secure with parents and teachers and is open to approachotherswith expectations of positive and prosocial interactions.         The formation and maintenance of reciprocal friendships  the secondcomponent  is characterized by mutual acceptance and preference.  Suchrelationships serve multiple functions for children, including the provisionof opportunities for affection, intimacy, companionship, and instrumentalsupport and help.  According to Vygotsky (1978), the social context providesthe base for the construction of social and cognitive knowledge.         Behaviors associated with the formation and maintenance of reciprocalfriendships include those required for the establishment of cooperativerelationships, as well as the ability to listen to others' points of view,theability to provide help and support for friends, the desire to make friends,and the willingness to solicit and act upon others' points of view.   Relationship to Individual, Cultural, and Contextual Variation        Social and emotional development, while always entailing thecharacteristics mentioned above, cannot be understood as the mere amalgamationof variables that pertain to the individual as an isolated entity. Individuals vary by their cultural and situational backgrounds and by anarrayof constitutional characteristics such as affect, attention, motor activity,and temperament.  We know that temperament among normally developingyoungsters varies dramatically and that children demonstrate markedlydifferent resiliencies.  Some children are able to avoid stressful outcomesfrom circumstances that negatively and profoundly affect others.  Internal,biologically-driven forces and external, cultural, and contextual forcescollide to buffer and mediate the development and mix of social and emotionalcharacteristics.         Social and emotional development must be understood as cumulative,contextually driven, and based on the interaction of the multiplecharacteristics or variables discussed above.  Social and emotionaldevelopment is contingent upon the match between:  (1) children's feelingstates and their social knowledge; and (2) the expectations of the socialsituation in which they find themselves (Bowman & Zvetina, 1992). Mismatchesoccur when developmental criteria and expectations for individual performanceare overly narrow, too prescriptive, or devoid of understanding of cultureandcontext.  A failure to consider the meaning of a child's actions or emotionalresponses in the context in which they developed may lead to profoundmisunderstandings.  Summary        Variables associated with emotional and social development can bedefined; the report has asserted that, for example, various emotions  joy,fear, anger, grief, disgust, delight, horror, shame, pride, guilt  areframedas a result of the individual's interactions in various situations overtime. Patterns of emotion help to shape a youngster's self-concept  the aggregationof traits, habits, abilities, motives, social roles, goals, values, andstatusthat define how humans perceive themselves.  Children's emotional developmentis also related to how youngsters express their own feelings (verballyandnon-verbally) and how they manifest sensitivity and empathy to the feelingsofothers (i.e., their understanding of how their actions affect others, theirability to praise others, and their acceptance of others' differences). Thedevelopment of empathy, leading to guilt and shame when one's actions harmothers, is a crucial aspect of emotional development.       Social development is the ability to form and sustain socialrelationships with peers and adults.  Variables associated with socialdevelopment include cooperation, understanding the rights of others, theability to treat others equitably, the ability to distinguish betweenincidental and intentional actions, the willingness to give and receivesupport, and the ability to balance one's own needs with those of others.Social development also includes the creation of opportunities for affection,intimacy, and companionship, as well as the ability to solicit and listentoothers' points of view.   Indeed, according to some, the adequacy withwhich achild gets along with other children may well be the single best predictorofadult adaptation (Hartup, 1991).**DIMENSION III  APPROACHES TOWARD LEARNING**Introduction        Closely aligned with, but less well-defined than physical, social,oremotional development is the dimension associated with how children approachlearning.  Gaining currency in recent years, "approaches toward learning"is an umbrella term covering a range of attitudes, habits, and learningstyles.  Although the research base of this dimension is small, imprecise,and less codified than that of the other dimensions presented, this reportoffers anamplification of thinking about the term in an attempt to engender discussionand encourage dialogue around the dimension.  Rationale        It is important to consider approaches toward learning, becausefirst,the mere acquisition of knowledge, skills, and capacities is an insufficientcriterion of developmental success and an insufficient measure of programaccomplishments.  Children must be inclined to marshall such skills andcapacities.  For example, possession of a capacity does not necessarilymeanthat it will be used; children have the capacity to listen, but may ormay nothave the disposition to be listeners.  Second, a narrow focus on skillsas theend-product of education may undermine the disposition to use the skills.Katz (1992) notes that early drills in reading  while potentially imbuingcertain reading skills  may actually quash children's desire to be readers.General Definition         Our analysis suggests that approaches to learning are influencedbypredispositions that may be inborn or may be inculcated very early in thechild's life.  Such predispositions may reflect: gender, temperament, andcultural patterns and values.  These predispositions may be present atbirthand set the stage for how children approach learning situations  theirlearning styles.  Learning styles are composed of aggregated variablesthatcharacterize ways of responding across situations.  Learning styles, incontrast to predispositions, are malleable and include variables that affecthow children attitudinally address the learning process: their opennessto andcuriosity about new tasks and challenges; their initiative, task persistenceand attentiveness; their approach to reflection and interpretation; theircapacity for invention and imagination; and their cognitive approachestotasks.    I.  Predispositions       Gender, temperament, and cultural patterns and values all predisposechildren to different approaches toward learning.       Gender        There seem to be differences in opinion regarding how much the roleofgender affects how children approach learning.  On the one hand, much dataaffirm that there are few significant differences in the cognitive developmentof young males and females, although there are different maturation anddevelopmental rates.  However, parental and teacher expectations frequentlyvary by gender, and, in practice, stereotyping by gender is prevalent. Genderhas been shown to influence both attitudes toward subjects (e.g., mathematics)and attitudes about one's own abilities, which can influence how oneapproaches a task.  For example, boys and girls differ in achievementmotivation and in their attributions for success and failure.  While itisdifficult to separate innate differences from those caused by socialization,it is clear that gender is an important influence on predispositions towardlearning.        Temperament         Current work on temperament suggests that it may be a predispositionfor learning, because temperamental variations can influence the wayindividuals think, perceive, understand, judge, and solve problems.  Indeed,temperament influences the manner in which individuals exhibit theircompetencies and understandings.  Like gender, temperament has a geneticdimension, but how the influence of temperament functions as a predispositionto learning is culturally and contextually influenced.  The effect oftemperament depends on how parents respond to the child, the nature ofthechild's larger environment and culture, and the child's unique set ofexperiences (Thomas & Chess, 1986).  For example, shyness  though atemperament  has been regarded in some cultures as a disability, ratherthana stylistic variation of normal behavior.  As a result, expectations forshychildren may vary, causing them, in turn, to approach learning and socialsituations in ways that are shaped by their shyness and the cultural andcontextual expectations attendant to it.  Clearly, some temperamentalcharacteristics influence how children approach and are predisposed tolearning.        Cultural Patterns and Values         Cultural patterns and values predispose children to learn in differentways.  For example, in some cultures children are encouraged to learn byengaging actively in dialogue with their parents; in other traditions,children play a more receptive role, listening quietly to parents'instructions and guidance; in still other cultures, children learn throughobservation, imitation, and non-verbal communication (Chang & Sakai,inpress).  Cultural variation may affect children's work styles, includingtheircomfort working independently or socially (Little Soldier, 1992); it mayaffect the way children approach immediate experience and the nature oftheinterpretations (imaginative versus realistic) they render; and it mayaffectchildren's distractibility or ability to focus, and their action  versusreflection  orientation.  Such stylistic variations must not be perceivedasdeficiencies, but as equivalent strategies.       Culture also influences children's predispositions for differentlearning modalities  the way they prefer to approach learning tasks  withsome youngsters learning more easily by manipulating concrete materials,others by talking through a problem, and others by using visualrepresentations to comprehend its nuances; indeed, some children work bestwhen presented with a changing array of problem-solving formats (Boykin,1977).  Such affinities (Wolf, 1992) or predispositions are associatedwithdifferences in the way individuals process information.  II.  Learning Styles       Gender, temperament, and culture combine with other variables toaffectchildren's learning styles, or the manner in which children go about theprocess of learning.   Although children may be predisposed to one styleoranother, based on temperament, gender, and cultural background, learningstyles are malleable and may change with time or vary depending on thecontext.  The term learning styles has been used to encompass bothmotivational, attitudinal variables and cognitive styles in approachingproblems.  These learning styles include:  (1) openness to and curiosityaboutnew tasks and challenges; (2) initiative, task  persistence andattentiveness; (3) a tendency for reflection and interpretation; (4)imagination and invention; and (5) cognitive styles.       Openness to and Curiosity about New Tasks and Challenges         Wolf (1992) notes that in infancy, thought and exploration are social,but largely dyadic.  That is, children gain and extract information fromlimited sources and use knowledge in limited ways.  But as children mature,they extend their capacities to plan, to imagine, and to wonder; they movefrom the immediate worlds of the here and now, to the worlds of what mightbe. Some children approach knowledge acquisition and learning tasks with aneagerness to know, a sense of inquisitiveness, an interest in pursuingthenovel or unknown.  They gain information by persistent examination of factsorby verbal inquiry, usually characterized by a playfulness of spirit.  Incontrast, others approach learning with no special keenness to know, withanuncritical and unquestioning acceptance of knowledge as a constant.  Howchildren approach learning  whether they are inquisitive or accepting,exuberant or passive  is a style of learning.       Initiative, Task Persistence, and Attentiveness         Initiative is the ability to develop and follow through on plans. Inorder to complete a task successfully once initiated, task persistenceandattentiveness are required.  One must be able to attend to a task overtimeand to concentrate attention on an issue or a question across time andacrossobstacles.  As children mature and face the demands of formal learningenvironments, the need to adhere to a task despite interruption grows.Children who are not distractible and are attentive to tasks, to adults,andto peers and who are inclined toward diligence of purpose generally farebetter in the formal school setting.        Reflection and Interpretation         Reflection on events and experiences and the propensity to drawoutlessons for future use are important qualities for the developing child. Moreprecisely, diagnosing difficulties, teasing out alternate solutions, anddiscerning agreements and disagreements are components of children's wideningset of reflective strategies.  The ability to step back, to "repair"one'smeaning when the message gets scrambled, to understand mistakes, to havetheories about them, and to distinguish accidents from mistakes are componentsof learning to learn.  Such reflection and interpretation, sometimes referredto as the "socialization of thought" (Wolf, 1992), includes thecapacity toseek models, absorb information, and work through alternate possibilities.          Imagination and Invention       Closely aligned with curiosity, imagination, and invention are learningstyles associated with the ability to form images of what is not actuallypresent, to extend conventional thinking beyond the known, and to combineprevious experiences to form new ideas.  Various cultures accord differentweight to the ability to imagine and invent, with some cultures elevatingandothers denigrating the value.  Such differences also frame American education.On the one hand, the nation's educational system rhetorically accords valuetoimagination and inventive learning styles; on the other hand, such creativityis often constrained by the realities of daily classroom regimes.  Wolf(1992)appropriately notes that cultural variation demands that we develop ourindices of symbolic activity and imagination with extreme care.  She suggeststhat in a world where diversity (including classroom cultures) is oftenmasked, conceptual distinctions fail to recognize that idealized picturesofwhat should be often accompany notions of normalcy.        Cognitive Styles       Cognitive style refers to why children approach learning.  For example,some children are more field-independent than field-dependent and viceversa. A field-independent style, as proposed by Witkin (1962), involves a tendencyto separate details from background and to analyze information.  Such astylehas been shown to be an important predictor of success in schools in theUnited States.  Field dependence, although negatively related to schoolperformance in the United States, appears to be positively related tointerpersonal competencies.  Other cognitive styles relate to how childrenprocess information.  Some youngsters learn better by listening and repeatinginformation orally, while others learn by observing and processing writtenlanguage.          Further stylistic distinctions include:  using broad versus narrowcategories for information; tending to evaluate alternative solutions versusresponding quickly to the first reasonable answer; and trying to see atask inthe widest possible perspective versus beginning with a narrow focus. Perhapsthe most important finding from the large body of research on cognitivelearning styles is that children are most likely to achieve when tasksandteaching styles match their learning styles.  This leads to the conclusionthat a variety of teaching styles and tasks are necessary to meet children'sneeds.Relationship to Individual, Cultural, and Contextual Variation        Perhaps no other dimension is so subject to individual variationasapproaches toward learning.  In part, such variation owes itself todifferences in parental child-rearing practices.  It is from parents  throughinstruction, guidance, modeling, and responses to children's initiativesthat children learn how to confront tasks.  For example, parentalchild-rearing practices influence children's perceived locus of control thatis, whether they believe that they have control over events in their livesorthat they are helpless, with other sources controlling their fates.  Perceivedlocus of control can be an important determinant of how children confrontdifficult tasks in the classroom and other settings.  Parental practices,including nurturance, showing protective concern, using predictablediscipline, and setting predictable standards, have been shown to be relatedto the development of a sense of internal control (Marquis & Detweiler,1985).       Despite rhetorical acknowledgement of the importance of individualvariation, however, approaches toward learning have traditionally beenexamined within the context of "averages" and middle-class samples. Suchinterpretations have had the undesired consequence of legitimizing conformistbehaviors and dispositions, and condoning "preferred" learningstyles.  Forexample, rather than appreciating a variety of styles, some conventionalcurricula continue to favor visual rather than auditory learning styles. Byadvancing approaches to learning as an essential dimension, this reportunderscores the need to accord importance to individualization and thevalueof diversity. Summary        Approaches toward learning comprise the least understood, the leastresearched, and perhaps the most important dimension.  Because approachestoward learning frame the child's entire being and are at the core ofsocial/emotional and cognitive interactions, the dimension warrants moreserious attention.  This report suggests that predispositions and learningstyles influence the way the child both thinks about and acts upon learningopportunities.  Predispositions are genetically and culturally embeddedearlyon and are linked to gender, temperament, and cultural patterns and values.Learning styles include both cognitive variables and variables that revealhowchildren approach the learning process  their openness to and curiosityaboutnew tasks and challenges; their task persistence and attentiveness; theirapproach to reflections and interpretation; and their capacity for inventionand imagination.  Historically, American education has valued certain learningstyles over others, without fully recognizing the way in which cultureaffectslearning style.  Future work in this dimension will need to identify acontinuum of learning styles where all are accorded value and all are givenopportunity for development. 

**DIMENSION IV  LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT**Introduction        In comparison with the other dimensions, language development andthedimension that follows  cognition and general knowledge  are more oftenassociated with conventional definitions of early learning and school successin general.  Therefore, it could be assumed that these dimensions of earlylearning and development should be the easiest to define.  Two problemsarisefrom this assumption, however.  Too often, these important dimensions aretoonarrowly and simplistically defined and measured, with too little attentiongiven to the range of variation in manifestations of language developmentandcognitive development.  In addition, previous definitions of languagedevelopment have not sufficiently addressed the way in which English languagecompetence is acquired by children whose primary language is other thanEnglish.  Rapidly changing demographics demand that this issue become anintegral part of any discussion of language development as a dimensionofearly learning and development in the United States.Rationale            Language ability is a highly valued dimension of early developmentandlearning as demonstrated by a survey of kindergarten teachers (Boyer, 1991)who identified language as the area where most "unready" childrenhaddifficulty.  The ability to communicate competently with other people isessential to function effectively within and across the broad range ofactivities that characterize everyday life.  Children need to be able touselanguage as a tool for communication  to express their own thoughts andfeelings to others and to receive and interpret communications from otherpeople.  Language plays an equally crucial role in providing symbols forconcepts  a role fundamental for cognitive development.General Definition         By definition, language development is the acquisition of linguisticforms and procedures, and social rules and customs for acts of expressionandinterpretation.  Such knowledge has three essential components:  content(meaning), form (structure), and use (function).  These components of languageare formally called semantics, syntax, and pragmatics (Bloom & Lahey,1978;Crystal, 1987; Lahey, 1988).  In acquiring language, children learn wordsandstructures that articulate ideas to be shared with others in their communityand ways of using those words and structures to influence the ideas andactions of other people.  Both the forms of language and the ways of usingthem are mutually agreed upon by the community of language users  thatis,they are "conventional."  As such, the language development dimensionisclosely tied to development in the social-emotional dimension.       The outward manifestations of expressive and receptive languagespeaking and listening  are only a part of the process of languagedevelopment.  To interpret the communications of others involves the cognitivedimension of language in which the message received is evaluated in relationto the knowledge that is already stored in memory.  This means that childrenuse their language for accessing the knowledge they already have in ordertogain new knowledge.  Most people understand this cognitive dimension oflanguage when they realize that they have little memory for events thatoccurred before their third or fourth year of life  that is, before theirlanguage ability was sufficiently developed.  In short, language is crucialfor conceptual development and thinking.        Such rich language development (for expression and interpretation)requires much more than the acquisition of vocabulary and grammar.  Listening,remembering, following directions, noting details, understanding the mainidea, and other skills associated with success in school are ways childrenuselanguage for interpretation  figuring out what someone else (often theteacher) has in mind.  Explaining and describing are what children do whenthey use language for expression, to communicate their own thoughts toothers.       Researchers use the term "communicative competence" todescribe thecomplex set of skills encompassed in human language use (Hymes, 1972). Theseskills include:  (1) knowledge of the physical and sociocultural settinginwhich communication occurs; (2) knowledge about persons and their socialroleswithin settings; (3) knowledge of the goals of interaction among persons;(4)skill in performing sequences of acts involving language to successfullycommunicate (achieve goals); (5) knowledge of the range of affective elementsin communication (non-verbal communication, tone); (6) knowledge of thegrammatical structure and meanings of words used in written or spokenlanguage; (7) knowledge of the norms of communication  that is, the rulesorstandards for marking social relations in communication; and (8) knowledgeofgenre  the structures or forms that communication takes such as story,formalspeech, or casual conversation.  These components of language developmentareinterrelated and overlapping; skill in one component influences and isinfluenced by ability in another as well as by past experience anddevelopment.       The broad area of language can be divided into many categories,but atleast two are particularly highly valued:  verbal language and literacy.Children develop both as they use them in interaction with other peopleinpurposeful activities in their communities.  Much of the development ofverballanguage and literacy occurs through interactions with more experiencedlanguage users who support the child's linguistic development.  When childrentell stories, parents frequently ask questions to help them structure thetale, and when parents read books with their children, they allow the childtoparticipate increasingly until he or she is capable of carrying out theactivity without support.  More specific definitions of verbal languageandliteracy follow.I.  Verbal Language       Below is a summary of some of the commonly accepted behaviors thatchildren develop and learn in the domain of spoken language.  It is importantto note that by age five, children have not mastered adult forms of language(Crystal, 1987).  It is also important to note that these skills shouldnot beviewed as prerequisites to school entry  the refinement of skills is tobeseen as a shared task of schools, families, and communities.       Listening (e.g., increase the ability to discriminate and identifysounds; process sounds to formulate words and meanings; attend to and followoral directions)       Speaking (e.g., increase the ability to produce a broad range ofsounds; gradually develop and apply grammatical rules; increase clarityofpronunciation and speech)         Social Uses of Language  context-specific determinants of appropriatelanguage (e.g., use language as a tool to get services and objects, expressemotions, get and give information; use language pragmatically [functionally]and as part of social conventions and manners, saying, for example, "please,""excuse me," etc.)       Vocabulary and Meaning (e.g., increase the number of meaningfulwordsunderstood and used; explore and discover meanings of words and sentences;know relational terms that refer to spatial [in, over], temporal [before,after], and other types of relationships; use complex sentences that linksimple sentences, usually in terms of sequence [and, then] or causality[so,because])       Questioning (e.g., develop questioning ability, from what to where,when, why, and how)        Creative Uses of Language (e.g., listen attentively to stories,songs,and poetry; play with rhyming sounds and words; develop and tell a story) II.  Emerging Literacy       Closely related to the verbal language domain is the literacy domain,especially for young children.  Literacy begins to develop before childrenareformally taught to read and includes the whole act of extracting meaningfromprinted symbols, not merely decoding printed words.  Early storybook readingis important for the development of literacy, because it allows childrentolearn how to listen, remember, and ask and answer questions.  It also teachesthem that words have specific meanings, and they begin to develop anunderstanding of the structure of stories.  Although early exposure tobooksand reading is beneficial, children are also exposed to the printed wordandbegin to develop an understanding when they encounter food product labels,clothing labels, traffic signs, and television commercials.  As they begintoexplore the written system in a variety of social situations, they begintodiscover its inner workings  how meaning and print connect.  Children alsoengage in storytelling and sociodramatic play  in which stories and rolesmust be negotiated with others  thereby learning about the structure ofstories and laying the groundwork for later literacy.       Some of the emergent literacy competencies that are developing inyoungchildren include:       Literature Awareness (e.g., show interest in various forms ofliterature; recall familiar stories)       Print Awareness (e.g., be aware of print permanency [text remainsthesame from one reading to next]; be aware of the connection between thetextand the telling of the story; assign verbal labels to familiar letters;assignsounds to letter combinations; recognize own name in writing)       Story Sense (e.g., be aware of the sequence of a story [beginning,middle, end] and permanency of story sequence)       Writing Process (e.g., produce ordered scribbling [circular movementson paper]; produce writing configurations [a circle or an X])       Many such lists of language and literacy competencies could be producedto define language development.  The length and diversity of such a samplelist only partially reveals the complexity of the construct.  Languageabilities allow a child to participate in acts of expression andinterpretation that are necessary for other areas of learning and cognition:to read, write, solve problems, and acquire the knowledge related to otherschool subjects.  Language knowledge underlies children's growing abilitytointerpret and express new knowledge of the world and to exchange informationthat is increasingly decontextualized and explicit.  These skills providethefoundation for participating successfully in activities and accumulatingmoreabstract knowledge about the world.Relationship to Individual, Cultural, and Contextual Variation        As mentioned above, two important aspects of children's languagedevelopment are variation and complexity.  In terms of variation, childrendiffer in the language forms and structures they have acquired at any pointintime and in the rate of mastery over time.  One of the most influentialfindings in contemporary research on language acquisition has to do withtheindividual differences among children from very similar cultural and socialbackgrounds.  For example, the rate of language acquisition variesconsiderably.  Children can take from several months to several years tomaster various aspects of language.  Children learn words and the formoflanguage not only to express their ideas about persons, objects, and events,but also to meet personal and cultural objectives as determined by thegroupwithin which they are socialized.  Therefore, it is not surprising thatconsiderable research can be cited to demonstrate that cultural differencesexist in the way children acquire and use language (Blake & Bloom,1992;Duran, 1992).       Within the United States, we have many varieties of English thatsharelinguistic features with standard American English, but that also havedistinctive features that set them apart  for example, different patternsforthe use of language forms (Crystal, 1987; Sattler, 1992; Shuy & Staton,1982)and different distributions of language functions as a result of theirsocialuses (Brice-Heath, 1988; Hale-Benson, 1986; Miller, 1982; Potts, 1989.) Sucha complex perspective on communication is very important in understandinganddefining language development.  For example, interacting with a teacherin aninstructional activity at school requires a very different set ofcommunicative competencies  and sometimes an entirely different languagethan a child uses when interacting with a parent at bedtime or playinga gamewith another child at home.  The same child's language development couldlookvery different depending on the setting.        An expected outcome of different socialization experiences isdiscontinuity between the schooling experience and the everyday experiencesofculturally diverse children, as is apparent from the examples cited above.However, language is contextually based and influenced.  When five-year-oldchildren were observed while they were engaged in neighborhood dialogues,nodifferences were found in the linguistic abilities of black low-incomeandwhite middle-income children.  The structure of these children's dialogues;the quality, complexity, and functions of the language they used; and suchthings as concreteness and animacy of topics did not differ (Feagans &Haskins, 1986).       Much of what has been said so far also applies to children whoseprimary language is other than English.  Yet the question of languagedevelopment and learning among speakers of languages other than Englishneedscareful consideration.  Current research on second language acquisitionemphasizes the importance of children developing competence in their primarylanguage.  A growing body of research demonstrates the dangers of introducingEnglish before primary language skills have been developed.  For example,WongFillmore (1992) documents cases of immigrant families in which childrenhavelost the ability to speak to their own parents when English languageinstruction was imposed too soon.  In addition, time is needed to acquirecommunicative competence in a second language.  Cummins (1981) finds thatwhile children with a primary language other than English may develop abasicproficiency in English within two years of entering school, it takes fivetoseven years to develop the kinds of decontextualized academic skills necessaryfor school success in English.  The development of competence in a primarylanguage is also important for cognitive development.  Learning that takesplace in a child's primary language does not appear to impede the acquisitionof English; rather, instruction by means of the primary language in preschoolthrough the early grades promotes and develops the deeper cognitive andacademic skills that predict future success in the mainstream (Cummins,1981).        In the case of children whose primary language is not English, thechallenge is to develop curricula and assessments that allow children todemonstrate their true communicative competence, usually by producing moreextended segments of language.  Concerning assessment, the research onlanguage development suggests that permitting children to use languagetoexplore meaning more freely in light of their experiences and interests(during story-telling or peer-talk) can lead to better information abouttheirability to perform in school.  A truly sensitive assessment of any child'sverbal language would be capable of interpreting how his or her communicativecompetence in activities at home and in the community match or mismatch(arecontinuous or discontinuous with) the communication demands of activitiesrequired in the school. Summary        Children come to school as experienced users of language, butchildren's language has been acquired within the contexts of their homeandcommunity, within diverse cultural and linguistic environments.  Childrendonot acquire language skills out of context or despite a cultural milieu;rather, language is embedded in that context.  When the tasks, demands,andinteractions of a young child's everyday experiences are similar to andcontinuous with those of the school, then the child's prior experiencesfacilitate success in school.  But when the child's experiences differfromthose encountered in school  when they are discontinuous  it is moredifficult for children to apply previously acquired abilities in schooland toacquire new ones.  This means that educators need to be aware of and takeintoconsideration cultural and linguistic factors which influence children'sexpression and interpretation when assessing young children's cognitiveandlinguistic abilities.        The research cited here and much more that could be cited raiseseriousquestions about assessing children's language within narrowly definedcontexts.  Just as language is acquired because it is relevant to children'sexperiences, assessment of language ability must be conducted within relevant,meaningful conversational contexts.  Existing language assessments areinadequate to perform this task; current tests indicate what children donotknow about standard American English rather than what they do know aboutlanguage.  Obtaining child language samples in naturalistic contexts wouldbroaden our understanding of how children learning various social dialectsuselanguage for expression and interpretation.  This information could beused tobuild the connections needed between children's experiences and language,onthe one hand, and school experiences and language, on the other hand.

**DIMENSION V  COGNITION AND GENERAL KNOWLEDGE**Introduction        The last dimension of early learning and development is perhapsthe onethat is most frequently associated by the general public with schooling.Parents often assume that there is a set body of knowledge (e.g., namesforletters and shapes) that children need to acquire before they can successfullynegotiate early schooling.  In this regard, parents intuit only one aspectofthis complex dimension of early learning and development.  The problemwithtalking about knowledge is that there are many different, althoughinterrelated, kinds of knowledge that are acquired through similar, thoughnotidentical, processes.  Cognitive psychologists have used several categorysystems to describe knowledge.  For example, Piaget (1952, 1954, 1965)describes physical knowledge, logico-mathematical knowledge, andsocial-conventional knowledge.  Vygotsky (1978) describes school-learnedandspontaneous or socially-constructed knowledge.  Gardner (1983) identifiesmultiple different ways that humans beings are capable of knowing abouttheworld.  The "human intelligences" or ways people know the worldare throughlanguage, logical-mathematical analysis, spatial representation, musicalthinking, the use of the body to solve problems or to make things, anunderstanding of other individuals, and an understanding of ourselves.Information-processing theorists, in addition to studying the processesnecessary for acquiring and using knowledge, have identified other importantcategories of knowledge that are crucial for early schooling.  Thesecategories include knowledge of strategies for remembering informationandsolving problems and knowledge about the regulation of thought processes(e.g., knowing how and when to focus attention and ignore irrelevantinformation).  The general public's expectation limits the cognition andgeneral knowledge dimension to social-conventional knowledge  such as thenames for colors and numbers  when what children need is far more complexandinvolves all types of knowledge.Rationale       Two influential theoretical perspectives on cognition are the landmarkworks of Jean Piaget (1952; 1954; 1965) and Lev Vygotsky (1978).  Eachofthese theories assumes that knowledge results, at least in part, fromchildren's construction of their own understanding through their naturalability to think about their actions and through their interactions withotherpeople, adults, and children.  Piaget's theory emphasizes the constructionofknowledge from within the child as a result of an interaction betweenchildren's own thought processes and their experiences in the physicalandsocial worlds.  Vygotsky emphasizes the process of social constructionofknowledge with the interpersonal (language-related) dimension precedingtheintrapersonal  competence is developed through language and throughinteraction with adults and other children in everyday problem-solvingactivities.  Adults and capable peers provide a child with guidance and"scaffolding," as well as support calibrated to the child's abilities,decreasing as the child is increasingly able to take on more of the burden.With such support, a child is able to perform tasks he or she would beincapable of completing alone.  According to Vygotsky (1978), the developmentof higher order mental functions such as conceptualization begins in socialinteraction  that is, language use.  This kind of learning is importantthroughout life, but essential for children who need to test the mentalhypotheses they construct against the thinking of other people.  Althoughtraditional assessments have focused on evaluating what a child can achieveinisolation, this theoretical perspective suggests that a more effectiveapproach might be to examine what a child can achieve when performanceissupported by others, and to consider the types of support necessary forthechild to complete the task successfully.         Vygotsky and Piaget propose similar methods for classifying knowledge.Vygotsky (1978) distinguishes spontaneous concepts from school-learnedconcepts.  Spontaneous concepts are those that the child discovers throughdirect experience; these are the concepts that the child constructs mentallywithout need of instruction from adults.  On the other hand, school-relatedorscientific concepts originate in the culture and represent the body ofknowledge from past generations.  Vygotsky's school-learned concepts areanalogous to Piaget's socio-conventional knowledge, just as Vygotsky'snotionof spontaneous concepts parallels Piaget's view of construction of socialknowledge.  Piaget describes three categories of knowledge:  physical,logico-mathematical, and social-conventional.  They are defined here todelineate this dimension of early development and learning.General Definition        The cognitive and general knowledge dimension of early developmentandlearning includes at least three different kinds of knowledge.  The firstisphysical knowledge, the second is logico-mathematical knowledge, and thethirdis social-conventional knowledge. I.  Physical Knowledge       This is the knowledge of objects in external reality.  The colorandweight of a ball and the fact that the ball rolls down an incline are examplesof physical properties that are in objects in external reality and arelearnedby observation and experience with the objects.  II.  Logico-Mathematical Knowledge        Logico-Mathematical knowledge consists of the relationships createdbyindividuals within their minds between objects, events, or people.  Thisknowledge extends beyond physical knowledge to establishing similarities,differences, and associations.  For instance, when a child sees a red beadanda blue one and judges them to be different, the difference is an exampleoflogico-mathematical knowledge.  The difference is not a part of the physicalproperties of the beads themselves but is a product of the relationshipwhichthe individual has created between the beads.  Likewise, the individualcouldconstruct a relationship of similarity between the beads if the variableunderconsideration were size or weight.  Logico-mathematical knowledge is themostcomplex kind of knowledge and therefore the most difficult to describeandassess.  However, logico-mathematical knowledge is essential for childrentobe able to perform mathematical operations and also to solve problems ofallkinds.  As was indicated above in the discussion of language development,understanding relationships is key to understanding the world and solvingproblems.  III.  Social-Conventional Knowledge        Social-conventional knowledge reflects the agreed-upon conventionsofsociety and the school-learned knowledge that could not be reinvented byeverygeneration of learners.  For example, the conventions of the English languageare that there are 26 letters, including five vowels and 21 consonants,whilethe Hawaiian language consists of 12 letters with five vowels.  Other examplesof social-conventional knowledge are that December 25 is Christmas andthat weuse the numerals 1, 2, and 3 and the words one, two, and three.  The numericconcepts necessary to make sense of these numerals, however, are examplesoflogico-mathematical knowledge.       These three types of knowledge are interrelated.  For example, inorderto "read" the physical properties of objects such as color, thechild musthave first constructed a classification system that discriminates objectsalong this dimension (an example of logico-mathematical knowledge). Similarly, we could not understand the statement about Christmas withoutcategorizing Christmas day in relation to all other days of the year.        The distinction between types of knowledge is essential forunderstanding how children learn and how they demonstrate their learninginvarious contexts.  For example, many young children will break a cookieintolittle pieces and proudly announce that they have more cookie than theirclassmates.  This is an example of the child's reliance on physical knowledge(the cookie pieces look like more) in the absence of the construction oflogico-mathematical knowledge (the relationship stays the same becausenothingwas added or taken away).  As children mature, they acquire the abilitythrough repeated experiences to apply logico-mathematical knowledge tothisproblem.       Likewise, children may be able to demonstrate social-conventionalknowledge of numbers by rotely counting up to 30 or higher, but not beable toaccurately count a set of objects if they do not have the logico-mathematicalunderstanding that each object must be counted in order and only once (i.e.,understand one-to-one correspondence).  Piaget describes the child'sconstruction of number concepts as the process of synthesizing two kindsofrelationships  order and hierarchical inclusion.  The concept of orderisnecessary so that children do not count the same object over and over orskipany objects.  Hierarchical inclusion enables children to quantify a set,realizing that "three" includes "two" and "one,"or that "eight" encompassesall the objects rather than the eighth object in a series.  Sometimes childrenwho have not fully developed an understanding of numbers will count a setofeight and when asked to "show me eight" will point to the last object in the set.  This behavior demonstrates that, for thischild, the words "one, two, three" are names of individual elementsin aseries like "January, February, and March" rather than a numericalset.  Inshort, a child may demonstrate social-conventional knowledge of numberswithout demonstrating logico-mathematical understanding.  (A completedescription of children's development of number concepts is available inKamii, 1982; 1985; 1989.)         Similarly, as Gelman & Meck (1983) have shown, just as a childmaydemonstrate a social-conventional knowledge of numbers without demonstratinglogico-mathematical understanding, a child may have an implicitlogico-mathematical understanding of numbers and counting without necessarilybeing able to demonstrate this understanding.  For example, under certaincircumstances (e.g., when watching a puppet count), children as young asthreerecognize that each item in a set must be matched with a different numbername, that number names must be used in a constant order, and that thelastnumber in a count is special, because it indicates the number of itemsin theset.  Yet these children are unable to count appropriately on their own. Suchfindings force us to recognize that the level of logico-mathematicalunderstanding children demonstrate is dependent on the type of task usedtoassess this knowledge.        These examples illustrate the challenge of assessing children'scognition.  As in the area of language development, defining and assessingcognition is often oversimplified.  First, the cognitive domain is usuallymeasured as narrowly defined social-conventional knowledge:  what numberisthis? what shape is this?  Second, an assumption is made that the culturallydefined social-conventional knowledge of one group is or should be reflectiveof the knowledge and experiences of all cultural groups.  Social-conventionalknowledge is perhaps the most variant across cultural groups because itis themost determined by exposure to specific cultural information.  It is alsothemost easily acquired form of knowledge (usually through direct instruction).Lack of specific social-conventional knowledge should not be construedas lackof ability to learn.  Also, it is clear from the previous discussion, thatatleast two dimensions of learning  language and cognition  cannot beseparated, because language is crucial for conceptual development andthinking.        Below are some of the cognitive competencies that young childrendevelop through interaction of the different types of knowledge:       Representational Thought (e.g., the ability to think about thingsnotpresent; to distinguish between real and pretend)       Problem-solving (e.g., the ability to experiment using differentstrategies; relate cause to effect; interpret and generalize)       Mathematical Knowledge (e.g., the ability to put objects, events,actions into all kinds of relationships; explore sequence, cardinal andordinal number properties; perceive sequenced events in time)       Social Knowledge (e.g., to be aware of self, family, and community;beaware of physical environment and natural world)       Imagination (e.g., the ability to "formulate rich and variedmentalimages, see beyond the obvious, or draw upon experience in inventive andeffective ways" [Jalongo, 1990, p. 195])       Such a list as the above immediately reveals the importance as wellasthe interrelatedness of different kinds of knowledge.  Relationship to Individual, Cultural, and Contextual Variation             The above categorizations of knowledge and ways of learning arestatedgenerally as though all children learn in the same way.  While it is truethatthere are certain aspects of learning that can be generalized, recentcognitive research is equally clear that there are considerable differencesinnot only the rate at which children acquire knowledge, but in the waysinwhich children learn, remember, and understand.  Gardner's (1983) workdemonstrates that individuals differ in the strength of various abilitiesandin the ways different intelligences are combined to complete differenttasks,solve various problems, and progress in various domains.  Gardner's complexview of intelligence, considered in light of the growing body ofknowledge on approaches to learning described earlier, begins to explainsomeof the enormous variation that is observed in children's early learning.       In addition, as noted above, knowledge  particularlysocial-conventional knowledge  is extremely dependent on cultural context,and thus is subject to strong intercultural variation.  Culture contributestothe variance in children's development:  (1) by providing specific contextsfor learning; (2) by determining how different contexts are related; and(3)by regulating the difficulty of the child's role and the level of supportgiven to a child in performing a task (Laboratory of Comparative HumanCognition, 1983).  Culture determines not only the knowledge that is valuedand transmitted in children's communities, but also how children perceiveevents and stimuli.         Caregiver beliefs and child-rearing practices are influenced bycultural practices and have important consequences for children's cognitivedevelopment.  Caregivers shape the environments in which children growup, andthe level of guidance and support provided for children at different agesasthey engage in different activities varies widely among families.  Inaddition, although widely ignored in most current assessments, it is clearthat children's abilities and understandings are frequently highlycontext-dependent.  Slight variations in a task may produce large differencesin the level of understanding demonstrated. Children's performance on newtasks will depend on their familiarity with the context, which is highlyinfluenced by their cultural backgrounds.  In contexts that are familiar,where they can properly interpret the requirements of the situation, childrenwill demonstrate a high level of knowledge and understanding.  When thecontexts are unfamiliar, however, children may respond in ways that adultsdeem developmentally inappropriate and illogical.  For example, Carraher,Schliemann, & Carraher (1988) found that Brazilian street childrenwho work asvendors are able to perform relatively complex calculations in calculatingtotal costs of purchases and change due to customers, but cannot performwritten calculations for the exact same arithmetic problems in school.Summary         Even a cursory comparison of the list of cognitive competenciesdelineated above with the identified intelligences explains why those childrenwhose styles and ways of knowing more closely approximate the challengesofschool will appear to be more cognitively competent.  Less obvious is thefactthat cultural preferences and patterns are reflected in these cognitivetasks. For example, it is often assumed that the appearance of a strongfantasy-reality distinction is a developmental task of the preschool period,but in fact these behaviors are heavily culturally influenced (Wolf, 1992).As we learn more about cultural patterns in approaches to learning, stylesoflearning, and individual variation, we will gain greater understandingof theways that cognition and general knowledge are manifested by differentchildren.  In the meantime, the operating premise should be that all childrencan learn and that schools need to adapt to the individual needs, interests,and learning styles of different children if all are to succeed.**CONCLUSION**       The purpose of this paper has been to amplify the dimensionsof earlylearning and development used by the National Education Goals Panel tomeasureprogress towards Goal 1.  In developing this definition, the TechnicalPlanning Group has responded to widespread concerns regarding the narrownessof current definitions of "readiness," inappropriate methodsof testing, andthe misuse of data that can cause unintentional harm to individual children.By expanding the awareness and understanding of the multiple domains ofearlydevelopment and learning and of the variability caused by individual,cultural, and contextual influences, the Group hopes to stimulate areappraisal of our current methods of assessment, as well as our currentpolicies and practices concerning young children and their families.       This section examines issues that underlie this definitional analysisand that must be addressed as a prelude to any reappraisal of our currentapproach to early care and education.  Then, the section identifiespreliminary implications of the Technical Planning Group's work forassessment, practice, and policy.  Finally, the section suggests specificaction steps based on these implications for future work in early developmentand learning.Underlying Issues        Throughout this report, two underlying issues have repeatedly emerged.First, though the immediate task at hand was to amplify the dimensionsofchildren's early development and learning with an eye toward the futuredevelopment of specifications that might be suitable for assessing theconstruct, the Technical Planning Group strongly believes that child outcomesshould not and cannot be the sole measure of America's progress towardthefirst Education Goal.  While specifying desired child outcomes is a necessarystep, it is an insufficient approach.  It must be coupled with a commitmenttoexamining social and institutional readiness to support children's earlydevelopment and learning.        To that end, the Technical Planning Group strongly urges that energybedevoted to examining the readiness and capacity of the nation's schoolstoreceive young children.  Moreover, the nation must examine the nature andquality of America's health and mental health services to assure that adequatepre- and post-natal care is available to all, that all children have accessnot simply to immunizations but to on-going health care and adequatenutrition, and that child abuse and neglect are eliminated.  We shouldexaminewhat it will take for our education system to assure that young peoplereceiveparenting education and support routinely, and that preschool childrenhaveaccess to high quality programs.  Family resource and support programsshouldbe widely available, offering parenting education, support groups, andoutreach to improve families' capacities to support their children'sdevelopment.  America should examine its employment practices to assurethatall who are able have access to gainful, durable employment, and thatcorporate policies support a nation attempting to enrich its commitmenttochild and family life.  In short, the Technical Planning Group is wrestlingwith tension created by a nation that wants to be able to measure childoutcomes without according sufficient attention to the inputs necessarytoyield those outcomes.        The second issue permeating this report is related to both the drivefor standardization that is implicit in Goal 1 and the need for andappreciation of the significance of individual, familial, cultural, andcontextual diversity.  The report has called for a rethinking  arestandardization, of sorts  of the essential domains of early developmentand learning.  Specifically, the report has encouraged a shift from aprimarily cognitive orientation to one that embraces multiple dimensions.Simultaneously, the Technical Planning Group's work strongly underscorestheneed to respect individual, cultural, and contextual variability  a stancethat demands flexibility, rather than standardization, in the interpretationand utilization of the definitions.  In short, the Technical Planning Group,while understanding the complexity of the technical challenges associatedwithdefining and assessing early development and learning before us, is convincedthat new assessments are doomed to repeat past problems unless such effortsare permeated by a conceptual orientation that accommodates cultural andcontextual variability in what is being measured and in how measurementsareconstructed.  Within the broad parameters of standardization, then,flexibility and inventiveness must be brought to bear on the content andtheprocess of assessment.   Implications        Recognizing the above issues and the limitations of this report,whatare the implications that can be drawn to inform the approaches towardearlydevelopment and learning that are necessary if we are to undertake responsiblythe challenge of the nation's first Education Goal?  The Technical PlanningGroup offers suggestions  bearing in mind that much fruitful work is alreadyunderway  in three categories:  assessment, practice, and policy.Assessment       For decades, the use of norm-referenced standardized tests to assessyoung children has been commonplace.  In the late 1980s, however, throughtheefforts of individual scholars, advocates, and teachers, along with supportfrom professional organizations, the liabilities of such practices wereuncovered.  To modify the situation, alternative assessment practices werepromulgated, and efforts were made to distinguish between "assessment"andstandardized "testing."       Given the amplification of children's early development and learningdiscussed here, plus the shortcomings of established testing methods, itisessential that any assessment strategy take into consideration a numberofissues, such as the incorporation of multiple dimensions as well as culturaland individual variability issues.  In addition to abandoning testingstrategies that rely on single administrations, that are uni-dimensional,andthat fail to capture cultural variability,assessment strategies must clearly distinguish the purposes of assessment. Itis not possible for a single assessment system or a single assessmentinstrument to do all things.  Instruments used to determine eligibilityforservices should be different from both those used to collect nationalaccountability data and those used to make clinical judgments; moreover,dataderived from assessments and observations that will be useful for theimprovement of pedagogical practices are likely to be different from allthree.  Furthermore, rather than the automatic administration of instrumentsthat may be inexpensive and readily available, more thoughtful data collectionplans that include input from families, teachers, and the children themselvesmust be constructed.  And rather than administering all assessments toallchildren, such plans need to be developed with the understanding that,for thepurposes of monitoring national changes over time, sampling is sufficient.       In addition, greater attention must be given to addressing unresolvedconceptual issues, suggested above.  First, amplification of the variablesassociated with children's early development and learning actually posesserious challenges for assessment.  As we have seen, information is notequally robust regarding all dimensions; indeed, in some areas it is woefullyweak.  Consequently, far more scholarly work is needed to tease out variablesin certain domains.         Second, this analysis suggests that far more work is needed if weareto make assessments responsive to the cultural variation that characterizesall early development and learning.  Heretofore, "cultural" sensitivityhasbeen expressed by simplistically making assessments available in children'sown languages or by showing sensitivity in the types of questions askedandthe nature of information solicited.  While these factors are important,weare now aware, for example, that cognitive processing is different forbilingual children than it is for monolingual youngsters.  We have seenthatculture profoundly affects how children approach learning, how they learn,howthey process information, and how they interpret ideas and behaviors tosuch adegree that assessment procedures and instruments must not merely becalibrated to accommodate such differences, but must be constructed fromthevery core to embrace variation.  There is a need for new ways of thinkingabout multiple outcomes, and for the development of outcome continua thatfully recognize alternative expressions of valued outcomes.            Third, and despite the first two concerns, so much knowledge isalreadyavailable that if one were to construct an assessment that incorporatedallthe variables presented and that represented sound principles of assessment(e.g., periodic assessment by multiple parties), the time committed toassessment would be enormous.  Although the Technical Planning Group supportsthe value of assessment, particularly as a tool for enhancing qualityclassroom practice, the Group also demands sensitivity to the burden placedonteachers, children, and families by assessment.  Efforts must be undertakentocollapse variables and to frame specific performance assessments so thatmultiple information can be extracted from common or everyday experiences. Practice       This analysis suggests that early development and learning mustnolonger be regarded solely, or even primarily, as a cognitive issue.  Knowledgemust nest within the full range of dimensions discussed, and must beunderstood as a fully integrated component of early development. Understanding that early development and learning consists of physicalandmotor development, social and emotional development, approaches towardlearning, and language development  in addition to cognition and generalknowledge  has implications for the content of curriculum and for the goalsof early education (i.e., for what is taught, for how it is taught, andforhow knowledge is constructed).         Moreover, the discussion suggests that those who work with youngchildren should know the dimensions and understand how to translate thatknowledge into classroom practice.  Achieving this sounds far simpler thanitis.  Certification standards that drive college course offerings oftendo notacknowledge the multiple dimensions of early development and learning.Certification processes consistently devalue understandings of humandevelopment (child and adult).  In short, if practice is to be alteredtogenuinely accord weight to the five dimensions, teacher preparation programsmust also do so.  Further, new approaches to in-service training need tobedeveloped so that teachers and those who work with young children haveaccessto specialized training.  Individuals who work with young children  mustbewell-versed in parent engagement and family support, as well as in thenuancesof pedagogy and its application.       The analysis suggests that to optimize early development and learning,there must be a match between the nature of the child's learning environmentand the child.  Contextual variables dramatically alter the trajectoryofchildren's early development and learning, suggesting that in order forchildren to thrive, they must be in environments that foster richdevelopmental experiences.  In the most simple manifestation of this point,classrooms where young children congregate may therefore feel and lookdifferent from those of older youngsters.  Constructing knowledge fromexperience must be accorded value.  Variation in the learningenvironment must reflect cultural values and modes of interaction.   Policy       It is quite clear that the multidimensional nature of early developmentand learning has serious implications for the enactment of policy, whichhasso long been characterized by categorical funding and distinct programs. Thedimensions and the need for them to be integrated means that partnershipsamong agencies in health and education, not to mention social services,needto be fostered.  In some cases, programs are already designed to bemulti-disciplinary; where they are not, linkages for referrals, for combinedplanning, and for collaborative work can be developed.        Taking hold in local communities throughout the nation, suchintegrative efforts also need support at the federal level.  In some cases,supports that enable cross-program linkages and service integration taketheform of waivers or exemptions from extant policy.  In other cases, incentivesfor collaboration are being incorporated into legislation.  Whatever thestrategy, to attain the multi-dimensional outcomes presented herein, morecollaboration is needed at various levels.        By implication, the focus on children's early development and learningsuggests that policy emphases must begin well before the early years ofschool.  The challenge is that such activity needs coordination at thefederaland state levels.  Currently, responsibility is dispersed among many agencies,and between the public and private sectors.  If the nation is serious aboutmeeting its first Education Goal, delivery mechanisms beyond what currentlyexist will need to be considered.  It is not simply the development ofnewpolicies that must be accorded attention; it is the development of newstructures and new public will.  It is to that end that this report isdedicated.   Action Steps        Given the expanded definition of early development and learningproposed in this report and the above implications for assessment, practice,and policy, concrete action steps are proposed below to guide the developmentand implementation of a revised approach to serving young children.      First, to nurture these five dimensions will require additional workbyresearchers and local districts to observe, describe, measure, and understandthe dimensions.  Far more scholarly work needs to be done to tease outvariables where current information is not adequate.      Second, assessments of the strengths and needs of young childrenentering school need to reflect the five dimensions explained in this paper.Currently, many local systems assess children's "readiness" bythe use ofinappropriate testing methods that focus too narrowly on children's knowledgeof pre-literacy and pre-academic information.      Third, to help schools and teachers recognize the five dimensionsaccurately, work is needed to develop ways to assess them in children whosecultural backgrounds vary from that of the teacher.  Children's earlydevelopment and learning always occur in a specific cultural context. Thatcontext influences the ways in which the child learns to use language,thespecific knowledge he or she is most likely to acquire, and the ways inwhichhe or she approaches learning and other social situations.  In the past,individual and cultural variations in the expression of these dimensionshavebeen mistaken for deficiencies in the children.  Important work needs tobedone to develop methods to recognize these dimensions accurately in childrenfrom varying social and cultural contexts.  Assessment procedures andinstruments must both be calibrated to accommodate such differences andconstructed to recognize and illuminate multiple expressions of outcomesonthese dimensions.      Fourth, attention is needed in both policy and practice in ordertorecognize that preparing children for school means helping them becomehealthy, adjusted, curious, and expressive, as well as knowledgeable. Asschools laudably seek to raise education standards, some will be temptedtobegin academic instruction at younger and younger ages.  In contrast, thebestway to reach high standards may be to attend to children's general well-beingand encourage teachers to provide learning environments and experiencesrichin opportunities to explore, rather than providing earlier formal academicinstruction.  Increasing recognition that children learn by activelyconstructing knowledge complements the understanding of the importanceof allfive dimensions.      Fifth, regarding the issue of teacher training and certification,teachers need training to understand, recognize, and nurture the fivedimensions of early development and learning and the variety of ways inwhichdifferent children may demonstrate them.  Such training can help them toappreciate the educational strengths and needs of their students and totranslate that knowledge into classroom practice.  In addition, teachersneedtraining in increasing parent involvement, educating parents, and in assistingparents in supporting their children's development.       Sixth, to promote all five of these dimensions in children thereis apolicy need to coordinate human service delivery among health, education,andother social service agencies at the local, state, and federal levels. Suchpolicy coordination needs to reflect a shared commitment of communitiestosupport the efforts of families and schools to provide a supportiveenvironment for children in the larger society.**REFERENCES** Anderson, S. B.  (1992).  Practical measurement and relatedconsiderations. Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on School Readiness fortheNational Education Goals Panel.Bandura, A.  (1977).  Social learning theory.  Englewood Cliffs, N. J.:Prentice-Hall.Blake, I. K., & Bloom, L.  (1992).  Language development and learninginschool.  Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on School Readinessfor the National Education Goals Panel.Bloom, L., & Lahey, M.  (1978).  Language development and languagedisorders. New York: John Wiley.Bowman, B. T., & Zvetina, D.  (1992).  "By the year 2000 all childreninAmerica will start school ready to learn":  Social/emotional readiness.Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on School Readiness fortheNational Education Goals Panel.Boyer, E.  (1991).  Ready to learn: A mandate for the nation.  Princeton,NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Boykin, A. W.  (1977).  Experimental psychology from a black perspective:Issues and examples.  In W. Cross (Ed.), Final report from the ThirdConference on Empirical Research in Black Psychology.  Washington, DC:National Institute of Education.Brice-Heath, S.  (1988).  Language socialization.  In D.T. Slaughter (Ed.),Black children and poverty:  A developmental perspective (pp. 29-41). SanFrancisco:  Jossey-Bass Inc.Brown, B.  (1989).  The role of peer groups in adolescents' adjustmenttosecondary school.  In T. J. Berndt & G. W. Ladd (Eds.), Peer relationshipsinchild development (pp. 188-216).  New York:  Wiley.Brown, R.  (1982).  Exercise and mental health in the pediatric population.Clinics in Sports Medicine, 1, 515-527.Carew, J. V.  (1978).  Head Start profiles of program effects on children.Position paper for Mediax ACYF Project.  Westport, CT:  Mediax Associates.Carraher, T., Schliemann, A. D., & Carraher, D. W. (1988).  Mathematicalconcepts in everyday life.  New Directions for Child Development, 41, 71-87.Chang, H. N., & Sakai, L.  (in press).  The challenges of culturalandlinguistic diversity for early care and education.  California Tomorrow.Comer, J. P., & Poussaint, A. F.  (1992).  Raising black children. New York: Plume.Crystal, D.  (1987).  The Cambridge encyclopedia of language.  Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.Cummins, J.  (1981).  The role of primary language development in promotingeducational success for language minority students.  In California StateDepartment of Education (Ed.), Schooling and language minority students: Atheoretical framework (pp. 3-49). Los Angeles: Evaluation DisseminationandAssessment Center, Calilfornia State University.Cutler, R., Heimer, C. B., Wortis, H., & Freedman, A. M.  (1965). Theeffectsof prenatal and neonatal complications on the development of prematurechildren at two-and-one-half years of age.  Journal of Genetic Psychology,107, 261-276.Dawson, P.  (1992, June).  Should the field of early child and familyintervention address failure to thrive?  Zero to Three, 20-24.Dienard, A., List, A., Lindgren, B., Hunt, J., & Chang, P.  (1986). Cognitivedeficits in iron-deficient and iron-deficient anemic children.  JournalofPediatrics, 108, 681-689.Duran, R. P.  (1992).  Communicative competence of language minority childrenwith implications for the design of an early childhood assessment.  Manuscriptprepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on School Readiness for the NationalEducation Goals Panel.Epenschade, A., & Eckert, H.  (1974).  Motor development.  In W. R.Johnson &E. R. Buskirk (Eds.), Science and medicine of exercise and sport.  NewYork: Harper and Row.Feagans, L., & Haskins, R.  (1986).  Neighborhood dialogues of blackand white5-year-olds.  Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 7, 181-200.Gallahue, D.  (1987).  Developmental movement activities for young children.Presented at the Annual Conference of the National Association for theEducation of Young Children, Chicago, IL.Garcia, E. E., & Figueroa, R.  (1993).  Goal one:  The impact of culturaldiversity on America's schools.  Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 ResourceGroup on School Readiness for the National Education Goals Panel.Gardner, H.  (1983).  Frames of mind.  New York:  Basic Books.Gelman, R., & Meck, E. (1983).  Preschoolers' counting:  Principlesbeforeskill.  Cognition, 13, 343-359.Hale-Benson, J.  (1986).  Black children:  Their roots, culture and learningstyles (Revised edition).  Baltimore, MD:  Johns Hopkins University Press.Halverson, H. M.  (1931).  An experimental study of prehension in infantsbymeans of systematic cinema records.  Genetic Psychology Monographs, 10,107-286.Halverson, H. M.  (1936).  Complications of the early grasping reactions.Genetic Psychology Monographs, 47, 47-63.  Harter, S.  (1983).  Developmental perspectives on the self-system.  InP.Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Social and personality development(Vol. 4, pp. 275-385).  New York:  Wiley.Hartup, W. (1991).  Having friends, making friends, and keeping friends:Relationships as educational contexts.  ERIC Digest.  Urbana, IL: ERICClearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education [ED 345-854].Howes, C.  (1988).  Peer interaction of young children.  Monographs oftheSociety for Research in Child Development (Serial No. 217), 53(1).Howes, C.  (1992).  Background paper on social emotional elements of schoolreadiness.  Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on SchoolReadiness for the National Education Goals Panel.Hymes, D.  (1972).  Models of the interaction of language and social life. InJ. Gumper & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics.  New York: Holt,Rinehart and Winston. Jalongo, M. R. (1990).  The child's right to the expressive arts:  Nurturingthe imagination as well as the intellect.  Childhood Education, 66, 195-201.Kamii, C.  (1982).  Number in preschool and kindergarten.  Washington,DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.Kamii, C.  (1985).  Young children reinvent arithmetic.  New York:  TeachersCollege Press.Kamii, C.  (1989).  Young children continue to reinvent arithmetic, 2ndgrade. New York: Teachers College Press.Katz, L. G.  (1992).  Approaches to learning:  Dispositions as a dimensionofschool readiness.  Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group onSchoolReadiness for the National Education Goals Panel.Klerman, L. V., & Parker, M.  (1990).  Alive and well?  A review ofhealthpolicies and programs for young children.  New York:  National Center forChildren in Poverty.Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition (1983).  Culture and cognitivedevelopment.  In P. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology:  Volume1,History, theory, and methods.  New York:  Wiley.Ladd, G. W.  (1990).  Having friends, keeping friends, making friends andbeing liked by peers in the classroom:  Predictors of children's earlyschooladjustment?  Child Development, 61, 1081-1100.Ladd, G. W., & Price, J. M.  (1987).  Predicting children's socialand schooladjustment following the transition from preschool to kindergarten.  ChildDevelopment, 58, 1168-1189. Lahey, M.  (1988).  Language disorders and language development.  New York:Macmillan Publishing Company.Landreth, C.  (1967).  Early childhood:  Behavior and learning.  New York:Knopf.  Liebert, R. M., & Wicks-Nelson, R.  (1981).  Developmental psychology.Englewood Cliffs, NJ:  Prentice Hall.  Little Soldier, L.  (1992).  Working with Native American children.  YoungChildren, September.Lozoff, B., Wolf, A., Urrutia, J., & Viteri, F.  (1985).  Abnormalbehaviorand low developmental test scores in iron-deficient anemic infants.  Journalof Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 7, 69-75.Marquis, K. S., & Detweiler, R. A. (1985).  Does adopted mean different? Anattributional analysis.  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,48,1054-1066.Marshall, H.  (1989).  The development of self-concept.  Young Children,44,44-51.McLoyd, E.  (1990).  The impact of economic hardship on black familiesandchildren:  Psychological distress, parenting, and socioemotional development.Child Development, 61, 311-346.Mediax Associates.  (1980).  Accept my profile!  Perspectives for HeadStartprofiles of program effects on children.  Westport, CT:  Author.Miller, P. J.  (1982).  Amy, Wendy, and Beth:  Language learning in SouthBaltimore.  Austin, TX:  University of Texas Press.National Center for Clinical Infant Programs.  (1992).  Heart start:  Theemotional foundations of school readiness.  Arlington, VA:  Author.National Education Goals Panel.  (1991a).  The national education goalsreport:  Building a nation of learners.  Washington, DC:  U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.National Education Goals Panel.  (1991b, September 4).  The Goal 1 TechnicalPlanning Subgroup report on school readiness. Washington, DC:  Author.  National Education Goals Panel.  (1992).  The national education goalsreport: Building a nation of learners.  Washington, DC:  U.S. Government PrintingOffice.Oski, F., Honig, A., Helu, B., & Howanitz, P.  (1983).  Effect of irontherapyon behavior performance in nonanemic, iron-deficient infants.  Pediatrics,71,877-880.Parmelee, A.  (1986).  Children's illness:  Their beneficial effects onbehavioral development.  Child Development, 57, 1-10.Piaget, J.  (1952).  The origins of intelligence in children.  New York:International University Press.  (Original work published 1936) Piaget, J.  (1954).  The child's construction of reality.  New York:  BasicsBooks.  (Original work published 1937)Piaget, J.  (1965).  The child's conception of number.  New York:  Norton.(Original work published 1941)Poest, C. A., Williams, J. R., Witt, D. D., & Atwood, M. E.  (1990,July). Challenge me to move:  Large muscle development in young children.  YoungChildren, 45, 4-10. Potts, R.  (1989).  West side stories:  Children's conversational narrativesin a Black low-income community.  Paper prepared for biennial meeting oftheSociety for Research in Child Development, Kansas City, MO.Public Health Service.  (1990, September).  Healthy people 2000:  Nationalhealth promotion and disease prevention objectives (Conference Edition).Washington, DC:  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Rogers, C.  (1961).  On becoming a person.  Boston:  Houghton Mifflin.Rutter, M.  (1979).  Protective factors in children's responses to stressanddisadvantage.  In M. W. Kent & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary preventionofpsychopathology (Vol. 3):  Social competence in children (pp. 49-74). Hanover, NH:  University Press of New England.Sattler, J. M.  (1992).  Assessment of children (3rd edition).  San Diego,CA: Jerome M. Sattler, Inc.Seefeldt, V.  (1980).  Physical fitness guidelines for preschool children. InProceedings of the National Conference on Physical Fitness and Sports forAll(pp. 5-19).  Washington, DC: President's Council on Physical Fitness andSports.Shapiro, S., McCormick, M. C., Starfield, B. H., Krischer, J. P., &Bross, D. (1980).  Relevance of correlates of infant deaths for significant morbidityatone year of age.  American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 136, 363-373.Shonkoff, J. P.  (1992).  Physical health and the concept of school readiness.Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on School Readiness fortheNational Education Goals Panel. Shuy, R. W., & Staton, J.  (1982).  Assessing oral language abilityinchildren.  In L. Feagans & D. C. Farran (Eds.), The language of childrenreared in poverty:  Implications for evaluation and intervention (pp.181-195).  New York:  Academic Press.Smith, B. J.  (1992).  Goal one and children with disabilities.  Manuscriptprepared for the Goal 1 Resource Group on School Readiness for the NationalEducation Goals Panel.Stipek, D., & Tannatt, L.  (1984).  Children's judgments of their ownandtheir peers' academic competence.  Journal of Educational Psychology, 76,75-84.Thomas, A., & Chess, S. (1986).  The New York Longitudinal Study: Frominfancy to early adult life.  In R. Plomin & J. Dunn (Eds.), The studyoftemperament:  Changes, continuities and challenges (pp. 39-52).  Hillsdale,NJ:  Lawrence Erlbaum.Tittnich, E., Bloom, L. A., Schomburg, R., & Szekeres, S. (Eds).  (1990).Facilitating children's language:  Handbook for child-related professionals.New York:  Haworth Press.  United States Department of Agriculture, Human Nutrition Information Service.(1993).  Food and nutrient intakes by individuals in the United States,1 day,1987-88.  Nationwide Food Consumption Survey 1987-88, NFCS Rep. 87-I-1. DraftReport.  United States Department of Health and Human Services.  (1981).  Betterhealthfor our children:  A National strategy:  The report of the Select Panelforthe Promotion of Child Health to the United States Congress and the Secretaryof Health and Human Services (Volume I).  Washington, DC:  U.S. GovernmentPrinting Office.Vygotsky, L.  (1978).  Mind in society:  The development of psychologicalprocesses.  Cambridge, MA:  Harvard University Press. Witkin, H. A. (1962).  Psychological differentiation:  Studies of development.New York:  Wiley.Wolf, D. P.  (1992).  Approaches to learning:  A perspective on childrencoming to school ready to learn.  Manuscript prepared for the Goal 1 ResourceGroup on School Readiness for the National Education Goals Panel.Wong Fillmore, L.  (1992).  When learning a second languages means losingthefirst.  Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 6(3), 323-346.Zill, N.  (1991).  Recent trends in children's physical and mental health.Testimony before the Subcommittee on Children, Families, Drugs and Alcoholism,United States Senate, Committee on Labor and Human Resources.  Washington,DC: Child Trends.