Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Profile of Preschool Learning and
Development Readiness (ProLADR)
For Children One & Two Years Prior
to Kindergarten
ADMINISTRATION &
TECHNICAL MANUAL
© 2017 Early Learning Labs
2 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Authors & Contributors
Kristen Missall, Ph.D., NCSP
Kristen is an associate professor in the School Psychology Program at the University of
Washington. She received a Ph.D. in school psychology from the University of Minnesota, and
completed post-doctoral training at the Center for Early Education and Development at the
University of Minnesota. Prior to her appointment at the University of Washington she served on
the faculty at the University of Kentucky and University of Iowa.
Her research interests include child development (specifically from ages 3-8), academic and
social development, transition to kindergarten, early school adjustment, and general outcome
measurement. Kristen has authored over 40 journal articles, technical reports, and book
chapters. She serves currently as Associate Editor for the Journal of Early Intervention and on
the Advisory Board of the Iowa Reading Research Center.
Alisha Wackerle-Hollman, Ph.D., NCSP
Alisha is the vice president of research at Early Learning Labs and a research associate within
the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Minnesota. Alisha has
contributed to IGDI development since 2005 and currently works on the research and
development of future measures including identification and progress monitoring measures.
Alisha’s research interests include development of early literacy and language, measure
development, research to practice application, progress monitoring, community based and
participatory action research, parenting intervention, children’s literature and school readiness.
Dena Roberts
Dena Roberts has worked in Early Childhood for over 20 years. She has worked in various roles
in the early childhood field, including teacher, assistant director, coach and most recently trainer.
Dena received her bachelor’s degree in Early Childhood Education at Concordia University.
Dena’s work consists of providing resources and support for students, teachers and
administrators by implementing various coaching strategies targeted towards kindergarten
readiness. Dena has also helped prepare centers and schools in achieving accreditation. Dena has
facilitated and created many trainings designed for Early Childhood staff with a focus on
literacy, math and MTSS/RTI implementation.
Copyright Notice
Copyright © 2017 Early Learning LabsTM. All rights reserved.
3 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Background ................................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction to Purpose and Type of Assessment ....................................................................................... 4
Theoretical Framework for Development ................................................................................................... 5
Domain and Subdomain Orientation and Rationale ................................................................................ 5
Social and Emotional Development .................................................................................................... 5
Language Development ...................................................................................................................... 6
Cognitive and General Knowledge ..................................................................................................... 6
Approaches to Learning ...................................................................................................................... 7
Physical Well-Being ........................................................................................................................... 7
Guiding Frameworks .............................................................................................................................. 7
Alignment with State Standards .......................................................................................................... 8
Procedures for Completing the Tool ........................................................................................................... 9
Training .................................................................................................................................................. 9
Recommended Administration Windows................................................................................................ 9
Administration Instructions and Scoring Procedures .............................................................................. 9
Needed Materials .............................................................................................................................. 11
Scoring Rubrics................................................................................................................................. 11
Item Examples & Scoring ................................................................................................................. 12
Reducing Bias in Scoring .................................................................................................................. 14
Score Interpretation ............................................................................................................................... 14
Normative Benchmarks..................................................................................................................... 15
Normative Sample ............................................................................................................................ 17
Using the Assessment with All Children .................................................................................................. 17
Sharing Results with Families................................................................................................................... 18
Using Results to Inform Instruction .......................................................................................................... 18
Technical Adequacy ................................................................................................................................. 19
References ................................................................................................................................................ 23
4 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND
The myIGDIs Profile of Preschool Learning and Development Readiness (ProLADR) was
designed to provide teachers a rating scale for monitoring the growth and development of young
children across multiple learning domains as they make their way through preschool towards
Kindergarten. The ProLADR is one of several instruments in the myIGDIs assessment portfolio,
and is intended to be used alongside the existing research-based measures, Individual Growth
and Development Indicators of Early Literacy (IGDI-EL) and Early Numeracy (IGDI-EN).
Using these three tools in unison will provide teachers/caregivers a broad range of information,
collected in a standardized fashion both formally and informally, for assessing the growth and
development of preschool-aged children.
For more information pertaining to these assessment tools and programs, please reference the
myIGDIs website at http://www.myIGDIs.com.
INTRODUCTION TO PURPOSE AND TYPE OF ASSESSMENT
Purpose of Assessment
The Profile of Preschool Learning and Development Readiness (ProLADR) is a
comprehensive assessment for children in preschool and preschool-like settings the two years
prior to kindergarten entry. ProLADR is a teacher/caregiver rating scale grounded in a series
of semi-structured observations, with teacher ratings information about individual children.
ProLADR can be used by a child’s primary teacher or caregiver across a range of preschool
settings, including schools, Head Start centers, child care centers and family child care
programs, homes, and so on.
The purpose of the ProLADR is to allow teachers/caregivers to gather information about each
child’s development across settings through intentional individualized and ongoing observations
and direct prompts during authentic interaction, and to use that information to inform
instructional planning and communicate with families about their child’s development.
Type of Assessment
ProLADR is a teacher/caregiver rating scale designed to be administered three-times during the
academic year (fall, winter, spring). ProLADR includes both observational questions and direct
prompts. By design, the scale items (and the physical presentation of the items) measure and
inform a child’s developmental growth and progress over time. Results can be used to assist in
planning individual or small group instruction of children with Individual Education Plans,
special learning needs, and children learning English as a second language.
5 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK FOR DEVELOPMENT
Domain and Subdomain Orientation and Rationale
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) technical report on school
readiness (2010), a child’s readiness to learn in a formal school setting is generally attributed to
five domains:
1. Social and emotional development (e.g., social skills, emotion regulation);
2. Language and early literacy development (e.g., verbal language, early literacy skills);
3. Cognitive and general knowledge (e.g., early mathematics skills, problem solving);
4. Approaches to learning (e.g., ability and inclination to use learning skills); and
5. Physical well-being (e.g., health, motor development).
Social and Emotional Development
Preschool marks the beginning of rapid growth in development and application of lifelong social
and emotional skills including establishing and maintaining positive relationships, setting and
reaching goals, relating to others, and regulating emotions. Broadly speaking, social and
emotional development in preschool includes peer-related, adult-related, and learning-related
skills (McClelland, Acock, & Morrison, 2006; McClelland, Morrison, & Holmes, 2000). Peer-
related social-emotional skills are evident when children navigate play and work contexts with
same-age peers, children practice and fine-tune interaction skills like social initiation and
response, cooperation, sharing, negotiation, and conflict resolution. As children enter preschool,
adult-related social-emotional skills grow in importance. Preschool environments, in contrast to
infant/toddler classrooms, are more structured, often with larger groups of children and a lead
teacher in ways that reflect formal schooling contexts. As they move to these classrooms,
children must learn acceptable ways to seek adult attention, wait their turn, contribute in the
classroom, and request support. Last, preschool-age children develop a considerable number of
learning-related social-emotional skills that facilitate successful classroom management. In fact,
research studies with kindergarten teachers suggest learning-related skills are among the most
important to kindergarten teachers (Rimm-Kaufman, Pianta, & Cox, 2000). Learning-related
skills support being part of a classroom of children: hand raising, independent working, sitting
Terminology
6 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
still, asking relevant questions, engaging actively in class activities, managing emotions,
following rules and directions, meeting classroom expectations, and so on.
Language and Early Literacy Development
Language development consists of two discrete components: expressive language or the ability
to communicate wants and needs verbally (e.g., speaking) and nonverbally (e.g., American Sign
Language, use of picture schedules), and receptive language, or the ability to demonstrate
understanding and comprehension of spoken language. Language, broadly, incorporates
vocabulary and general knowledge. Research has shown that early vocabulary development is
essential for supporting ongoing language development, and early academic skills, particularly
in the area of early literacy (c.f., Hart & Risley, 1995; National Early Literacy Panel [NELP],
2008; Snow, Burns, & Griffin, 1998; Whitehurst & Lonigan, 1998).
During the preschool years, language development shifts a bit from being central to
communication to supporting early literacy development. Early literacy skills in preschool
include alphabetic knowledge, phonological awareness/phonics, concepts of print,
vocabulary/comprehension, and emergent writing (NELP, 2008). These skills really start to
emerge and refine in the year before Kindergarten, and support early reading including:
recognizing the differences between illustration, letters and words; awareness of letter-sound
correspondence; understanding that words are made of sounds that can be blended and
segmented; learning that words have specific beginning and ending sounds; awareness of word
play, like rhyming and alliteration; learning that spoken words have symbols (e.g., letters) that
can be formed and written; that books are read top to bottom and left to write; and knowledge
gain be gained without direct life experience (i.e., learning about exploring a place they have
never visited).
Cognitive and General Knowledge
Early mathematics learning in preschool is essential for later mathematics learning and school
preparedness (Duncan et al., 2007; National Council for the Teachers of Mathematics, 2000). In
preschool, math development is important in the areas of numeracy/number sense, geometry and
measurement, although young children also learn the foundational skills of algebra and data
analysis (Clements & Sarama, 2007). Because math development is not necessarily hierarchical
and sometimes not even number-oriented, young children start to learn math concepts early in
development. In preschool, young children learn to rote count and identify printed numerals
(which is part of internalizing a number line). They count with one-to-one correspondence, notice
and estimate quantity, use mathematical position words (e.g., first, second, third; one-half),
understand that the final number in a counting series represents the total amount, and use simple
mental calculation. Young children identify basic shapes and compare and contrast items using
physical properties.
7 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
As children engage in early learning and problem solving, they must be taught to use critical and
hypothesizing skills as they engage in activities that require scientific and cause-effect thinking.
Generating many possible solutions and contemplating differential outcomes encourage broad
and flexible thinking, and prepares young children for advanced and independent thinking.
Approaches to Learning
Temperament and personality are individual traits that vary tremendously across young children.
At the start of any given year, teachers can reasonably anticipate that all of their students will be
different. Yet, the U.S. education system requires that students gradually engage in learning in
similar ways. Schools and teachers value independent thinking and working (as explained in
learning-related social skills), and a range of approaches to learning that broadly represent
engaged and inquisitive exploration. More specifically, as part of a trajectory of learning and
engagement in formal learning, young children must be taught (and usually with individualized
approaches) to demonstrate motivation, persistence, reflection, and willingness/interest/
flexibility in learning.
Physical Well-Being
Physical well-being incorporates motor development and general health. Motor development
includes small movements (fine motor development) and large movement (gross motor
development). Fine motor skills involve those that facilitate eating, dressing, toileting, writing,
and playing with small toys. Gross motor skills involve large muscle movements, like jumping,
running, hopping, climbing, throwing, and arm swinging. Many motor skills require eye-hand
coordination and depth perception, such as throwing a ball toward a target, accurately kicking a
ball, or placing a block on top of a tower.
Motor development facilitates physical movement, general well-being, and life satisfaction. More
specifically, motor skills facilitate social and language development. The more children move
and the larger their movement and play skill repertoire, the more options they have for
interacting with others. Similarly, movement through the environment produces learning
opportunities that facilitate vocabulary and knowledge acquisition.
Guiding Frameworks
To help teachers/caregivers and families fully evaluate a child’s performance, several
developmental frameworks were consulted when creating ProLADR. Specific frameworks
included: The Head Start Child Development and Early Learning Framework: Promoting
Positive Outcomes in Early Childhood Program Serving Children 3-5 Years Old (U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families Office of
Head Start, 2010); the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Developmental Milestone
8 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Checklists, and various state-level early childhood indicator systems including Minnesota’s
Early Childhood Indicators of Progress (ECIP) content. ProLADR is also being reviewed for
standards in other states.
Alignment with State Standards
In recent years, individual states have been creating standards for early care and education in
their jurisdictions (Scott-Little & Maxwell, 2015). While these standards differ in detail from
state to state, they tend to share several common characteristics. First, these standards describe
desired features of young children’s development related to kindergarten readiness and school
success. Second, in broad ways, these standards are designed to guide the development or
selection of assessment and curriculum resources for early childhood programs. Third, these
early learning standards are typically “comprehensive” or “holistic,” describing a wide and
complete array of child skills and competencies in multiple domains.
ProLADR items are organized into the following developmental domains and subdomains:
Developmental Domains Subdomains
Social and
Emotional
Development
Emotional Development
Self-Concept
Peer-Related Social Competence and Relationships
Adult-Related Social Competence and Relationships
Language and
Literacy
Development
Receptive Language (Listening and Comprehension)
Expressive Language
Emergent Reading: Phonological Awareness
Emergent Reading: Alphabetic Knowledge
Emergent Writing
Cognitive Development
Mathematical and Logical Thinking
Scientific Thinking and Problem Solving
Social Systems Understanding
Physical and Motor
Development
Gross Motor
Fine Motor
Physical Health and Well-Being
Approaches to
Learning
Development
Curiosity
Risk Taking
Imagination and Invention
Persistence
Creativity and the
Arts Development
Creating
Responding
9 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
PROCEDURES FOR COMPLETING PROLADR
Training
ProLADR is a teacher rating scale, where individual teachers’ judgments are based on direct and
varied observations of individual children. Prior to using the ProLADR we suggest
teachers/caregivers receive training focused on conducting naturalistic observation with
preschoolers and specifically on how to complete the ProLADR. Conducting high-quality natural
observation requires attention to many important variables. Training in using ProLADR items for
instructional purposes is also recommended.
Recommended Administration Windows
Start Date End Date
Fall Aug 15 Nov 14
Winter Nov 15 Feb 14
Spring Feb 15 May 14
Administration Instructions and Scoring Procedures
ProLADR has been designed to be completed 3 times over the course of a child’s year-long
preschool experience. It can be used with children in P3 or P4, or up to 6 times in the years
before kindergarten. We recommend that ProLADR be completed by teachers who know the
child being rated; in particular, we recommend that ratings be completed by teachers who spend
at least 30% of the school day with the rated child over a period of at least 4 weeks. Teachers
and caregivers working on teams are encouraged to work together on each assessment. Each
teacher/caregiver who interacts with the child at least 30% of the child’s time can conduct
observations and then complete ProLADR items based on (a) direct observation and (b)
teacher/caregiver knowledge of the child’s skills and (c) direct prompting of student behavior or
skills. Teachers/caregivers are encouraged to work together on completing the assessment.
ProLADR includes two types of items. First, teachers are asked to rate a child’s skill based on the
array of observations they have completed, describing a child’s typical level of performance.
Second, some items provide teachers an opportunity to assess child skill directly, by providing
direct prompts to produce child response.
To complete ratings based on teachers’ watching children over time, the assessment process for
the ProLADR begins with observation. For one calendar month, teachers/caregivers should
10 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
engage in observation of the child in his/her natural environment and take note of his/her
behaviors as they relate to ProLADR items. Work samples, anecdotal notes, and other forms of
observational evidence from the same period should be examined and evaluated to inform child
development. During the 1-month observation period, ProLADR items can be completed but it
is important not to “close the window” and finalize ratings prematurely. Providing a month of
observation offers children many authentic opportunities to demonstrate each rated skill. By
making notes along the way, the assessor can then review their scores at the end of the 1- month
period and adjust these ratings as necessary.
To complement observations the ProLADR also includes some questions that are provided as
direct prompts. For these items, standardized approaches to determining the student’s skill level
are provided. Each direct prompt question requests the assessor provide a prompt to the child to
determine if he or she has the noted capacity described in the question. These direct-prompt
items can be completed any time during the one-month observation period. Together, these
observational and direct prompt items provide a complete snapshot of the child’s development.
The assessment process concludes with completion of the ProLADR Record Form, where the
teacher collects and finalizes ratings on all ProLADR items. Completion of the scale will take
about 15-30 minutes per child, depending on child-level variability. But ratings should be based
on a series of observations in a range of settings over the period of one calendar month, and
should reflect typical behavior demonstrated by the child. Items should be completed based on
what the child does and can do - during the 1-month observational window. Items reflect
expected development throughout the course of preschool.
Tip
Items with an asterisk align in theory and concept with other measures in the myIGDIs
suite, including the Early Literacy & Early Numeracy IGDIs. We encourage the assessor to
provide these items to the student during use of ProLADR but note the differences in
observations that may occur between types of assessment. This information may be useful
when data is examined for instructional decision making.
Optional
The assessment process for the ProLADR continues with the option of collecting
feedback from families. Families should be encouraged to complete the Family
Survey of Preschool Learning and Development Readiness to gather information
about their perspectives in key developmental areas and to prompt comments about
their interests, concerns, and resources. It is recommended to send a copy of the
Family Survey at the start and end of each preschool year. The Family Survey can be
used as a tool to support Parent-Teacher meetings.
11 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Needed Materials
As we have noted, some ProLADR items are completed by the teacher specifically asking a child
to complete a particular task. For these “direct prompt” items, some everyday materials are
required to complete tasks. When indicated, please be ready to collect the following items for use
during assessment:
● 10 small objects (e.g. crayons, blocks, etc.)
● A visually appealing picture book (e.g. The Very Hungry Caterpillar, Pete the Cat, etc.)
● Printed numerals 0-10, separated from one another and at least ½ inch high
● 3 objects of different sizes (small, medium, large), all small enough to hold in your hand
● 3 basic shapes (e.g., triangle, square, rectangle, circle)
● Scissors
● 10 blocks of the same size
● Objects to compare weight and length.
Scoring Rubrics
Teachers complete ratings for each item. These ratings provide some measure of the extent to
which the child can complete the assessed skill. Details for rating are somewhat different for
observation and direct-prompt items:
Skills observed during the 1-month window
0 Child never demonstrates
1 Child demonstrates infrequently
2 Child demonstrates some of the time
3 Child demonstrates consistently
n/a No opportunity to observe child demonstrating this skill
Skills prompted during the 1-month window
0 Child was unable to perform skill
1 or 2 Child was able to partially perform skill (scoring unique to each item)
3 Child was able to perform skill
n/a No opportunity to prompt the child this skill
12 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Item Examples & Scoring
To aid assessors in understanding how to use observational and direct prompt tasks, examples
of scoring a small set of ProLADR items is provided.
Observational Tasks. The teacher observes the child and determines to what degree the child
engages in the task:
● Task I.5 - Labels own emotions (e.g., sad, mad, happy)
Over the course of the observational month, the teacher can make notes of variation in
the child’s expressed emotion, and note whether the child indicates awareness and
“names” that emotion. After reviewing the observational notes, the teacher completes
rating:
A score of 3 indicates the child uses phrases that show emotion consistently. Statements
like, “I am so mad,” “that makes me happy,” “I’m excited,” “She is sad, I am too.”
A score of 2 indicates the child uses phrases that show emotion some of the time, but
when the opportunity is present sometimes he or she fails to use emotion phrases. For
example, the child takes a toy from another child and says “its mine! You made me mad”
but in another interaction he or she takes the toy and pushes the other child.
A score of 1 indicate the child rarely uses phrases that label emotions. He or she is more
likely to experience emotions without providing labels.
A score of 0 indicates the teachers has never seen the child use an emotion label.
● Task III.17 - Identifies problems
A score of 3 indicates the child frequently identifies problems in his or her natural
environments. A child who consistently identifies problems uses phrases such as “I can’t
get it, its stuck!,” “I want to have a turn, but you have it,” “When can I use that?,” “My
shoes don’t fit,” “This page is torn, I need to fix it,” “He doesn’t have any snack” etc.
These types of phrases illustrate the child observes the situation and is able to call out the
problem.
Scoring is based on a child’s capacity to do the task - not necessarily how often the child
performs the task. For example, you may only observe a child do a task twice, but if both
times the child did the task well, it would be appropriate to score a 3 because the child is
consistently doing it. Observe for quality over quantity.
13 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
A score of 2 indicates the child occasionally, but not frequently, uses phrases that
identify the problem, but other times the child observes but is unable to label the
problem and disengages. For example, if the child is at snack and doesn’t get any, a child
who gets a score of 2 would sometimes say “Can I have some please. I don’t have any”
but in other circumstances would not speak up and go through snack without ever getting
anything to actually eat. Similarly, the same child may want a toy but not recognize the
problem and instead walk away and disengage rather than asking for a turn, or say to
adults “he/she has it!” without seeing this as a problem to solve.
A score of 1 indicate the child rarely identifies problems. He or she is more likely to
experience problems as a part of their experience that they feel is out of their control.
Disengaging, crying or frequently moving on to something else without identifying the
problem are all examples of behaviors indicative of children who are not yet able to
identify problems.
A score of 0 indicates the assessor has never seen the child identify a problem.
● Task III.18 - Tries out various strategies to solve problems
A score of 3 indicates the child routinely or frequently attempts to find solutions to
problems in their natural environments. A child who consistently tries out strategies to
solve problems exhibits behaviors indicative of, and uses phrases such as, “How about
you get a turn, then I get a turn?,” “I will trade you this toy for that one,” “If I eat all of
my lunch can I play with it afterwards?,” “Maybe if it I put it on this way it will fit,” “I
fixed it!,” “I helped him/her!” These types of phrases illustrate the child is able to
determine a strategy and try it out to solve the problem.
A score of 2 indicates the child occasionally but not frequently attempts to find
solutions to problems they encounter, or uses phrases that suggest a resolution strategy
some of the time, but other times the child is unable to think of and apply a solution.
For example, if a child wants a toy another has in some instances he or she might ask
for it or offer a trade, and in others he or she might just yell, “He has it!, I’m telling!” or
something similar.
A score of 1 indicate the child rarely is seen to be seeking solutions to problems. He or
she is more likely to experience problems as a part of their experience that they feel is out
of their control and therefore not try strategies that are potential solutions. Disengaging,
crying or frequently moving on to something else without trying to find a strategy to
solve the problem are all examples of behaviors indicative of children who are not yet
able to problem solve.
A score of 0 indicates the assessor has never seen the child solve a problem.
Direct Prompt Tasks. Questions 1.13 and 2.6 are examples of direct prompt items. The teacher
asks the specific prompt and scores the response:
14 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
● Task I.13 - Ask the child if they are a boy or a girl
A score of 3 is provided for a child who correctly identifies their sex. A score of 0 is given
for an incorrect response, if the child does not respond, or if the child says "I don't know."
● Task II.6 – Ask child to predict what will happen next in the story
After reading a story, the child is asked to predict what will happen next.
A score of 3 is given to a child who gives any reasonable response based on the story
content.
A score of 0 is given for any response that does not in any way align with the story
presented.
Reducing Bias in Scoring
Bias in scoring can occur when the teacher/caregiver filling out the form consults their previous
season's score of the child's abilities and skills and uses that information to determine the current
assessment's scores. This is an inappropriate use of prior data and does a disservice to accurate
assessment because it unduly influences scores based on teacher self-reference rather than the
child's true skills and abilities. Each season should be considered separately based on
observations and prompts, not on prior scores. As such, it is important that all
teachers/caregivers who complete the ProLADR do NOT flip to previous pages to consult
prior season's scores for each individual child.
Score Interpretation
ProLADR was designed to describe individual child growth and development in the six assessed
domains. Growth and development is examined by raw score change over time. Items are scored
based on the frequency of a child’s behaviors, and higher scores over time suggest a child is
engaging in key skills on a more consistent basis. This is important because consistent
performance of the skill-based items over time suggests proficiency, and gives us confidence that
a child is demonstrating the skills necessary for school preparedness.
Items within subdomains are summed, and subdomains within domains are summed. In short,
each child receives 6 domain scores. All children grow and develop at different rates, but when
children approach the end of their final preschool year, they should be demonstrating most of
the items in a consistent manner. That said, teachers/caregivers should rate children based on
natural interactions and not in accordance with developmental goals. This scale was designed to
be sensitive to individual differences and to produce scores to show areas likely to benefit from
additional instruction. At almost every assessment period, results should show that every child
in the classroom is working to further develop skills in at least one of the domains.
15 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Normative Benchmarks
ProLADR can be used to make “norm-referenced” evaluations of individual child performance.
A normative reference approach to benchmarks identifies a standard percentile to indicate
success or level of intervention need. This means that individual child scores are compared to the
broad range of scores by children in the same season and grade. Children whose ratings exceed
the 50th percentile – the large group average – are judged to be proficient, and those children
with scores below the 25th percentile are considered candidates for intervention in that particular
domain. Normative benchmarks at the 50th and 25th percentile by age and domain are provided
on next page.
● Tier I: Strong Progress --- Domain scores at or above the 50th percentile indicate the
child’s performance in that domain is developing as expected.
● Cut Range: Moderate Progress --- Domain scores between the 25th and 50th percentile
indicate that the child’s performance in that domain warrants attention and monitoring,
with careful attention to the possible need of early intervention.
● Tier II/III: At-risk Progress --- scores at or below the 25th percentile indicate the
child’s performance in that domain is not at an expected level. Further
instructional/intervention support should be offered.
16 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Age Group 50th
Percentile
Benchmark
25th
Percentile
Benchmark
P3
Social and
Emotional
Fall 65 45
Winter 70 47
Spring 76 63
Language
and Literacy
Fall 48 28
Winter 55 30
Spring 68 52
Cognitive Fall 26 12
Winter 28 20
Spring 40 30
Physical
and Motor
Fall 22 11
Winter 24 15
Spring 27 21
Approaches to
Learning
Fall 21 10
Winter 22 12
Spring 27 19
Creativity
and the Arts
Fall 15 6
Winter 18 8
Spring 20 15
P4
Social and
Emotional
Fall 72 59
Winter 74 61
Spring 80 71
Language
and Literacy
Fall 60 42
Winter 67 46
Spring 75 65
Cognitive Fall 52 42
Winter 57 45
Spring 61 54
Physical
and Motor
Fall 18 16
Winter 19 17
Spring 20 18
Approaches to
Learning
Fall 28 23
Winter 31 24
Spring 34 29
Creativity
and the Arts
Fall 16 13
Winter 17 14
Spring 19 16
17 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Normative Sample
For the purposes of normative benchmark, 442 3-year olds and 1,052 4-year olds were included
in the analysis. Mean age and range by season is provided below.
Age Group
Mean Age Range
P3
Fall 3.38 2.8-4.6
Winter 3.62 3.0-4.7
Spring 3.79 3.2-4.8
P4
Fall 4.69 3.4-6.0
Winter 4.93 3.7-6.2
Spring 5.11 4.0-6.5
Demographic information collected from the normative sample indicated students were sampled
from six states (MN, WI, IL, KS, SC and TX) and included public preschool programs, family
childcare programs, private preschool programs and subsidized school readiness programs.
Programs included full-day and half-day programs and a variety of curricula were used to
engage student in developmentally appropriate early childhood activities.
Across the sample, 33% of rated children were eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch, and 20%
received special education services through an IEP or IFSP. Forty-seven percent of students in
the norming group were male. Regarding ethnicity, 78% were White, 9% were Black, 7% were
Hispanic/Latino, 2% were Asian American, 3% were Native American and <1% reported other
(including Bi-racial, Polish, and Arabic).
USING THE ASSESSMENT WITH ALL CHILDREN
The focus of scoring is identifying areas of need for instructional purposes, which is sensitive to
individual differences and classroom needs. All children have strengths and weaknesses, and
one important interpretation of scores is that all children will be working on further development
of skills – regardless of whether they have an identified disability, are learning English, or are
experiencing stressful life events, etc. Because children are rated on their typical behavior and
classroom performance, individual differences are captured in scoring.
Also, because items are behavioral and developmental, response bias due to culture and value is
minimized. Accordingly, we feel the items are generally reflective of developmental objectives
and as culturally neutral and respectful as possible.
18 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
SHARING RESULTS WITH FAMILIES
ProLADR results are summarized in a report for families that is easy to access and interpret.
The Summary Report (last pages of Record Forms) is completed for each child. Summary
scores are presented in a table format that lists domain totals along with any items that reflect
skills for which the child needs developmental support at home or school. Each form is
comprehensive across one academic year to encourage discussions about individual needs and
growth across the academic year.
Additionally, ProLADR is now compatible with the myIGDIs Data System. Managing your data
and generating reports electronically at login.myigdis.com.
Use the Family Survey of Preschool Learning and Development Readiness to collect
information provided by the child’s primary parent/guardian.
USING RESULTS TO INFORM INSTRUCTION
ProLADR can be used to support instruction and intervention. Because ProLADR items are
behavioral and discrete units presented clearly across domains, it is straightforward to use child-
level results to inform instruction. Many of the items are addressed in typical curriculum and are
part and parcel of preschool classroom experiences (i.e., sharing with peers, listening to
instruction, following classroom rules). Items may require explicit and targeted instruction or
scaffolding, particularly those related to early academic skills (i.e., literacy, math, problem
solving). Teachers/caregivers should evaluate each child’s observationally-based rating scale
scores tri-annually to evaluate and plan instruction objectives.
ProLADR results can be used to plan instruction for individuals and small groups. For example,
if several children are identified on the ProLADR as needing to demonstrate sharing more
consistently, teachers/caregivers could create semi-structured play groups with these children that
might involve more adult time than usual in order to model, scaffold, and instruct on the target
skill of sharing.
Tip
ProLADR was normed with full day and half day programs. If you are in a half-day program
it is important to try to observe and prompt for all domains. This means you may need to
strategically make use of the full one-month window so that you can balance instructional
time with observations of child level skills.
19 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
Teachers/caregivers should use professional judgment and discretion to prioritize developmental
and learning needs for individual children. Children should be demonstrating most of the items
consistently by kindergarten entrance. Teachers/caregivers should note as part of the scoring and
report sharing processes areas of child growth and need, and monitor instruction and learning
accordingly. It is recommended that teachers/caregivers use specific instructional planning for
each child to note needs and teaching targets.
TECHNICAL ADEQUACY
Development of the ProLADR followed a specific, expert process to establish construct validity.
Items were selected using prominent theoretical frameworks for child development (see
“Theoretical Framework for Development” earlier in this manual) and contributions from three
child development experts – two researchers with collectively over 25 years of experience
developing assessment tools for preschool and early elementary school, and a former early
childhood educator with over 20 years of preschool classroom experience. Theoretical
frameworks were read; items were written independently by the three expert contributors; items
were reconciled; items were compared against theoretical frameworks; items were clarified and
combined; and items were reworded to be behavioral and discrete. Both experts contributed to
content to ensure theoretical and practical representation.
The ProLADR research team engaged in two years of research to iteratively revise the protocol,
items, and administration prompts to create the most efficient and psychometrically robust
testing experience. Using Kane’s (2013) model for demonstrating validity the ProLADR features
four claims regarding interpretations and uses:
(1) ProLADR can be used to inform instructional decisions by providing teachers
with information about student performance in six early childhood domains.
(2) ProLADR includes item that are theoretically aligned and empirically robust.
(3) ProLADR items are sensitive to growth over the academic year.
(4) ProLADR can be used to screen performance and identify students who may be
candidates for intervention within each domain.
Item Level Analysis
Over the course of two years, all ProLADR items were iteratively evaluated and revised. Our
final item level analyses produced descriptive statistics, item means, p-values, and item to total
correlations for each age group within a classical test theory model.
20 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
P3 ProLADR Items
3-year old ProLADR performance across the academic year generally demonstrates an increase
in performance across the academic year as depicted below.
P3 Descriptive Performance
FALL WINTER SPRING
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Total Score 169.11 90.13 169.30 107.02 217.35 96.12
Domain I 55.09 27.81 56.21 31.11 65.01 27.88
Domain II 42.08 25.08 42.88 31.47 58.04 26.99
Domain III 23.44 15.16 24.40 18.54 34.03 16.16
Domain IV 18.52 11.47 17.55 13.29 22.65 11.81
Domain V 11.13 17.62 16.41 12.42 21.98 11.17
Domain VI 7.70 12.35 11.86 8.72 15.65 7.70
The ProLADR P3 items are featured in all six domains, with sub-scores computed to illustrate 3-
year old performance profiles. Item means and standard deviations by domain are provided in a
technical appendix made available on the myIGDIs website (www.myigdis.com). Within each
table the average score, or item mean, for each item is provided (range is 0-3) as well as the
standard deviation.
Item statistics were also computed to evaluate the degree to which each item contributes to the
test. All items were evaluated with the goal of including items with polytomous p-values greater
than .2, and item to total correlations greater than .2. Results indicated eight items produced p-
values below .2. These evaluation team reasoned these items were too difficult to meaningfully
illustrate growth over time and therefore were removed or revised. Item-to-total correlations
were appropriate, with no items removed as a result of item-to-total evaluations.
P4 ProLADR Items
4-year old ProLADR performance across the academic year generally demonstrates an increase
in performance across the academic year as depicted below.
P4 Descriptive Performance
FALL WINTER SPRING
Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD
Total Score 212.68 81.48 223.88 95.43 251.32 82.46
Domain I 63.33 22.25 65.45 25.04 71.45 22.33
Domain II 50.29 24.23 55.50 28.20 65.72 24.27
Domain III 42.67 18.65 45.16 21.88 51.67 18.34
Domain IV 17.89 7.52 17.82 8.71 19.11 8.77
Domain V 24.29 10.32 25.25 14.70 27.30 12.22
Domain VI 14.21 6.22 14.70 7.18 16.08 7.04
21 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
The ProLADR P4 items are featured in all six domains, with sub-scores computed to illustrate 4-
year old performance profiles. Item means and standard deviations by domain are provided in a
technical appendix made available on the myIGDIs website (www.myigdis.com). Within each
table the average score, or item mean, for each item is provided (range is 0-3) as well as the
standard deviation.
Item statistics were also computed to evaluate the degree to which each item contributes to the
test. All items were evaluated with the goal of including items with polytomous p-values greater
than .2, and item to total correlations greater than .2. Results indicated eight items produced p-
values below .2. These evaluation team reasoned these items were too difficult to meaningfully
illustrate growth over time and therefore were removed or revised. Item-to-total correlations
were appropriate, with no items removed as a result of item-to-total evaluations.
Reliability
Reliability coefficients were computed using ProLADR Fall assessment data for each domain. We
computed internal reliability as Chronbach’s alpha. Alpha is the average of all possible Spearman-
Brown corrected split half correlations. Results are reported in the table below. Results indicate
ProLADR obtained excellent reliability within each domain.
Number of Items Crohnbach’s Alpha
Domain I 35 .947
Domain II 39 .924
Domain III 23 .938
Domain IV 13 .815
Domain V 12 .958
Domain VI 7 .909
Split half reliability was also computed by domain. To produce split half reliability coefficients we
randomly divided items in each domain into two parallel forms and correlated the split form scores
to produce a split-half reliability estimate for each domain.
Fall split half correlations
AGE 3 AGE 4
Domain I 0.98 0.96
Domain II 0.93 0.95
Domain III 0.84 0.91
Domain IV 0.87 0.77
Domain V 0.94 0.93
Domain VI 0.88 0.89
Finally, we examined, internal consistency by examining the standard error of measurement for
each item; as child level abilities are dependent in the error inherent in each item that contributes to
their score. In classical test theory, each domain can be evaluated using item to total domain score
22 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
correlations where items that have significant standard error of measurement will have depressed
item to total correlations and thus depress mean item to total correlations with the domain score.
Mean item to total correlations by domain are provided below for age 3 and age 4 across seasons:
Mean item to total correlations across seasons
AGE 3 AGE 4
Domain I 0.86 0.72
Domain II 0.78 0.63
Domain III 0.75 0.66
Domain IV 0.76 0.81
Domain V 0.87 0.86
Domain VI 0.91 0.91
Evidence to Support Validity Claims
ProLADR is designed to detect changes in student performance across time with the expectation
that instruction is differentiated based on student performance in between assessments that should,
if appropriately engaged, change student performance by accelerating development, or maintaining
development for those students who are performing above the Tier I, or success at the universal
curriculum level. As a result, we expect moderate correlations between fall, winter and spring
scores on the ProLADR given that instruction may impact student performance over time.
Correlations between seasons are reported below.
Correlations within domain across seasons for P3
FALL TO WINTER WINTER TO SPRING
Domain I 0.55 0.67
Domain II 0.62 0.55
Domain III 0.60 0.56
Domain IV 0.58 0.53
Domain V 0.59 0.49
Domain VI 0.57 0.50
Correlations within domain across seasons for P4
FALL TO WINTER WINTER TO SPRING
Domain I 0.40 0.57
Domain II 0.60 0.57
Domain III 0.62 0.55
Domain IV 0.50 0.40
Domain V 0.59 0.43
Domain VI 0.49 0.42
23 Copyright © 2017 Early Learning Labs. All rights reserved.
REFERENCES
Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., Pagani,
L.,
... Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology,
43, 1428-1446.
Clements, D.H., & Sarama, J. (2007). Building blocks – SRA real math grade pre-K.
Columbus, OH: SRA/McGraw Hill.
Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young
American children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
McClelland, M. M., Acock, A. C., & Morrison, F. J. (2006). The impact of kindergarten learning-
related skills on academic trajectories at the end of elementary school. Early Childhood
Research Quarterly, 21, 471-490.
McClelland, M. M., Morrison, F. J., & Holmes, D. L. (2000). Children at risk for early
academic problems: The role of learning-related social skills. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 15, 307-329.
Minnesota Department of Education (2005). Early childhood indicators of progress:
Minnesota’s early learning standards. St. Paul, MN: Author.
National Conference on State Legislatures (2010). Technical report: State approaches to
school readiness assessment. Available at http://www.ncsl.org/research/education/ncsl-
technical-report-state-approaches-to-school.aspx.
National Council for the Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school
mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Early Literacy Panel, (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the national early
literacy panel: A scientific synthesis of early literacy development and implication for
intervention. Jessup, MD: National Institute for Literacy.
Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Pianta, R. C., & Cox, M. J. (2000). Teachers' judgments of problems in
the transition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 147-166.
Snow, C. E., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998) (Eds.). Preventing reading difficulties in young
children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families
Office of Head Start (2010). The Head Start child development and early learning
framework: Promoting positive outcomes in early childhood programs serving children
3-5 years old. Arlington, VA: Author.
Whitehurst, G. J., & Lonigan, C. J., (1998). Child development and emergent literacy. Child
Development, 69, 848-872.