Assessing Young Children

There is a place for standardized testing but when used as the only standard for assessment I think it falls short of giving a clear picture of a child's abilities and potential.  I like the way Meisels and Steele describe standardized assessments:  "Unlike standardized assessments that are little more than a 'snapshot' of a child's performance on a single occasion, portfolios capture the evolution of a child's abilities, providing a rich documentation of each child's experience throughout the year" (1991). 

I agree that individuals have strengths in different areas that cannot be evaluated by a standardized test.  Berger (2009) described Gardner's multiple intelligences as covering linguistic, logical-mathematical, musical, spatial, bodily-kinesthetic (movement), interpersonal (social understanding), and intrapersonal (self understanding), naturalistic (understanding of nature), existential (asking questions of life and death).  William Martin, in a discussion on assessment of multiple intelligences, pointed out that brain injury research has shown that intelligences operate separately from one another (1995).  In other words, a high score indicating strong ability in one area does not mean that same person would show the same ability in other intelligence areas.  Martin asserted that cultural and biological influences are not taken into account in standardized testing (1995).  Someone could show a high ability in a particular intelligence but it would be demonstrated differently according to what is significant to his/her culture (Martin, 1995).  He suggested the use of  projects to assess an individual's intelligence strength (Martin, 1995).  I would say that projects and portfolios coupled with some testing provide a more accurate view of an individual's abilities.

Over the years we have received copies of our sponsored child's report cards from Tanzania.  She is given numeric scores which correlate to letter grades.  She is graded in math, English, Kiswahili, social studies, science, art work, and handwriting.  They give her a ranking among all the children in her grade level.  She also attends classes at a Mennonite center.  There she is not evaluated but takes classes in health (infectious disease), animal life, God, and sewing.  I looked into assessment in Africa and found that national standardized assessment is used to determine if children will be able to move on from the primary level to a secondary level of education (Kellaghan & Greaney, 2004).  According to Kellaghan et al., the tests are poorly written (some only in English) and assess only cognitive ability (2004).  Only a small portion of the children move on to secondary education.  There is no assessment of practical skills and knowledge needed outside the classroom (Kellaghan et al., 2004).  As I have seen with our little friend, there are classroom assessments, also. They seem to substantiate the claim that assessing is done more on the cognitive level and not the practical skill level.

I have found that a cummulative portfolio type assessment keeps me accountable to being alert and aware of progress and challenges on an ongoing basis.  Evaluating my assessments helps me rethink my goals for individual students.  Having clear teaching objectives is necessary for relevant assessing.  It seems the pressures of standardized testing in most public schools determine the classroom objectives rather than the desire to show development of potential and/or areas needing work.

Berger, K. (2009).  The developing person through childhood (5th ed.).  New York, NY: Worth  Publishers.

Kellaghan, T. & Greaney, V. (2004).  Assessing student learning in Africa.  Washington D.C.:
World Bank Publications.

Martin, William.  (1995).  Assessing multiple intelligences.  Paper presented at International
Conference on Assessment.  Retrieved from ERIC Database.

Meisels, S. & Steele, D.  (1991).  The early childhood portfolio collection process.  Ann Arbor, MI
Center for Human Growth and Development  University of Michigan.