26 Apr Review the results of the Formal/Norm Referenced Assessment, Informal/Criterion Referenced Assessment, and Informal/Performance Authentic Assessment, then b
review the results of the Formal/Norm Referenced Assessment, Informal/Criterion Referenced Assessment, and Informal/Performance Authentic Assessment, then based these results, provide an overall written analysis of the child’s performance across all assessments, observations, interviews. Write and submit Section V: Written Analysis.
YOUR LAST NAME: WRITTEN ANALYSIS/RATIONALE
Section 5: Written Analysis/Rationale
Your name here (then change font to black, then remove blue instructions)
EEX 3226
Instructor Name
Semester/year here (then change font to black)
Child
Use this section to describe the child’s demeanor and/or remarkable traits across all three assessment situations, as you conducted assessments for sections II (Norm/Standardized), II (Informal/Criterion), and IV (Authentic/Performance). See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). Remember, all sections of the TAIP report should be written in third person, objective.
Third person: This means reference to "I" or first person should not be used. In lieu of “I,” you are to use the “test administrator” to refer to yourself.
Objective: For example, instead of “I gave the test on June 4;” should be phrased as “the test was administered on June 4.”
Overall Analysis of the Child’s Performance
Use this section to describe your overall analysis of the child’s performance across all three assessments. Basically, you are to summarize child’s performance for on all assessments: I (Observations), II (Norm/Standardized), III (Informal/Criterion), and IV (Authentic/Performance).. Be sure to indicate if the child appears to be performing below, at, or above, age and/or developmentally expected levels. See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This should be written in paragraph format, indented, as it is here.
Goals and Objectives
This section should be a synthesis of the nine goals you have written for this child. Based on these nine goals, you are to select three that can serve as annual goals. Based on what you now know about this child, which three goals should remain? Please be reminded that annual goals should be for the long term (e.g. one school year).
Please be reminded that annual goals should be for the long term (e.g. one school year). So, for each three annual goals for the child, you are to write two associated “benchmark” objectives for each annual goal. Benchmark objectives are shorter approximations to the larger annual goal. These too must be in ABCD forma, but should cover either a smaller amount of content, looser criteria, shorter instructional time period.
See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This sections should have this structure:
Annual Goal 1:
1st Benchmark for Goal 1:
2nd Benchmark for Goal 1:
Annual Goal 2:
1st Benchmark for Goal 2:
2nd Benchmark for Goal 2:
Annual Goal 3:
1st Benchmark for Goal 3:
2nd Benchmark for Goal 3:
Rationale
Use this section to provide a rationale for why these annual goals and benchmark objectives. There should be specific rationale provide for each annual goal. See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This should be written in paragraph format, indented, as it is here.
Plan/Policy for How Assessment Results are Shared
Assurances for confidentiality
Describe who will have access to assessment results and why? See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This should be written in paragraph format, indented, as it is here.
How often assessments are administered?
Your TAIP has described a comprehensive system of assessment, implementing varied types of assessment. Use the information learned from your textbook to describe how often each of these types of assessments should be used in a program serving young children. Answer the following questions:
In a comprehensive system of assessment what types of assessment are to be implemented?
How often is each type of assessment to be implemented?
What are the defining characteristics of each type and the advantages/disadvantages for each type?
See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This should be written in paragraph format, indented, as it is here.
How teachers use assessment results to guide curriculum planning and to monitor progress
Use this section to describe how teachers should use information gleaned from these varied types of assessment results to guide curriculum planning and to monitor progress. See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This should be written in paragraph format, indented, as it is here.
How communication with families about their child’s assessments is sensitive to family values, culture, identity, and home language.
Use this section of the paper to describe how your communication with families about their child’s assessment results is sensitive to family values, culture, identity, and home language.
See syllabus for the specific information you are to insert here (change the font color to black once you type in your own information). This should be written in paragraph format, indented, as it is here.
Once you have completed the assignment.
1. Save file as a WORD document with the file name format: your last name_Your first name_Section V Written Analysis
2. Change all text to black, then
3. Remove these (and all) instructions.
4. Upload to the assignment link
5
,
2
THESKA MOISE
DR darling
FAU
Friday, February 14, 2025
Assessment Situation
The first form of assessment was based on the informal observation and interaction. and the second form was completed with the Ages & Stages Questionnaire, 3rd Edition (ASQ-3) with child “Alex” as a pseudonym. Particulars of Child: Alex was 48 months old at the time of assessment, and the assessment was done on March 10, 2024, although he was born on March 15, 2020.
This The assessment was done in a preschool learning environment in the morning session. with students. Basically, Logi seemed attentive and motivated but sometimes was indecisive during the tasks that demanded a higher level of requirements. The author of the test has known Logi for six months, and this fact could have beneficial effects on the conditions of testing. To enhance the validity and reliability of the study, the assessment was conducted in line with the standard procedures of the ASQ-3.
Instrument Description
The Ages and Stages Questionnaire, 3rd Edition (ASQ-3) by Squires & Bricker is a screening tool that is suitable for children between one month and five and half years. It measures development in five areas of functioning:
Communication – Language and verbal skills.
Gross Motor—Large muscle movements and coordination.
Fine. Motor—Small muscle control and precision.
Problem-Solving – Cognitive abilities and critical thinking.
Personal-Social – Social behaviors and self-help skills.
Reliability and Validity
Test-retest reliability: Another aspect that shows the consistency of the scale is the percent agreement that ranges from 92% to 96%.
Here, Interobserver reliability is reaction rates (the number of times each behavior is contemporaneously rated by the two observers of the three sessions each day out of the maximum possible rate: 93-98%.
Validity analysis:
This The type of Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient is 0.81, which is highly correlated with other standardized assessment.
Coefficient of internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha): The Cronbach alpha was estimated to be 0.86 thus showing high internal consistency in the current study.
The ASQ-3 is described as a norm-referenced tool, which is the assessment results. are compared with a normative group. It offers benchmarks which could define whether the kid is developing within the normal process, whether he or she needs some observation or requires additional evaluation.
“Instrument Protocol & Scoring Record. Worksheet”
Specifically, the responses on the ASQ-3 were coded as follows:
YES = 10 points
SOMETIMES = 5 points
NOT YET = 0 points
Scores and Cutoff Comparisons:
|
Domain |
Total Score |
Cutoff Score |
Interpretation |
|
Communication |
55 |
30.72 |
Above Cutoff |
|
Gross Motor |
60 |
32.78 |
Above Cutoff |
|
Fine Motor |
20 |
15.81 |
Above Cutoff |
|
Problem Solving |
45 |
31.30 |
Close to Cutoff |
|
Personal-Social |
45 |
26.60 |
Close to Cutoff |
Child’s Performance Interpretation
Communication
A variation of complexity in the structure of the sentence is worthy of note in logi’s encounter with communication, and he was good in answering questions. The improvements in this aspect involved naming objects as well as putting them into practice in the formation of simple grammatical sentences and even in simple conversation. There was no significant shortcoming of this domain, which can be considered as a benefit of the approach, as it was able to capture over 90 percent of the activities.
Gross Motor
Logi showed a good gross motor development particularly in catching and throwing, as well as climbing and jumping. There was some degree of challenge observed in the stance where the child was expected to stand on the foot for a considerable time.
Fine. Motor
As for the gross motor skills logi also reached the age norms as he was able to correctly use scissors, draw specific shapes, and even button his garments. There was a tendency to have diminished grasp endurance when it comes to maintaining fixing strength when performing extended-duration activities.
Problem Solving
Logi performed quite mediocre and was able to solve problems of identification of color, counting, activities, and following of directions, etc. Most of them did. not encounter any challenges with the instructional use and the concept of Abstract reasoning only caused slight performances weakness when performing the subsequent tasks in sequence and having to deal with proper spatial relations.
Personal-Social
Socially, interactions as well as play, sharing, and imaginative play relationships were befitting Logi’s age. The issues half of the participants experienced slight difficulty in the initial interactions with the new peers; therefore, this might be noted as a developmental need.
Rationale for Goals
According the assessment performed, some goals were set to meet Alex’s needs, get him ready to learn the ways to rightfully manage his temper. These domains are chosen based on the found deficits and the possible development that might be required in problem solving, personal-social skills, as well as fine motor and endurance skills (Agarwal, et al 2021).
Annual Goals
Annual Goal #1: Problem-Solving
Therefore, logi will be able to individually perform simple multi-step problem-solving. tasks such as the sort and sequence tasks in 4 out of 5 trials at the end of one year with objective measurements as per the teacher’s observation and proctored tests.
Annual Goal #2: Fine Motor
Logi will achieve improved control over grip and writing tools as well as improve fine motor skills in precision tasks in not less than four out of five attempts, within one year and based on class activities.
Annual Goal #3: Personal-Social
Engagement: At least twice per play session, one of the three goals is to have the student initiate peer interactions in both structured and unstructured play settings as observed by the teacher and reported by the parents within one calendar year.
Conclusion
The ASQ-3 assessment was beneficial in determining Alex’s development because it gave information on his development. A speech/language, gross motor, and fine motor weakness was found, while problem-solving and social skills require focus. The established goals will assist Alex in the achievement of the following experiences for a successful and social success at school.
References
Agarwal, P. K., Xie, H., Rema, A. S. S., Rajadurai, V. S., Lim, S. B., Meaney, M., & Daniel, L. M. (2020). Evaluation of the Ages and Stages Questionnaire (ASQ 3) as a developmental screener at 9, 18, and 24 months. Early Human Development, 147, 105081.
image1.tiff
,
Moise: INFORMAL/CRITERION-REFERENCED ASSESSMENT
Section III: Informal/Criterion-Referenced Assessment
Theska Moise
EEX 3226
Dr. Darling
Spring 2025
Assessment Situation
An assessment was conducted on a boy referred to as Logi—born on September 22nd 2020, and at the age of 4 years and 5 months old during the assessment. The assessment occurred on 14th March 2025 during a planned one-on-one session in a calm class environment. The child objected that he was the one who was too tired of the evaluation and seemed to be the most uncooperative. There had been some familiarity between the test administrator and Sam from a class setting, hence the ease in interacting with him.
Instrument Description
The used assessment was the Criterion-Referenced Assessment for Pre-K (Ages 4.0-4.11) created by the teachers of Ruth and Edward Taubman ECC @ B’Nai Torah. This assessment is designed to assess the baseline of literacy and numeracy skills, key learning areas that include:
Upper/lowercase letter recognition
Initial and final sound recognition
Number recognition and counting ability
Rhyming word identification and production
Criterion-referenced tests measure a child’s achievement against certain objectives set down instead of comparing with peers or other students. The strengths of this approach are that it enables an individual to pinpoint strengths and weaknesses, thus being useful for teaching.
A page break has been inserted here, so the pictures begin on the next page.
Instrument Protocol
The assessment was conducted as per the directions given in the administration of the assessments’ documents. For the letter and number recognition, the child was given printed letters and numbers, and they were asked to name them.
For Initial and Final Sound Recognition:
Expressive (Initial Sound): In this part of the assessment, the child was orally administered the following prompt: “Tell me the letter that starts the word apple.”
Expressive (Final Sound): In this subtest, the child was asked what letter makes up the end of a particular word (for example, ‘Tell me the letter that ends the word ball").
Receptive (Initial Sound): The child was instructed to repeat the first sound of the word (s) said to him/her.
Receptive (Final Sound): The last phoneme imitation was done by the child when he or she was asked to replicate the sound made at the end of the word.
For Rhyming Words:
Expressive: The child was required to produce a word that is homophonous with a certain word (e.g., “Name a word that sounds the same as cat”).
Receptive: For this assessment, the child was given two sets of words; the first set of words had rhyming words, and the second set had words that did not rhyme, and the child was asked to identify the two words that rhyme.
Child’s Performance
Child’s Performance
Overall Performance
Logi was on the way to improving his competency in many areas of development. He seems to have developed a good understanding of most of the letters in terms of upper and lowercase and got an average on the identification of the initial sounds as well as the numbers. Specifically, it was found that there is a need for improvement in the final sound identification and the production of the rhyming word.
Upper/Lower Case Letter Recognition
Date Administered: March 14, 2025
Score: As for the uppercase, 20 out of 26 are being recognized; for the lowercase, 18 out of 26 are being recognized.
Interpretation: Performance is near age comparison in indicating letters but has not adequately differentiated between small letters.
Strengths: Strong recognition of common letters (A, B, C, D, E, F, etc.).
Flaws: A brief amount of time is spent on the letters Q, X, and Z—can distinguish them as not used often.
Initial and Final Sound Recognition
Date Administered: March 14, 2025
Immediate results, out of 12 attempts, correctly identified 10 first and 6 of the last sounds.
Interpretation: The symbol displays that it is above average in the initiating elements of speech, and it is below average in the concluding elements of speech.
He was able to name correctly the first letter of an object when pointing out your objects for him, i.e., the first object had a “B” labeled on it, and he was able to call it Ball, as well as the second object had “D” on it, and he was able to name it as Dog as well.
Its weaknesses were, however, more pronounced at the end of words and especially with consonant clusters.
Number Recognition and Counting
Date Administered: March 14, 2025
Score: Identified 15 out of the 20 numbers; accurately quantified the dots for 12 numbers from the 20 numbers.
Assessment: Conventional with regards to age-level recognition but lacks one-to-one correspondence count practice.
Strengths: Recognized numbers 1-10 fluently.
Flaws: He/she did not feel comfortable counting beyond 15 and had difficulties when determining the totals in a large group.
Rhyming Words
Date Administered: March 14, 2025
Score: generated 5 out of the 10 words needed to rhyme; identified 7 out of the 10 pairs of receptive language.
Interpretation: Developing skills but below expected proficiency.
Strengths: Good at creating word rhymes for words that were already given, for instance, “cat” and “hat.”
This is observing that Sadar’s strength lies in recalling commonly used words, and weaknesses are that the model needed prompting for less familiar rhymes and produced many non-rhyming words.
Rationale for Goals
According to the observed performance of Logi, it will be appropriate to design highly specific instructional objectives for final sound identification as well as number matching and rhyming word production. These are good practice areas in young children's education for addressing aspects such as literacy and mathematics.
Objectives
Objective #1
Audience: Logi
Behavior: will be able to segment the last sound in a word.
Condition: When given a word list consisting of three words.
Degree: With 80% accuracy over three consecutive sessions.
Objective #2
Audience: Logi
Behavior: Will be to count objects up to 20.
Condition: When the model receives diagrams of the objects.
Degree: With 90% accuracy in four out of five trials.
Objective #3
Audience: Logi
Behavior: Will directly speak one correct rhyming word.
Condition: Only when the activity contains a stimulus word.
Degree: In 8 out of 10 trials across three consecutive sessions.
6
,
MOISE: PERFORMANCE/PORTFOLIO ASSESSMENT
Section 4: Performance/Portfolio Assessment
Theska Moise
EEX 3226
Sharon Darling
Spring 2025
Assessment Situation
The child’s name is Logi Klaus, aged 4 years and 5 months at the time of the assessment. The assessment was conducted on the morning of April 15, 2025, at his daycare center. Logi was polite and did not seem to show much stress, even though at the onset of the game he was a little slow, which is quite natural when faced with unfamiliar tasks. Nevertheless, as the activities unfolded, the observer Logi seemed to be more focused, or at least, his contribution bore witness to enhancement. The test administrator has had a three-month experience with Logi, using him during non-restrictive classroom activities, for instance, playtime, in order to build rapport before the test.
Overall Project Description
The specific domain and subdomains chosen in this portfolio are in the area of learning: Cognitive Development, learning objective: Number Recognition and Order. This domain is the first since the plan is to test two tool modes next: Counting and Sequencing This was chosen based on comments made during previous sessions that Logi seemed to have some issues with number identification. The objective of the given activity was to assess his number knowledge and his capacity to order the numbers appropriately as a part of his learning at this age.
This assessment is an authentic/performance assessment type where Logi would be expected to perform a number of tasks just like he would in real life. Some advantages of this type of assessment are that it may give a wider picture of the child’s performance within real-life chores. But this is also grounds for subjectivity because sample results’ interpretation is based on an administrator’s perception.
Overall Performance
Logi also more successfully completed the tasks involving the identification of the numbers, but he had some limitations in arranging the numbers in the appropriate order. The client was able to name most of the numbers whenever the examiner requested him to, but in regard to the sequencing of numbers, he made errors. Thus, it can be concluded that Logi was highly proficient in its performance while being approximately accurate in recognizing the numbers but incapable of sequencing them on its own.
Strengths:
Consistent number recognition with minimal prompting.
This ability is quite high; while they can work alone and accomplish most activities by themselves, they require occasional supervision in some portions of the assignments.
Weaknesses:
On operations, he/she has limitations on sequencing numbers as well as ordering them in the right sequences without any form of direction.
Lack of independence on many tasks and required some insistence for multi-step processes.
Description of Tasks
Task 1 Number Sequencing with Cards
Purpose of the Task:
This task is meant to evaluate Logi’s capacity to detect and order numbers correctly. This is a great task to assess his understanding with regards to numbers in order, which is a critical skill for early math.
Materials:
· Number cards (0–9)
Instructions/Prompt for the Child:
A set of mismatched number cards (0–9) will be given to Logi who will have to arrange them to be sorted in order. An examiner will ask you to arrange number cards and order them into the number 23. Logi will be asked to do the same procedure
