ERIC ED616031: Kindergarten Readiness Assessments Help Identify Skill Gaps. Policy Perspectives

2021·0.2 MB·English

by  ERIC

policy perspectives
Kindergarten Readiness Assessments
Help Identify Skill Gaps
Joanne L. Jensen, WestEd
Jessica Goldstein, Boulevard Research Partners LLC
Matthew A. Brunetti, WestEd
Researchers have long traced achievement gaps in the elementary years
ABOUT THIS BRIEF
back to readiness gaps at the start of kindergarten (Duncan et al., 2007;
Connor et al., 2011; Neuman & Dickinson, 2001). Educators seeking to Many children start school
needing extra support to thrive
address these gaps, which are associated with race and ethnicity, home
academically in grades K–2 — the
language, disability status, and indicators of economic disadvantage
foundation for success as they
(O’Donnell, 2008; Denton-Flanagan & McPhee, 2009), need systematic move up the grades. This paper
ways to identify which children need what kinds of support as they explains how states can address
readiness gaps by identifying
begin school. To help meet that need, over the past decade, states have
children at kindergarten entry
developed a kindergarten readiness assessment (KRA) that schools and
who may need extra support. A
districts can use to evaluate how well prepared each child is to begin companion paper discusses the
learning the state’s academic standards across multiple domains. design of early grade assessment
systems that enable educators
to intervene throughout the
Since 1965, the federal govern- funding for education expanded to
K–2 years to help students
ment has promoted equity for all include children from birth through
achieve success.
students through the Elementary grade three. The ESSA legislation,
and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) along with federal funding oppor-
and its subsequent reauthorizations. tunities like Race to the Top Early
In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Learning Challenge (RTT-ELC) grants,
(NCLB) Act connected assessment Enhanced Assessment Grants (EAGs),
to equity, with new tests for students and Preschool Development Grants,
in third grade through high school prompted and enabled state-level
designed to monitor achievement systems to evaluate learning and
gaps between traditionally under- development as students started
served students and their peers. school — that is, kindergarten readi-
When President Obama reauthorized ness — and also as they advanced to
NCLB as the Every Student Suc- third grade.
ceeds Act (ESSA) in 2015, the federal
In this paper, we review the status of states’ require teachers to make a summary evalu-
development of KRAs and how states are ation of evidence of students’ knowledge
using KRA data to profile skills at kindergarten or skills based on criteria in observational
entry, help track longitudinal progress, provide rubrics. Some include a combination of the
early warnings for needed intervention, and two item types (Ackerman, 2018).
guide policy decisions.
Purposes for Kindergarten
Development of Kindergarten Readiness Assessments
Readiness Assessments
States are using KRA data for multiple
KRAs are assessments that offer a profile purposes, as described below.
of students’ knowledge and skills as they
start formal schooling. KRAs are designed
Using KRA Data to Provide a Profile of
to gauge students’ readiness to engage
Students’ Skills at Kindergarten Entry
with the kindergarten curriculum at the
start of kindergarten by measuring learn- Early childhood advocates often point
ing and development across five essential to skill differences at kindergarten entry
domains of school readiness. As defined by as opportunity gaps (U.S. Department of
the federal government, those domains are: Education, 2015; Solano & Weyer, 2017),
language and literacy development; cogni- since they result from inequitable distri-
tion and general knowledge (including early bution of opportunities for children to
mathematics and early scientific develop- acquire foundational skills before they start
ment); approaches to learning; physical school. KRAs can help districts and schools
well-being and motor development; and measure whether such gaps exist, and if
social and emotional development. Skills so, where they exist, as each cohort enters
such as curiosity and persistence fall under kindergarten.
“approaches to learning”; skills such as
With RTT Early Learning Challenge and
sharing emotions and initiating friendships EAG funding, Maryland and Ohio jointly ps
a
are considered markers of social and emo- G
tional development. dbeovthe lsotpaeteds as iKnRceA tthhea t2 h0a1s4 /b1e5e snc uhsoeodl iyne ar. kill
S
The development of KRAs accelerated in The assessment includes all five of the fy
ti
2011 when 20 states were awarded RTT-ELC essential domains of school readiness and en
d
grants and continued in 2013 when the U.S. categorizes students into one of three p I
Department of Education offered EAG funds performance levels: demonstrating readi- el
H
for KRA development or enhancement. ness, approaching readiness, or emerging s
t
n
To date, as many as 41 states have KRAs readiness. Students demonstrating readi- e
m
either in development or full implementa- ness possess the foundational skills and s
s
tion (Center for Standards, Assessment, behaviors that prepare them to engage with se
s
and Accountability, 2021; Weisenfeld et al., curricula based on kindergarten standards. s A
2020). Because both federal grant programs Those at the approaching level demonstrate es
n
gave states latitude to design or purchase some of the foundational skills. Students di
a
assessments to meet their needs, KRAs at the emerging level are expected to need Re
across states include a mix of item types — targeted support or interventions to be suc- en
t
that is, some include items that require a cessful in kindergarten. ar
g
direct response from students while others er
d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 2
Figures 1 and 2 show the percentage of stu- Figure 2. Percentage of Students by
dents at each performance level for Mary- Performance Level for Ohio’s KRA
land and Ohio based on these states’ last
three years of published KRA results (Mary- Ohio KRA Performance Levels by Year
land Department of Education & Ready At 50
Five, 2020; Ohio Department of Education, 42 41 41
40
n.d.). The data for both states demonstrates 36 36 36
that the percentage of students at each 30
performance level has remained relatively 22 23 23
20
stable across the three years. In addition to
the overall data, both states provide break- 10
downs by domain, gender, ethnicity, English
0
language learner, disability, and socioeco- 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20
nomic status. Moreover, Maryland provides Demonstrating Approaching Emerging
Readiness Readiness Readiness
data based on students’ prior care status.
Both states provide the subgroup perfor- Note. Authors used Ohio state data summary for
school years 2017/18, 2018/19, and 2019/20. Ohio
mance data for each district in addition to
School Report Cards. https://reportcard.education.
overall performance data, thus allowing the ohio.gov/download
depth of analysis needed as the states and
districts monitor progress, adjust practices, Using KRA Data as a Baseline for
redirect resources, and adapt policies to Longitudinal Tracking
achieve the goal of increasing the kinder-
A number of states that initiated KRA programs
garten readiness of all students.
in the 2014/15 school year were able to study
connections between students’ KRA scores
Figure 1. Percentage of Students by
Performance Level for Maryland’s KRA and their reading and mathematics, proficiency
at third grade, as measured by end-of-grade
Maryland KRA Performance Levels by Year summative assessments from 2017/18. ps
a
G
50 In Ohio, researchers found a direct and
45 47 47 significant relationship between overall kill
40 S
37 KRA scores and third-grade reading perfor- y
33 32 f
30 mance, as well as a connection between nti
e
20 18 20 21 KRA language and literacy, and mathematics p Id
domain scores and third-grade proficiency el
10 (Justice et al., 2019). Students with higher s H
t
KRA scores — including higher language n
0 e
2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 and literacy scores and higher mathematics m
s
s
Demonstrating Approaching Emerging scores — had higher rates of third-grade e
s
Readiness Readiness Readiness s
proficiency as measured by the third-grade A
s
Note. Authors used data from Maryland Department summative assessment. Positive and sig- s
e
of Education & Ready At Five. (2020). Readiness n
matters: The 2019–2020 Kindergarten Readiness nificant but slightly lower correlations were di
a
Assessment report. https://earlychildhood.maryland- also evident between KRA domain scores e
R
publicschools.org/system/files/filedepot/4/200178_ for social foundations and physical well- n
ready5_book_web.pdf e
being and motor development as compared rt
a
g
to third-grade reading scores. The study r
e
d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 3
also showed that of the Ohio kindergarten- While these findings are not surprising on
ers who demonstrated readiness on the the surface — we would expect students
KRA in 2014/15, nearly all demonstrated who struggle to demonstrate proficiency
proficiency on the third-grade state assess- at kindergarten entry to be more likely than
ment (88 percent for English language arts their peers to still be struggling in third
and 91 percent for mathematics). grade — they are pronounced, a fact that
underscores the critical need for targeted
Analyses of scores from Maryland’s 2014/15
interventions in the early grades. KRA data
KRA and the performance of that same
is crucial to efforts to systematically identify
cohort on the 2017/18 third-grade summative
and intervene with children who need extra
assessment for reading and mathematics1
support in their earliest years to thrive and
yielded performance patterns similar to
be successful in school. By providing data
those seen in Ohio (Dragoset et al., 2019).
from standards-aligned statewide measures
Researchers in Maryland studied differ-
of student performance at kindergarten
ences in third-grade performance based
entry and at third grade, these assessments
on KRA performance level (demonstrating,
allow longitudinal tracking of student per-
approaching, or emerging readiness). Only
formance which, in turn, allows educators
9 percent of the kindergarten students
to structure student support systems and
who fell into the emerging readiness perfor-
track those systems’ effectiveness.
mance level in 2014/15 met third-grade
performance expectations in reading, and
Using KRA Data as an Early Warning
11 percent met those expectations for
mathematics. Alternatively, of the kindergarten
Predictive relationships between kindergar-
students demonstrating readiness in 2014,
ten readiness and later achievement have
59 percent met third-grade performance
prompted several states to initiate academic
expectations in reading and 63 percent
support programs for students with lower
met them in mathematics.
KRA scores. Ohio, for example, passed
Similarly, a 2019 study of data from the legislation in 2012 establishing Ohio’s ps
school district of Philadelphia identified a Third Grade Reading Guarantee (TGRG), Ga
relationship between kindergarten entry a program that uses assessment results to kill
assessment reading and mathematics item- identify students from kindergarten through y S
f
level data and proficiency on the third-grade third grade who may need extra support nti
in order to be proficient in reading by the e
summative assessment (Harding et al., 2019).2 d
And researchers in North Carolina found end of third grade. Program requirements p I
el
that only 36 percent of students who were include: annual testing in kindergarten H
s
identified as not proficient in early literacy through third grade with reading and moni- nt
e
and reading comprehension at kindergarten toring improvement plans for struggling m
s
entry in 2014/15 demonstrated proficiency students; highly qualified reading teachers; es
s
on the third-grade reading end-of-grade and, ultimately, the ability to retain non- As
exam in 2017/18 (McNeill et al., n.d.). proficient third-grade readers rather than ss
e
n
di
a
e
R
n
e
1 A s a member of the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC), t
r
a
Maryland used the PARCC assessments through 2019. g
r
e
2 Pennsylvania uses the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment (PSSA). d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 4
automatically promoting students to fourth interventions appeared to be effective in
grade (Logan et al., 2019). North Carolina, where McNeill et al. (n.d.)
assert that students were approximately
In the Ohio KRA study referenced earlier,
three times more likely to achieve profi-
researchers examined KRA performance
ciency on the third-grade state summa-
levels (demonstrating, approaching, and
tive assessment if they were identified as
emerging readiness) in relation to the
needing support at the beginning of kin-
cut score Ohio established for the TGRG
dergarten as compared to being identified
(Justice et al., 2019). They found that
at the beginning of third grade.
approximately three out of four students
who demonstrated readiness on the Ohio Early intervention can improve the skills of
KRA met the cut score for reading profi- students identified at kindergarten entry
ciency by the fall of third grade. They also as possibly needing extra support in order
found, however, that just half of the children to achieve positive learning outcomes.
who were approaching readiness at kin- Additional research is needed, however, to
dergarten entry were proficient readers by determine the features of interventions and
the end of third grade. More troubling, they supports most likely to help these students
found that three out of four children who achieve proficiency by third grade.
performed in the lowest category of the
KRA entry did not meet the TGRG’s fall term
Using KRA Data to Inform Policy
third grade cut point for reading proficiency
— an “unexpectedly high” number, signaling KRA data is also proving useful for informing
that the TGRG’s goals are not yet being met. state and local programmatic, funding, and
The researchers note that these findings policy decisions. KRA data and detailed score
may suggest a need for additional sup- reports can help track systemwide trends
ports for identified students, more efficient and patterns, identify and address kinder-
reporting of KRA results to kindergarten garten readiness gaps (within and across
teachers, and/or immediate resources to cohorts and subgroups of students), and
s
help those teachers intervene effectively allocate resources and supports efficiently ap
G
with students. aanl.,d 2 e0ff17e)c. tAivte lleya (sWt 2e5st sEtda,t e2s0 1c8o;l lReecgt eKnRsAt edinat eat kill
S
The aforementioned North Carolina study, at the state level, and many publish annual y
f
based on data collected between 2014/15 reports of KRA results (Garver, 2020; Center nti
e
and 2017/18, also found that early literacy d
scores are strongly predictive (with 70 for Standards, Assessment, & Accountability, p I
2021; Weisenfeld et al., 2020; Golan et al., el
percent accuracy) of third-grade reading H
2016). Examples of such annual reports s
proficiency (McNeill et al., n.d.). As in Ohio, include Maryland’s Readiness Matters: The nt
e
the researchers noted the value of having m
2019–2020 Kindergarten Readiness Assess-
s
assessment data from kindergarten entry, ment Report (Maryland State Department es
s
rather than waiting until third grade. When of Education & Ready At Five, 2020); South As
educators can identify students who might Carolina’s Analysis of Kindergarten Readi- ess
need additional support at the start of n
ness Assessment (KRA) Results, School Year di
kindergarten, they can use the assessment 2019–20 (South Carolina Education Over- ea
R
data to design targeted instruction, tutor- sight Committee, 2020); Illinois’s A Look at n
e
ing, and after-school support to change t
Kindergarten Readiness: 2019–2020 Illinois r
a
the trajectories of those students. Such g
Kindergarten Individual Development Survey r
e
d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 5
(KIDS) Report (Illinois State Board of Educa- access kindergarten learning standards. But
tion, 2020); and Utah’s Kindergarten Entry kindergarten is only the starting point in the
and Exit Profile (KEEP) Report: 2019–2020 larger K–12 system. Sustained evaluation
(Utah State Board of Education, 2020). of students is critical for ensuring that all
children receive the support they need to be
States that have made policy changes based
able to demonstrate proficiency in reading
on KRA results include Washington, where
and mathematics by third grade and beyond.
state officials deployed professional devel-
Especially for kindergarten, first, and second
opment resources to preschool and kin-
grades — the foundational years for literacy
dergarten teachers and education materials
and numeracy — school districts need more
to parents based on WaKIDS (KRA) results
support to evaluate learning so that educa-
(Golan et al., 2016). In South Carolina, after
tors can continually adapt strategies to help
state-level KRA data showed that students
all students succeed.
who attended a full-day prekindergarten
program in public schools outperformed The companion paper in this series addresses
their peers who did not attend such pro- the characteristics of a balanced assessment
grams, the governor announced a plan to system for K–2, recognizing that ongoing
expand full-day prekindergarten program- assessment of student performance in these
ming to children living in poverty (Raven, grades, prior to federally mandated assess-
2020). At the district level, Baltimore district ments at grade 3, is critical to ensuring that
leaders have used the KRA data to improve all students receive the support necessary
prekindergarten programs. “We also use for success.
KRA data to vertically plan with our PreK
and Kindergarten teams,” says Crystal
References
Francis, the Director of Early Learning
Programs in Baltimore City Public Schools. Ackerman, D. J. (2018). Real world
“We have created a toolkit that allows PreK compromises: Policy and practice impacts
and K teachers to work together to analyze of kindergarten entry assessment-related
s
data to identify trends and create responsive validity and reliability challenges. ETS. ap
G
instructional plans based on their actual Center for Standards, Assessment, and kill
student data” (Maryland State Department S
Accountability. (2021). State of the states: y
of Education and Ready At 5, 2019, p. 4). f
Pre-K/K assessment. https://csaa.wested. ti
n
e
org/tools/state-of-states/ d
A Look Ahead p I
Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., Schatschneider, el
H
Kindergarten entry data has the potential C., Toste, J. R., Lundblom, E., Crowe, E. C., s
t
n
to serve as a tool for equity by helping & Fishman, B. (2011). Effective classroom e
m
educators identify those students who instruction: Implications of child characteris- s
s
e
might need extra support or intervention in tics by reading instruction interactions on s
s
order to succeed as they progress through first graders’ word reading achievement. s A
s
the system. Educators can use baseline Journal of Research on Educational e
n
kindergarten data to target instruction Effectiveness, 4(3), 173–207. di
a
and add supports so that all students can e
R
n
e
t
r
a
g
r
e
d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 6
Denton-Flanagan, K., & McPhee, C. (2009). Justice, L. M., Koury, A., & Logan, J. (2019).
The children born in 2001 at kindergarten Ohio’s Kindergarten Readiness Assessment:
entry: First findings from the kindergarten data Does it forecast third-grade reading success?
collections of the Early Childhood Longitudi- Crane Center for Early Childhood Research
nal Study, Birth Cohort (ECLS-B), NCES 2010- and Policy & The Ohio State University.
005. National Center for Education Statistics.
Logan, J. A. R., Justice, L. M., O’Leary, J. L.
Dragoset, L., Baxter, C., Dotter, D., & Walsh, E. D., & Purtell, K. M. (2019). Has Ohio’s Third
(2019). Measuring school performance Grade Reading Guarantee led to reading
for early elementary grades in Maryland. improvements? Crane Center for Early
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED601956.pdf Childhood Research and Policy &
The Ohio State University.
Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens,
A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, Maryland State Department of Education
P., Pagani, L. S., Feinstein, L., Engel, M., & Ready At Five. (2019). Readiness matters:
Brooks-Gunn, J., Sexton, H., Duckworth, The 2018–2019 Kindergarten Readiness
K., & Japel, C. (2007). School readiness Assessment report. https://earlychildhood.
and later achievement. Developmental marylandpublicschools.org/system/files/
Psychology, 43, 1428–1446. filedepot/4/2018-19_rm_book.pdf
Garver, K. (2020). The “why” behind kinder- Maryland State Department of Education
garten entry assessments. National Institute & Ready At Five. (2020). Readiness matters:
for Early Education Research. The 2019–2020 Kindergarten Readiness
Assessment report. https://earlychildhood.
Golan, S., Woodbridge, M., Davies-Mercier, B.,
marylandpublicschools.org/system/files/
& Pistorino, C. (2016). Case studies of the early
filedepot/4/200178_ready5_book_web.pdf
implementation of kindergarten entry assess-
ments. U.S. Department of Education, Office of McNeill, S. M., Harbatkin, E., Jenkins, J. M.,
Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Penner, E. K., & Henry, G. T. (n.d.). Early literacy
Policy and Program Studies Service. in North Carolina and its lowest performing ps
a
schools. Vanderbilt University. https://www. G
Harding, J. F., Herrmann, M., Hanno, E. S., ednc.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Early- kill
& Ross, C. (2019). Using kindergarten S
Literacy_194259btr55542vuqxfp5yewl5j0th.pdf y
entry assessments to measure whether f
ti
n
Philadelphia’s students are on-track for Neuman, S. B., & Dickinson, D. (Eds.). (2001). The e
d
reading proficiently. Regional Educational handbook of early literacy research. Guilford. p I
Laboratory Mid-Atlantic. el
H
O’Donnell, K. (2008). Parents’ reports of the
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED599402 s
school readiness of young children from nt
e
Heissel, J. A., & Ladd, H. F. (2018). School the National Household Education Surveys m
s
s
turnaround in North Carolina: A regression Program of 2007: First look. NCES 2008- e
s
discontinuity analysis. Economics of Educa- 051. National Center for Education Statistics. As
s
tion Review, 62, 302–320. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/2008051.pdf s
e
n
Illinois State Board of Education. (2020). A Ohio Department of Education. (n.d.). di
a
e
look at kindergarten readiness: 2019–2020 Ohio school report cards. https://report- R
n
Illinois Kindergarten Individual Development card.education.ohio.gov/download e
t
r
Survey (KIDS) report. https://www.isbe.net/ a
g
r
Documents/Fall-2019-KIDS-Report.pdf e
d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 7
Raven, J. (2020). SC Governor set to U.S. Department of Education, Office of
propose plan to expand full-day pre- Planning, Evaluation and Policy Develop-
kindergarten statewide. Wis News 10. ment, Policy and Program Studies Service.
https://www.wistv.com/2020/01/07/sc- (2016). Case studies of the early implemen-
governor-set-propose-plan-expand-full- tation of kindergarten entry assessments.
day-pre-kindergarten-statewide/ https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/
opepd/ppss/reports.html
Regenstein, E., Connors, M., Romero-Jurado,
R. I. O., & Weiner, J. (2017). Uses and misuses Utah State Board of Education. (2020). Utah’s
of kindergarten readiness assessment results. KEEP report: 2019–2020. https://www.
The Ounce of Prevention Fund. schools.utah.gov/file/259daec6-2f6b-4b14-
96fc-af49d4269e9d
Solano, I., & Weyer, M. (2017, July). Closing
the opportunity gap in early childhood Weisenfeld, G. G., Garver, K., & Hodges,
education, NCSL LegisBrief, 25(25). K. (2020). Federal and state efforts in
the implementation of kindergarten entry
South Carolina Education Oversight Com-
assessments (2011–2018). In Early Education
mittee. (2020). Analysis of kindergarten
and Development. Rutgers University.
readiness assessment (KRA) results, school
https://doi.org/10.7282/t3-cjs2-k115
year 2019–20. https://earlychildhoodsc.org/
media/iwhjdid0/kra-results-2019-2020.pdf WestEd. (2018). Kindergarten readiness assess-
ment 2.0 development and technical report.
U.S. Department of Education. (2015). A
matter of equity: Preschool in America.
s
p
a
G
kill
S
y
f
ti
n
e
d
p I
© 2021 WestEd. All rights reserved. el
H
s
Suggested citation: Jensen, J. L., Goldstein, J., and Brunetti, M. A. (2021). Kindergarten Readiness Assessments nt
e
help identify skill gaps. WestEd. m
s
s
e
s
s
A
WestEd is a nonpartisan, nonprofit research, development, and s
s
service agency that partners with education and other communities e
n
throughout the United States and abroad to promote excellence, di
a
achieve equity, and improve learning for children, youth, and e
R
adults. WestEd has more than a dozen offices nationwide, from n
e
Massachusetts, Vermont, Georgia, and Washington, DC, to rt
a
Arizona and California, with headquarters in San Francisco. g
r
e
For more information, visit WestEd.org or call 415.565.3000. d
n
Ki
P o l i c y P e r s p e c t i v e s 8