I Can Do Better Than That: How to Make Evaluation Data More Authentic

By: Stephanie Stubbs, M.Ed. Candidate, Rapides Parish

Too often in the early childhood programs, we as educators see evaluation results for students that do not reflect what they are truly capable of accomplishing. It can be very frustrating to be expected to use data that we know are not accurate to write goals for these students. For services to be beneficial, evaluation data must be accurate and relevant, and student goals should be appropriate for individual students, reflect current data, and be measurable with proper monitoring and data collection procedures.

For example, student A enters the preschool setting with a current Individualized Education Plan (IEP). Student A has never been in a childcare or school setting but was recently diagnosed with autism. Student A completed testing with school personnel in a special education setting and qualified for services based on her diagnosis and evaluation results. One of Student A’s current goals is to verbally count to 20. Upon working with Student A for a few weeks, the teacher realizes that not only can Student A verbally count to 20, but Student A is also able to verbally count past 30, count objects in a group past 30, and identify and match numerals to objects in groups with as many as 20 objects.

Obviously, at this point, Student A’s teacher will reconvene the IEP and write more appropriate goals for Student A. However, it would have been easier if the student’s evaluation data had been accurate initially so that appropriate goals could have been established from the beginning. So, what went wrong and what can be done about it?

What are we getting wrong?

• Evaluating students in unfamiliar or unauthentic environments. In the case of Student A, this child had never been in a childcare or school environment. Yet, she was assessed in a special education (unfamiliar) setting.

• Using special education personnel that the student is unfamiliar with to complete evaluations. Because Student A had never been in a school setting before, not only was the student not familiar with the specific personnel that were conducting the evaluation, but the student was also unfamiliar with the concept of teacher/evaluator.

• Using evaluations that are inappropriate or do not pertain to the specific student. Given that the student’s goal was written as a verbal counting goal, we can assume that the student was given an evaluation that asked her to count verbally to some degree and the student was unable to complete this task. Given the student’s recent diagnosis of autism and the parameters that this diagnosis usually entails, we can also assume that there may be some communication barriers involved with evaluating Student A, be that receptive or expressive.

How can we fix it?

• Evaluate students in a familiar and appropriate setting. If the student is more comfortable in a home setting or current classroom or childcare setting, we can modify our evaluations to conduct them in these more natural settings. 

• Use (or at least include) familiar personnel during evaluations. If the student is comfortable with a certain teacher, service provider, or other adult, allow that adult to facilitate the evaluation, with prompting and guidance from diagnostic staff, while members of the diagnostic team evaluate from a distance and record results.

• Use appropriate evaluations for each student. Rather than using the same diagnostic device for each student, use one that targets each individual student’s needs and can be modified to accommodate any barriers that may present themselves during testing, such as using nonverbal methods of testing or even more kinesthetic methods of testing, depending on the needs of the student.

Summary:

In summary, evaluation results often fail to accurately reflect a student's true abilities, which leads to inappropriate goals and less effective support. We can help prevent this by conducting evaluations in a natural setting, including familiar adults, and using individualized and adaptable evaluation tools that consider the student’s unique communication and developmental needs. These changes can help ensure that goals are appropriate, meaningful, and measurable from the start.

---

Stephanie Stubbs is an Early Childhood Intervention graduate student currently studying at Northwestern State University. She currently teaches in an Early Childhood Special Education classroom supporting preschool students in Rapides Parish. Her goal is to improve the quality of services that are provided for the students and advocate for their needs as much as possible.