1

Running head: ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS

The Assessment of School Readiness

Shelina Hassanali
University of Calgary
EDPY 652














2
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
The Assessment of School Readiness
The area of student assessment is an important aspect of the education system not only
for the students, but also for educators, administrators and policy makers. Assessment results
have implications for student placement, curriculum development, teacher training, and referrals
for additional support for students. Although assessment during the school year and as students
transition between grades is important, another important area of assessment is that of school
readiness. This paper will discuss definitions and various domains of school readiness; the
importance of considering school readiness and general policy and educational trends towards it;
an overview of the available assessment tools; and research which highlights the predictive
validity of certain assessments to future school achievement.
How is school readiness defined and what does it include?
Definitions of school readiness are varied. One definition suggests that, School
readiness is the state of early development that enables an individual child to engage in and
benefit from first grade learning experiences (Maryland Model for School Readiness, 2003,
p.1). Another definition proposed by Snow (2006) is that school readiness is the state of child
competencies at the time of school entry that are important for later success (p.9). The above
definitions vary in the sense that the former highlights the ability of the child to engage, while
the latter highlights the competencies which the child brings. A third definition states that school
readiness is simply the ability of the child to meet the task demands of school (Offord Centre for
Child Studies, 2004). Although a single definition does not exist, there appears to be a consensus
in the literature that school readiness includes many different facets. It has been suggested that
school readiness is multidimensional and includes both the childs inherent qualities as well as
those of the environment and context in which learning occurs (Hair et al, 2006). Important areas
3
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
to consider in terms of the qualities the child brings were outlined by The National Education
Goals Panel, and include physical health, social/emotional development, language, cognitive
development, and approaches to learning (Hair et al, 2006). These are important aspects to
consider, especially from a holistic perspective in which many different contributing factors to
readiness interact with and affect each other. For example, although a child may have
developmentally appropriate language and cognitive skills, a lag in social/emotional/behavioural
development could affect his/her ability to successfully participate in the classroom. Therefore it
is important to consider the whole child when determining school readiness.
The trend towards considering school readiness
In recent years, there has been increased discussion about school readiness not only in the
education sector, but also within the government and with other stakeholders. This shift can be
partly attributed to the increased accountability placed on the education system for higher
academic achievement, therefore motivating policy makers to seek reliable ways to measure
readiness (Lloyd et al, 2009). Another reason for the trend is due to the growing interest in
developmental readiness itself (Rosiak, 2007). The concept of school readiness has gained
popularity in both the United States and Canada. During his term in office, President Bush and
his governors established six National Education Goals, the first of which was that all children in
America will start school ready to learn (National Education Goals Panel, 1991). Although
initially, it appears that the U.S. has taken a more direct stance towards school readiness
legislation, this is not the case. Education legislation in Canada is a provincial undertaking, thus
each province handles school readiness in its own way. In British Columbia, for example, the
Ready, Set, Learn initiative and the British Columbia Early Learning Framework are both
programs which aim to increase school readiness across the province (B.C. Ministries of Health
4
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
& Children and Family Development, 2008). Similar programming is also evidenced by
programs of the Best Start Panel for Early Learning in Ontario (Ontario Ministry of Education,
2007), and many other programs across Canada.
Uses for school readiness assessments
It is important to consider the various uses of school readiness assessments. Historically,
a child was automatically entered into kindergarten at the age of five years (Rosiak, 2007). Years
later with the introduction of school readiness assessments, the results were used solely to make
decisions regarding kindergarten entry or delay (Janus & Offord, 2007). Recent uses for these
assessments include the fact that they can provide teachers with vital information for
individualizing the curriculum (Rawlings, 2011), as well as allow teachers to prepare in advance
for students who may require extra support. Early assessment could also give parents information
about which skills to focus on before their child reaches school-age, and it could also drive
program planning for day-cares and pre-schools.
Although there are many benefits to readiness assessments, there are some potential
draw-backs. First, using these results as the sole criterion for placement or delayed entry into
school is highly controversial (DeBois, 2002), because there are other factors to consider. Such
factors include test validity, bias, the role of family income and parental education, and many
others. Second, as readiness assessments are typically administered at age 4-5 years, this will
likely be the child`s first testing experience and therefore factors such as anxiety and overall
unfamiliarity with the testing situation may skew the results. Last, but certainly not least, there
are relatively few studies in the literature that measure the ability of readiness tests to predict
academic achievement (Rawlings, 2011).
5
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
Tests to assess school readiness
There are a wide variety of tests available to assess school readiness. Some of these tests
are specifically made to assess readiness levels, while others can be used to assess readiness
based on the age-group they can be used for and the concepts which they test.
The Early Development Instrument (EDI) is a teacher completed measure of children`s
school readiness at entrance to grade one. It covers five domains, including physical health and
well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and
communication skills and general knowledge (Offord Centre for Child Studies, 1999). The
Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning (DIAL-3) uses fun, age-appropriate
materials and a station format so large groups of children can be tested at the same time. It
covers the areas of motor development, language, concepts such as naming, counting, and
identifying objects, as well as self-help and social development (Mardell & Goldenberg, 1998).
The Phelps Kindergarten Readiness Scale was developed to measure only the academic readiness
of children for kindergarten. It includes verbal, perceptual and auditory processing, language
competence, memory, and ability to compare and reproduce shapes (Psychology Press, 2003).
The Missouri Kindergarten Inventory of Developmental Skills (Missouri KIDS) assesses number
concepts, auditory skills, language, paper and pencil skills, visual skills and gross motor skills.
Other tests which can be used as part of a school readiness assessment include The
Metropolitan Readiness Test and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. Examples of instruments
used by some early learning projects in Alberta include the Brigance Inventory of Early
Development, the Kaufman Survey of Early Academic and Language Skills (K-SEALS), and the
Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals- Preschool (CELF-P) (Alberta Education, 2009).
6
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
At first glance, it would appear that choosing an appropriate instrument to test school
readiness would be very time-consuming, given the wide variety of available tests. However it
seems that as long as the examiner is clear about what exactly they want to measure, choosing
the appropriate instrument is not that difficult. For example, if the examiner only wants to test
academic skills, they may choose to go with the Phelps. If the examiner wants to screen large
groups of children at one time, they may choose the DIAL-3, and if they want to complete an
assessment based on teacher observation, they may elect to choose the EDI. It would be
advisable, however, to choose an instrument which is balanced and which assesses not only
academic skill but also skills which are related to success in the classroom, such as self-help,
social skills, and independent work skills. Time and cost-permitting, it would certainly be useful
to use more than one instrument. For planning purposes, it may also be useful to select a test
which has good predictive validity; that is, the ability to predict future academic outcomes. It is
to this area that we now turn our attention.
The predictive ability of school readiness assessments
One of the uses for school readiness assessments is to predict future academic outcomes
of students. Predictive validity is important because it would allow educators to plan for the next
cohort of students ahead of time, based on their strengths and limitations. It would also allow for
more purposeful curriculum development and individualization, as mentioned earlier. The
correct prediction that a student with a certain skill-base will achieve a certain level of academic
and school success would also help early childhood education programs to tailor their
programming to provide the best possible foundation for children.
7
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
According to Kim & Suen (2003), evaluation of the ability of a school readiness
assessment to predict later achievement is done through a pre-post design. Students are assessed,
and then re-assessed after some time, and the relationship between the earlier performance and
current performance is summarized in the form of a correlation coefficient, which is sometimes
referred to as the predictive validity coefficient (Kim & Suen, 2003). It has been suggested that
tests of this nature typically have only a weak or moderate correlation with future performance
(DeBois, 2002).
Although research in the area of predictive validity of school readiness assessments is
slim, there are some studies to discuss. In a study conducted by Rosiak (2007), 208 pre-
kindergarten students were randomly selected and tested using the Developmental Indicators for
Assessment of Learning (DIAL-3), and then re-tested four years later on fourth grade
achievement tests. The results of this study showed a significant correlation between the DIAL-3
scores and the achievement test scores. The author found that the DIAL-3 was predictive of later
outcomes, specifically in the areas of reading and suggests that student scores from the DIAL-3
can be used to create programs, make curricular decisions and interventions, especially for
schools with large minority populations (Rosiak, 2007).
Another study by Hair et al (2006) examined the predictive ability of kindergarten
readiness profiles to first-grade outcomes. The researchers first used Early Childhood
Longitudinal Study (ECLS-K) data to create school readiness profiles. Then, these profiles were
analyzed and data was collected on first grade outcomes. This study found that it was a
combination of academic and other factors which best predicted future outcome, not just
academic factors. For example, students with below average language and cognition skills in
combination with severely poor health or social skills at school entry predicted the lowest math
8
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
and reading scores and the end of grade one. Similarly, below average language and cognition
skills in combination with severely limited social/emotional skills at school entry predicted the
lowest ratings on self-control and motivation in grade one (Hair et al, 2006). This last finding has
particular implications for the type of assessment tool chosen when determining school
readiness, because if social skills are not included in the tested domains at school entry, we may
not be able to predict weaknesses in the area of self-control and motivation in later grades. Once
again, it is important to choose an instrument which assesses not only academic skill, but also
social, emotional, self-regulation, and other skills.
A very recent study conducted by Rawlings (2011) also attempted to answer the question
of whether kindergarten readiness skills are predictors of academic potential. The research was
conducted with 227 students using the Missouri Kindergarten Inventory of Developmental Skills
(Missouri KIDS), comparing school entry assessments with later assessment in grades 2-4. One
of the results of this study was that the most significant predictors for reading comprehension in
later grades were visual skills, language concepts, and auditory skills. The author reports that the
Missouri KIDS was able to predict future achievement and also correctly identify students who
should receive learning services (Rawlings, 2011).
Duncan et al (2007) analyzed six longitudinal data sets and found that academic, attention
and socioemotional skills were the three key elements of school readiness that were linked with
later reading and math achievement. The authors state, however, that they could not attribute
most of the variation in later school achievement only to their collection of school entry factors,
and they suggest that that is a sign that productive interventions in the early school grades could
benefit students who initially present with poor school readiness profiles (Duncan et al, 2007).
This suggestion is an important one to consider. Although not often discussed in the literature,
9
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
assessment results could be used to determine appropriate interventions/accommodations which
could already be in place as the student enters school. Research has consistently shown that early
intervention is crucial for struggling students, therefore assessment results at school entry could
be used to ensure that appropriate interventions are in place in order to provide the best possible
academic outcomes for these students.
A fifth study conducted by McClelland, Acocka & Morrison (2006) assessed the
predictive ability of learning related skills to later academic outcomes. Learning related skills
include following directions, working independently, etc. In this study, the math and reading
recognition subtests of the PIAT-R were administered to children between kindergarten and
grade two. Then, between third and sixth grade, students reading and math skills were re-
assessed. The authors controlled for variables such as child IQ, age, ethnicity and maternal
education level and found that the learning related skills which were rated pre-test significantly
predicted reading and math scores between kindergarten and sixth grade. In other words, teacher
ratings of student social and independence skills were a significant predictor of reading and math
achievement six years later. The authors suggest that learning-related skills be included in the
definition of school readiness as they play a large role in the predication of later academic
outcomes (McClelland, Acocka & Morrison, 2006).
Finally, a recent study by Panter and Bracken (2009) looked at the predictive validity of
the Bracken School Readiness Assessment for predicting first grade readiness for 86
kindergarten students. Students were tested using the BSRA in the fall, and then teachers
provided first grade readiness ratings in the spring. The researchers found that the BSRA
correctly identified the majority of students who were retained, referred for extra support, and/or
rated by teachers as not ready for first grade.
10
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
There are many questions related to the predictive power of school readiness
assessments. Parts of the literature show weak to moderate predictive validity of certain
assessments, while others show no real predictive ability. Kim & Suen (2003) examined data
from 44 studies and found that the predictive power of readiness assessments are not
generalizable and vary from situation to situation.
Conclusion
School readiness has emerged as an important area of consideration across school boards.
Although there does not appear to be one uniform definition of the term, school readiness is a
multidimensional concept which includes all of the skills which a child brings to the school
setting which will either promote or hinder their ability to engage, participate, learn and succeed
in the classroom environment. There are many different instruments available which can be used
to assess school readiness, each with its own set of tested domains. It is important to select an
instrument which effectively tests the skills which need to be assessed while not ignoring
important aspects which also undoubtedly contribute to school readiness and achievement. The
predictive validity of school readiness assessments is an important aspect which will hopefully
continue to be researched given the upward trend of school readiness assessment in the education
system. Research thus far has shown that while certain assessments may predict future academic
and school outcomes in certain situations, the ability of these instruments to consistently predict
future outcomes in all situations is questionable at best. School readiness assessments, therefore,
should be used in combination with other instruments and tools and the results of such
assessments should not be used as definitive predictions of future student outcomes.

11
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
References
Alberta Education. (2009). Managing School Transitions: Promising Practices in Alberta
Schools. Retrieved from http://education.alberta.ca/admin/resources.aspx
British Columbia Ministry of Health & Ministry of Children and Family Development. (2008).
British Columbia Early Learning Framework. Retrieved from
http://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/early_learning/pdfs/early_learning_framework.pdf
DeBois, S.L. (2002). Dissertation: Assessing school readiness: the validity and psychometric
properties of the early childhood skills inventory. University of Tulsa.
Duncan, G.J., Dowsett, C.J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A.C., Klebanov, P., Pagani,
L.S., Feinstein, L., Engel, M., Brooks-Gunn, J., Sexton, H., Duckworth, K., and Japel, C. (2007).
School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), pp. 1428-1446.
Hair, E., Halle, T., Terry-Humen, E., Lavelle, B., and Calkins, J. (2006). Childrens school
readiness in the ECLS-K: Predictions to academic, health and social outcomes in first grade.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, pp. 431-454.
Janus, M. & Offord, D.R. (2007). Development and psychometric properties of the Early
Development Instrument (EDI): a measure of childrens school readiness. Canadian Journal of
Behavioural Science, 39(1), pp. 1-22.
Kim, J. & Suen, H.K. (2003). Predicting childrens academic achievement from early assessment
scores: a validity generalization study. Early Childhood Reasearch Quarterly, 18, pp. 547-566.
12
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
Lloyd, J. E. V., Irwin, L. G., & Hertzman, C. (2009). Kindergarten school readiness and fourth-
grade literacy and numeracy outcomes of children with special needs: A population-based study.
Educational Psychology, 29(5), 583-602.
Mardell, C., & Goldenberg, D.S. (1998). Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of
Learning (DIAL-3). Pearson Assessments.
Maryland Model for School Readiness. (2003). School improvement in Maryland: Definition of
school readiness.
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, pp. 471-490.
Offord Centre for Child Studies. (1999). Early Development Instrument (EDI).
Offord Centre for Child Studies. (2004). Early Development Instrument: Fact Sheet. Retrieved
from http://www.offordcentre.com/readiness/files/EDI_Factsheet.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Children and Youth Services, Best Start Expert Panel on Early Learning.
Early learning for every child today: A framework for Ontario early childhood settings.
Retrieved from
http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/topics/earlychildhood/early_learning_for_every_c
hild_today.aspx
Panter, J.E., and Bracken, B.A. (2009). Validity of the bracken school readiness assessment for
predicting first grade readiness. Psychology in the Schools, 46(5), pp. 397-409.
Phelps, L. (2003). Phelps Kindergarten Readiness Scale. Psychology Press.
13
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL READINESS
Rawlings, J. (2011). Dissertation: Kindergarten readiness skills- predictors of academic potential.
Tennessee State University.
Rosiak, C. (2007). Dissertation: The predictive validity of the DIAL-3 kindergarten readiness
screening assessment as it relates to reading and math academic achievement in the fourth grade.
Graduate College of Bowling State University.
Snow, K. L. (2006). Measuring school readiness: Conceptual and practical considerations. Early
Education and Development, 17(1), 7-41.