Dynamic Assessment in Early ChildhoodSteven Arroyo, M.S., CCC-SLP& Valerie Thill, MA ECSEAdams 14 School District

Learning Objectives

Participants will be able to….

- Define dynamic assessment - Acquire an understanding of the test, teach, retest paradigm of dynamic

assessment- Increase understanding on how to implement dynamic assessment as a part

of MTSS and a body of evidence during evaluation

Pros and Cons of Standardized Measures

PROS:

● Norm-Referenced● Administration is explained and stimulus is clearly defined● Assists in clinical decision making

CONS:

● May not be reflective of the child’s background/experiences● Lack of formal measures in native languages● Biased ● Not flexible

Static Versus Dynamic AssessmentStatic:

● Passive participants● Examiner observes● Identification of deficits● Standardized or norm-referenced assessment● Measure of performance at a point in time

Dynamic:

● Dynamic participants● Examiner-led● Identifies individual modifiability● Fluid and responsive ● Offers system hierarchy of learning opportunity

What is Dynamic Assessment?● Explores learning potential of a student● Enables a deep understanding of cognitive processes ● Emphasizes the learning process and an indicator of future learning

outcomes● Based on Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)● Effective in distinguishing between language difference versus disorder. ● Useful during the MTSS/RtI process to determine appropriateness of SPED

referral

Dynamic Assessment Framework

TETE

RE-TE

Dynamic Assessment FrameworkTest

● Assess child’s current performance and identify deficient or emerging skills that may or may not be related to lack of experiences with that skill.

Teach

● Use a mediated learning experience (MLE) ● Assist the child in developing strategies● Changes from an evaluative interaction to a teaching interaction.

Re-Test

● Compare performance to pretest● Assess transfer of strategies ● Observe child’s modifiability following multiple teaching experiences.

Test- Phase One

1. Identify deficient or emerging skills

2. Evaluator establishes baseline data with probes or testing measures

3. Select target tasks that are within the ZPD

Teach- Phase Two

1. Evaluator implements a mediated learning experience (MLE) to explicitly teach skill

2. Utilize components of mediation 3. Scaffold concept to the student’s learning level 4. Use visuals, manipulatives, and follow a hierarchy of cueing5. Should be concept based and not content specific (i.e., teaching only animal

sounds).

Components of Mediation

a. Intentionality- explain reasoning for taskb. Meaning- Create meaning for student experiencec. Transcendence- Transfer of skilld. Planning- Student incorporates strategy taught to

complete taske. Transfer- Independent use of skill in meaningful

scenario

Examples of Support and Scaffolding during MLEs● Model or example of the concept ● Shorten directions● Use expansions of the students’ statements● Repetition● Visual/Verbal/Phonemic cues to assist in word retrieval● Pair pictures and manipulatives with directions or explanations of concepts● Simplify questions posed to child● Encourage elaboration by asking questions● Require the student to restate the directions● Give instructions and examples on using descriptive language

Student Responsivity/Modifiability

Planning- Student utilizes a strategy to engage or complete task

Self-Regulation-Student demonstrates ability to attend and utilizes strategies to obtain help as needed

Motivation- Student shows enthusiasm for acquiring new skill

Interaction with Adults- Student seeks help from adult and changes response based on adult cues and interaction

Mediated Learning Experiences (MLEs)

● Observe the amount of examiner effort ● Child’s responsivity● Ability to transfer

Timeline: Earlier models of dynamic assessment occurred over longer periods of time (i.e., MTSS/RtI), but now research is indicating that the modifiability identified in a single assessment is a valid data point to assist in determining difference vs. disorder.

Re-Test-Phase Three● Use same tool and items from pre-test to determine student growth● Can test immediately and/or following a period of delay during single

sessions● For lengthier timeframes, re-tet should occur no more than 2 days from the

final teaching session.

Re-Test-Phase Three

● What if post-test score does not improve?○ Focus more on the child’s responsivity, modifiability, and transfer of

strategies from teaching component.○ Level of cueing or examiner effort may have decreased over time-This is

a GOOD prognostic sign!○ Use at least one more dynamic assessment task to see if task choice

played a factor in degree of change from pre to post test.

Considerations for DA and CLD population● DA can be completed in any language● Typical language learners will demonstrate the ability to learn, retain, and

transfer new information. ● Those with possible language impairment will demonstrate little to no

transfer● If completing in English, the child must have Basic Interpersonal

Communication Skills (BICS) in English.● If the child does have BICS in English, select target tasks that are at their age

level and has considered stage of second language acquisition.

Considerations for DA and CLD population● Want to engage the child in novel learning, but doing so in language that is

accessible to the child (i.e., basic analogies). ● Very useful for the population of students who have experienced Language

loss in L1. ● If a child is responsive to the ELL strategies during the teaching component of

DA, this can be indicative that ELD is likely required versus SPED.

Research ● By using the test-teach-retest approach, children from CLD backgrounds with

and without language impairment learned and invented morpheme rules at different rates

● This differential learning rate allowed classification with better sensitivity and specificity(Roseberry and Connell, 1991).

● Peña and Iglesias (1992) applied DA methods to a study of 50 bilingual children (age range of 3.7-4.9 years) and found that this method effectively differentiates difference from possible disorder.

● DA was more predictive in differentiating difference vs. disorder in CLD population on a word learning task (Peña et al., 2006).

DAPPLE (Hasson et al., 2013)● Dynamic Assessment of Preschoolers

Proficiency in Learning English

● Study recruited 26 CLD Preschooler● 6 Tasks were utilized during assessment

○ Block Building (British Ability Scales II)○ Drawing (Goodenough Draw A Man)○ Dynamic Receptive Vocab○ Dynamic Expressive Vocab○ Dynamic Phonological Test○ Dynamic Sentence Production

● Measured ability to learn new vocab, correctly produce errores phonemes, and produce syntactically correct sentences after a teaching session. Also measures amount of prompting necessary.

Conclusion:DAPPLE did produce significant differences in the performances of Language Disordered vs. TD children.

The amount of cueing needed differentiated the two groups on the vocabulary and sentence structure tasks.

The types of errors discriminated the phonology and sentence structure tasks and so did retaining ability for newly learned vocabulary for semantic task.

Need further longitudnal and case studies for further

Dynamic Assessment and Child Find/Preschool Evaluations

● MLE can occur during a single session (Child Find) or over multiple sessions (Preschool, K-12)

● Distinguish Disability vs. Limited exposure or experience with concept● Can the child acquire new linguistic information from the environment?● Cognitive processes can be evaluated ● Nonword Repetition Tasks● Fast Word Mapping

Video: Leaders Project Columbia University Catherine Crowley, J.D., Ph.D.

Activity on Dynamic Assessment

(10 minutes)

At your table, determine who will be the student and who will be the examiner. The examiner will test the targeted task (student will not respond or respond incorrectly). The examiner will go through the mediated learning experience and retest. As a team, fill out the scoring sheet based on task acquisition then switch roles.

Multi-tiered Systems of Support and Dynamic Assessment

Dynamic assessment is an essential component of MTSS in the school setting. The test, teach, retest paradigm can be used to target learning goals and assess capacity of learning to further inform formal evaluation.

MTSS gives evaluators the opportunity to assess learning over time. The test, teach, re-test cycle can be utilized throughout the RTI/MTSS cycle to assess learning and retention of new skills

Examples of Dynamic Assessment in Child Find

● Learning to use a cause and effect toy● Linguistic concepts (Spatial concepts/sequence/descriptive)● Following directions (1 step and multi-step)● Sorting activities (pre-academics)● Categorization of items (animals versus people)● Manual signs for communication● Identification of body parts (self and others)

Dynamic Assessment Video

Dynamic Assessment Protocol

● Student background information● Areas of concern ● Parent input● Home Language Survey results or language background● Mediated Learning Experience step by step● Support strategies leveled by scaffolding● Assessment rubric

Q & A

ReferencesBangera, S. (2015) Dynamic assessment: A complimentary tool for assessments and interventions in culturally and linguistically diverse population. The Voice. http://integratedtreatmentservices.co.uk/author/sai-bangera/.

Crowley, C. (2014) Dynamic assessment: How does it work in the real world of preschool evaluations? Obtained from: http://blog.asha.org on January 20, 2018

Dollaghan, C. & Campbell. T. (1998) Nonword repetition and child language impairment. Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research, 41, 1136-1146

Hasson, N., Camilleri, B., Jones, C., Smith, J., & Dodd, B. (2013) Discriminating disorder from difference using dynamic assessment in bilingual children. Child Language and Therapy, 29, 57-75

Pena, E. & Iglesias, A. (1992) The application of dynamic methods to language assessment: A non biased procedure. The Journal of Special Education, 26(3), 269-280

Roseberry, C. & Connell, P. (1991) The use of an invented rule in the differentiation of normal and language-impaired Spanish-speaking children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34 (1991), pp. 596-603