Considering Purpose and Intended Use When Making Evaluations of Assessments: A Response to Dickinson

Abstract

tional Researcher, the processes that are used to measure the quality of outof-home care for young children have begun to lag behind the relatively recent developments in child development research regarding literacy and the current theories regarding the processes by which children acquire emergent literacy skills. Dickinson pointed out a similar lag regarding the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation standards. The purpose of this response is threefold: to further contribute to an important dialogue, to draw attention to some specific concerns with the details of Dickinson's argument, and to raise questions about the usefulness of making comparisons and evaluations of measurement tools without a complete consideration of their purpose. Early childhood researchers have begun to more fully understand the complex interchanges between young children and the various contexts in which they develop. Our understanding of both what young children can and do learn and how supportive contexts can strengthen learning is expanding (Bowman, Donovan, & Burns, 2000). Dickinson provided helpful reviews of the nature of these research developments with respect to emergent literacy (Dickinson & Tabors, 2001; Dickinson, 2002). Dickinson (2002) also drew attention to the fact that much of the current practice in the field of early childhood education fails to meet the challenges presented by recent research findings. This argument may also need to be extended to measures of teacher beliefs about de-