THE EVOLUTION OF THE CONNECTICUT
KINDERGARTEN ENTRANCE INVENTORY
Peter Behuniak
University of Connecticut
AERA Presentation



Understanding Students’ Skills at Kindergarten
Entry: Findings from Connecticut
Jessica Goldstein, Ph.D., Melissa Eastwood, M.A., &
Peter Behuniak, Ph.D.
Presentation at the Annual Conference of the
American Educational Research Association, April
2012, Vancouver, B.C.
The presentation


Connecticut’s Kindergarten Entrance Inventory (KEI)
Validity research
 Predictive
studies of the KEI
 Quantitative study of structure of teacher ratings

Lessons for the future
A mandated measure
The 2007 Legislation required that:
“(h) Within available appropriations, the Commissioner
of Education shall, not later than October 1, 2007,
develop and implement a state-wide developmentally
appropriate kindergarten assessment tool that measures
a child’s preparedness for kindergarten, but shall not be
used as a measurement tool for program accountability
pursuant to section 10-16s, as amended by the act.”
From mandate to policy
LEGISLATIVE MANDATE
CSDE POLICY
Developmentally
appropriate kindergarten
assessment tool that
measures a child’s
preparedness for
kindergarten
A statewide snapshot of
the skills and behaviors
students demonstrate,
based on teachers’
observations, at the
beginning of the
kindergarten year
Structure of the KEI




Census measure
Administered annually in October
Ratings assigned on 6 domains
Domains are defined by 3-5 indicators each
D1: Language skills






Participate in conversations
Retell information from a story read
to him/her
Follow simple 2-step verbal directions
Speak using sentences of at least 5
words
Communicate feelings and needs
Listen attentively to a speaker
D2: Literacy skills







Hold a book and turn pages from the
front to the back
Understand that print conveys meaning
Explore books independently
Recognize printed letters, especially in
their name and familiar printed words
Match/connect letters and sounds
Identify some initial sounds
Demonstrate emergent writing
D3: Numeracy skills







Count to 10
Demonstrate one-to-one correspondence while
counting (e.g., touches objects as he/she counts)
Measure objects using a variety of everyday
items
Identify simple shapes such as circles, squares,
rectangles, and triangles
Identify patterns
Sort and group objects by size, shape, function
(use), or other attributes
Understand sequence of events (e.g., before,
after, yesterday, today, or tomorrow)
D4: Physical/motor skills




Run, jump, or balance
Kick or throw a ball, climb stairs or
dance
Write or draw using writing
instruments (e.g., markers, chalk,
pencils, etc.)
Perform tasks, such as completing
puzzles, stringing beads, or cutting
with scissors
D5: Creative/aesthetic skills



Draw, paint, sculpt, or build to
represent experiences
Participate in pretend play
Enjoy or participate in musical
experiences (e.g., singing,
clapping, drumming, or dancing)
D6: Personal/social skills





Engage in self-selected activities
Interact with peers to play or
work cooperatively
Use words to express own
feelings or to identify conflicts
Seek peer or adult help to
resolve a conflict
Follow classroom routines
Rating scale
Performance
Level
1
Description
Students at this level
demonstrate emerging skills in the specified domain
and require a large degree of instructional support.
Rating scale
Performance
Level
Description
1
Students at this level
demonstrate emerging skills in the specified domain
and require a large degree of instructional support.
2
Students at this level
inconsistently demonstrate the skills in the specified
domain and require some instructional support.
Rating scale
Performance
Level
1
2
3
Description
Students at this level
demonstrate emerging skills in the specified domain
and require a large degree of instructional support.
Students at this level
inconsistently demonstrate the skills in the specified
domain and require some instructional support.
Students at this level
consistently demonstrate the skills in the specified
domain and require minimal instructional support.
What do the data look like?
2007 KEI Ratings
Frequency Frequency Frequency
1
2
3
24%
40%
35%
Domain
Language
N
37048
Mean
2.11
SD
.77
Literacy
37048
2.01
.76
29%
42%
29%
Numeracy
37048
2.10
.74
23%
45%
33%
Physical
37048
2.31
.69
13%
43%
44%
Creative
37048
2.31
.69
13%
42%
45%
Personal
37048
2.21
.73
18%
43%
39%
Classifications of validity evidence
AERA,
APA,
NCME
Standards for
Educational &
Psychological
Testing
(1999)
Classification
Question
Test content
Does the KEI content match the CT Curriculum
Framework?
Relations to other
variables
Are KEI ratings consistent with scores on similar
assessments?
Internal structure
Do KEI data match our expectations for test
functionality? (Quantitative analyses)
Response
processes
How do teachers evaluate and judge students’
skills and behaviors?
Test consequences Are the intended benefits of the KEI being
realized? Are there unintended consequences of
the KEI?
Validity evidence
Based on test content
Validity evidence based on test content

Indicators were developed from
 Connecticut
Preschool Curriculum Framework
 Connecticut Preschool Assessment Framework
 Connecticut Curriculum Standards for Language Arts
 Connecticut Curriculum Standards for Mathematics

Indicators were reviewed by
 Preschool
and kindergarten teachers
 Representation from urban and suburban districts,
special education, and educators of English language
learners
Validity evidence
Based on relationships to other variables
Validity evidence based on
relationships to other variables

Are ratings on the KEI in kindergarten associated
with performance on the state’s summative
assessment in third grade?
 Fall
2007 Kindergarten Entrance Inventory data
 Spring 2010 Grade 3 Connecticut Mastery Test
 2007 KEI Ratings / 2010 CMT Data Study
 Matched sample of students statewide (n = 29845)
2007 KEI Ratings by 2010
Grade 3 CMT Reading Proficiency
KEI Domain
KEI
Rating
n
Proficient+
Reading Grade 3
Not Proficient
Reading Grade 3
3
13048
88%
12%
3
10867
89%
11%
3
12097
88%
12%
Language
Literacy
Numeracy
2007 KEI Ratings by 2010
Grade 3 CMT Reading Proficiency
KEI Domain
KEI
Rating
n
Proficient+
Reading Grade 3
Not Proficient
Reading Grade 3
Language
1
9055
54%
46%
Literacy
1
10657
56%
44%
Numeracy
1
8444
52%
48%
2007 KEI Ratings by 2010
Grade 3 CMT Reading Proficiency
KEI Domain
KEI
Rating
Language
Literacy
Numeracy
n
Proficient+
Reading Grade 3
Not Proficient
Reading Grade 3
1
9055
54%
46%
2
14945
75%
25%
3
13048
88%
12%
1
10657
56%
44%
2
15524
77%
23%
3
10867
89%
11%
1
8444
52%
48%
2
16507
75%
25%
3
12097
88%
12%
Validity evidence based on
relationships to other variables

Are ratings on the KEI at the start of kindergarten
associated kindergarten retention?



Fall 2008 Kindergarten Entrance Inventory data
(n = 40,713)
Fall 2009 dichotomous retention variable
4% of 2008 kindergarten students were retained in 2009
The type of student who is the most likely to be retained for
a second year of kindergarten is




Young
Male
Eligible for free or reduced lunch
Has KEI Ratings of “1” on
Language, Literacy, Numeracy, and Personal/Social domains
Validity evidence
Based on internal structure
Language skills






Participate in conversations
Communicate feelings and needs
Speak using sentences of at least 5
words
Follow simple 2-step verbal directions
Listen attentively to a speaker
Retell information from a story read
to him/her
A new structure for teacher ratings
Domain
Sub-Domain
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Sub-Domain
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Re-conceptualized language domain
LANGUAGE
Expressive
Language
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Re-telling Information
from a story
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Receptive Language
Indicator 1
Indicator 2
Language domain in detail
Expressive
Language
Show comfort in expressing feelings and needs
Express feelings and needs with words
Speak using sentences of at least 5 words
Communicate personal needs
Communicate academic needs
Communicate with peers
Respond to “who, what, when, where” questions about self
Actively participate in conversations using reciprocal dialogue
Language domain in detail
Receptive
Language
Listen attentively in small groups
Listen attentively in large groups
Follow simple two-step verbal directions
Actively participate in conversations using reciprocal
dialogue
Language domain in detail
Re-tell
Information
from a story
Answer questions about a story
Retell parts of a story
Retell a story in proper sequence
Validity evidence based on
internal structure
READY TO LEARN
ACADEMIC
READINESS
LITERACY
NUMERACY
SOCIAL
READINESS
LANGUAGE
LANGUAGE
PERSONAL/
SOCIAL
READINESS
FOR ACTIVITIES
CREATIVE
PHYSICAL/
MOTOR
Validity evidence
based on test consequences

Fall 2010 survey study of K teachers (n = 1084)
 Teachers
believe the KEI is an appropriate
representation of students’ skills at the start of the
kindergarten year.
 Teachers felt the rating scale was appropriate.
 Teachers reported that they had appropriate time and
training to complete the Inventory.
 Teachers were neutral about administrative support to
complete the instrument.
Looking across the studies
What have we learned?


Teachers can form accurate judgments of student knowledge
and skills at the start of the kindergarten year.
Teacher judgments at the start of the kindergarten year are
related to academic performance in later grades.


Higher ratings at the domain level are related to higher levels of
proficiency in each of the domains covered by the CMT.
Future development of the KEI



Ratings of simple, discrete skills are easier than general domains.
More detailed indicators provide more information about
students.
KEI focused on specific discrete skills could be rated
dichotomously.
Conclusion



Questions
Discussion
Follow-up issues or thoughts: PeterBehuniak@cox.net