Once the six steps are finished, the process begins anew. The goals defined in the next plan will be different, because of the information gained in the first round of the process. The child will have new activities to support his or her growth. Different aspects of a child's language development may be important the next time the process is implemented.

Obviously, developing a procedure such as the one described above requires a commitment on the part of all parties. The usual objection is that there just is not enough time. Where is a busy staff to find the time to make observations, to write them down, to make up a portfolio, to talk with family members about the child's language development, to meet and write summary statements, to meet and discuss curriculum changes? These are serious concerns that cannot be taken lightly.

In fact, the only way this kind of assessment can take place is if there is a commitment to reform. A drastic restructuring is necessary in 1) the uses of time, 2) staff professional development, 3) accountability, and 4) relationships with parents.

The Uses of Time. For the kind of authentic assessment we have described, there has to be a fundamental rethinking of how time is used by center staff. There has to be a new conceptualization of what the staff person's role is. In a certain sense, all staff become researchers-gathering data on their students that are then used to inform curriculum. This is a new role for staff. It will require some adjustment for them to think of themselves as observer-researchers.

A major part of this adjustment is the requirement to put time aside to make observations and to record them in the children's portfolios. This time has to come from other activities. Staff have to be able to step back and "see," and children need to adjust to the teacher making observations. Children may become curious when a staff member takes notes about their behavior. McAfee and Leong (1994) recommend the following responses: "I'm keeping track of what we've learned and have yet to learn" or "I do this to help me teach better." Saying something like this may help the children understand that the staff member needs quiet time to watch what is happening in the classroom.

Time also has to be found for meetings with parents and staff to discuss individual children and to plan curriculum changes. These meetings are key to the success of the assessment enterprise and to the center generally. If directors and staff look carefully at how staff meetings are run and how time is spent at these meetings, they will often find that a great deal of time is wasted that could be used to discuss individual children and their competencies and needs.

Staff Professional Development. Serious reform also requires professional development. Especially in situations where staff are dealing with children who come from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, it is critical that staff have information about language development in general and second-language development in particular.

The kind of information presented in the first part of this paper is especially important for successful reform and assessment. Staff also need information on what steps are to be taken when there are children with particular needs. Staff need to understand the course of normal language development and what to expect of children at particular ages. They need to be able to determine when there are enough warning signs to suggest that a child is in need of referral. This requires an appreciation for age-appropriate developmental patterns.

Part of professional development has to do with learning to "see." Over time, staff who take observational notes of children inevitably start seeing more and more, and develop a sense for what is important for understanding a child's development and what is not. They also learn over time what information will be helpful for future modification of the curriculum. There is a learning curve here-as staff engage in authentic assessment, they become better at it.

Accountability. A key element of reform is accountability. Program goals need to be clearly spelled out and procedures need to be developed to determine whether those goals are being realized. An assessment procedure such as was outlined above forces programs to be clear about their goals in the planning stage. In some cases the program will focus on developing proficiency in English; in other cases the focus will be on home language development. In many programs, the goal will be to develop both languages. Authentic assessment furthers program accountability because of its impact on instruction. Assessment means more than taking a snapshot of the child at a given point in time. Current thinking about assessment uses the metaphor of a video, in which a picture is given of how the child is developing across many points in time. These methods give a clearer picture of the ebb and flow of development, and help staff to formulate curricular modifications.

Relationship With Parents. Such assessment also provides a way of involving parents in the development of their children. It is important that parents understand the rationale behind authentic assessment and the benefits that this approach carries with it. Parents need to hear how assessment and curriculum development are reflected in the activities the child development program provides for children. Consideration must be given to involve parents who do not speak English. If the teacher does not speak their language, an aide, parent, or older child who speaks the language might act as a translator.

It is important to be sensitive to the impact of what is said on the family and on the child. Cultural differences can make judgments about what is appropriate very difficult. Teachers sometimes ask more of parents than they can provide. If parents are asked to read more to their child, for example, it may be necessary for the teacher to provide appropriate books. Just asking the parents to read more is not enough if the parents do not have the time or resources to find books. In some cases the parent may not be able to read.

Parents need information about how oral language develops. Too often they may push too hard or think that language can be taught directly, rather than indirectly through expansions, paying attention to the meaning of words, and enriching the child's language environment. Like staff, parents need to understand the processes of language development and how to observe these processes in their children. As they observe more, pay more attention to language, they will "see" more and be able to be more involved in the process of assessment.

ENDNOTES

1. A fuller discussion of the first two sections in this paper can be found in Fostering the development of first and second language in early childhood: Resource guide. The resource guide is part of a comprehensive training package currently being developed by the Santa Cruz Office of Education for the California Department of Education, Child Development Division, Sacramento, CA. Robert Cervantes, Assistant Superintendent of this division, conceived this project. The authors are indebted to Marcia Meyer and Dale Zevin of the Santa Cruz County Office of Education and to the project's advisory board for their support throughout this project.

2. A fuller account of this procedure can be found in the Resource Guide, Assessing first and second language development in early childhood, Child Development Division of the California Department of Education, Sacramento CA. Robert Cevantes, Assistant Superintendent of this division, conceived this project. The authors are indebted to Marcia Meyer and Dale Zevin of the Santa Cruz County Office of Education and to the project's advisory board for their support throughout this project.

REFERENCES

Abramson, S., Seda, I., and Johnson, C. (1990). "Literacy development in a multilingual kindergarten classroom." Childhood Education, 67, 68-72.

Bialystok, E. (1988). "Levels of bilingualism and levels of linguistic awareness." Developmental Psychology, 24, 560-567.

Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age eight. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Derman-Sparks, L., and ABC Task Force. (1989). Anti-bias curriculum tools for empowering young children. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Doyle, A. B., Champagne, M., and Segalowitz, N. (1978). "Some issues in the assessment of the consequences of early bilingualism." In M. Paradis (Ed.), Aspects of bilingualism. Columbia, SC: Hornbeam Press.

Garcia, E., and Figueroa, R. (in press). "Goal one: The impact of cultural diversity on America's schools." NAME Journal.

Goodz, N. S. (1994). In F. Genesee (Ed.), Educating second language children: The whole child. The whole curriculum. the whole community. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Haugen, E. (1953). Bilingualism in the Americas. Montgomery, AL: University of Alabama Press.

Herrell, A. L. (1990). Assessment in early childhood education programs. A report commissioned by the California State Department of Education, Child Development Division.

Lynch, E. W., and Hanson, M. J. (1992). Developing cross-cultural competence: A guide for working with young children and their families. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks Publishing.

McAfee, O., and Leong, D. (1994). Assessing and guiding young children's development and learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

McLaughlin, B. (1984). Second language acquisition in childhood: Preschool children. Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.

Mehan, H., Hertweck, H., and Meihls, J. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Meisels, S. J. (1991). "Assessment issues in the early childhood and early elementary years." Paper presented at the National Policy Forum on Strengthening Linkages and the Transition between Early Childhood Education and Early Elementary School, Chevy Chase, MD.

Navarrete, C., Wilde, J., Nelson, C., Martinez, R., and Hargett, G. (1990). Informal assessment in educational evaluation: Implications for bilingual education programs. FOCUS Occasional Papers in Bilingual Education. Washington, DC: NCBE.

Nissani, H. (1990). Early childhood programs for language-minority children. FOCUS Occasional Papers in Bilingual Education. Washington, DC: NCBE.

Salvia, J., and Ysseldyke, J. E. (1988). Assessment in special and remedial education. Dallas, TX: Houghton Mifflin.

Saville-Troike, M. (1987). "Bilingual discourse: The negotiation of meaning without a common code." Linguistics. 25, 81-106.

Tabors, P. O., and Snow, C. E. (1994). In F. Genesee (Ed.), Educating second language children: The whole child, the whole curriculum, the whole community. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Teale, W. H. (1988). "Developmentally appropriate assessment of reading and writing in the early childhood classroom." The