Guhn, Guderman and Zumbo (2007), Oliveri, Ercikan and Zumbo (2013), and readings from the text all illuminate some of the ways diverse classrooms function. Early childhood educators face a multitude of issues during the course of their work. One of the greatest challenges to early childhood educators is assessment, and finding the most appropriate, least biased, and least invasive methods of assessing students from diverse populations. Assessments should certainly be comprehensive and refer to the whole child, as Guhn, Guderman and Zumbo (2007), Oliveri, Ercikan and Zumbo (2013), and readings from the text all show. Behavioral issues need to be taken into account, as to issues related to social learning and emotional maturity. Yet concrete learning tasks, ranging from language development to specific knowledge, also need to be measured in ways that are sensitive to different learning styles. One way to ensure a fair assessment is simply to use multiple methods of assessment for each child, and to assess for as many factors as possible to avoid overlooking key areas of strength or weakness. Moreover, administrators or coworkers can monitor assessments or perform independent ones to correct for and address potential biases related to gender or ethnicity. Ideally, observing children in a naturalistic setting over a long period of time would help provide a comprehensive picture of their development. Video recordings might also come in handy for review purposes.

3. Does the prospect and understanding of differential item functioning (DIF) change your perception of reported scores and rankings on tests such as the PISA? Explain how DIF may have changed your perception or did not and why?

Measurement biases like differential item functioning (DIF) has changed my perception of reported scores and rankings on tests like the PISA. The plethora of learning that takes place at home and in communities can often supplant or enhance the learning that takes place in the classroom. Social learning in diverse communities also complicates matters related to DIF. Understanding DIF enhances my personal appreciation for early childhood education methods. Many tests do take place in settings that might enhance DIF, whereas more naturalistic assessments might minimize DIF. Specific methods of controlling for DIF can also be used in more complex data analyses. While I understand the need for assessments, I do believe that standardized systems like PISA can be seriously flawed in their design and interpretation. Learning more about DIF has helped me envision how to design more appropriate assessment methods while still recognizing the role that specific learning plays in education. Assessments that acknowledge cultural bias, allowing more nuance and greater reliance on holistic teacher observations, will be preferable in early childhood education. In many cases, multiple assessment methods can be combined to provide a complete picture of a child's development.