This article highlights an action research project that sparked transformation regarding how early years practitioners documented children’s learning. The dominant discourse of standardisation and narrowing of early childhood education, encapsulated in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s International Early Learning Study, has resulted in the ‘shaping’ and ‘testing’ of young children around the globe. The OECD has become very interested in early childhood education and is a very instrumental player today (Moss, 2018). Consequently, the testing of young children has been instigated by governments to ensure children gain the accepted knowledge, skills and dispositions required to be successful learners.

Situated within this context of testing and standardisation, this article will share knowledge gained from a small action research project that took place in one Scottish early years setting. The study was stimulated by the early years practitioners of the setting, who strongly opposed the ‘reductionist’ formal ‘tick-box’ assessments produced by their local authority. These types of didactic formal assessments suggest that pedagogy is underpinned by a desire to tame, predict, prepare, supervise and evaluate learning. This article is of critical importance as it examines the imposition of didactic assessment from the practitioners’ perspective. The practitioners in the study contested that ‘tick-box’ assessments diminished children’s identities down to a list of judgements about their academic abilities, or lack thereof. The introduction of the ‘tick-box’ assessments presented a dilemma for the practitioners, in terms of the different views of the government and practitioners of what knowledge is worth knowing and what individuals and groups are able to learn. Many of the practitioners from the early childcare and learning setting positioned themselves and their work as being consciously different from what was going on in the wider sector. The early childcare and learning setting employed in this article introduced a new method to capture children’s learning, which they named the ‘Lived Story’ approach. In this article, we argue that Lived Stories are a form of narrative assessment which are designed to track children’s progress whilst respecting the complexity of their learning, their position within the learning process, the flow/fluidity of their ways of being and their ability to act in radical, creative and innovative ways. We conclude that by using ‘Lived Stories’ practitioners were able to lessen the surety of the language we use. The article highlights that as practitioners write Lived Stories and assess children’s progress they are freed to use language such as ‘wondering, puzzling, thinking, exploring’. In turn, we demonstrate that this language, and the ideas it enables, are on a continuum; a journey that spans a lifetime.

本文重点介绍了一项行动研究项目，该项目引发了有关早年从业人员记录儿童学习方式的变革。经济合作与发展组织的国际早期学习研究总结了关于标准化和缩小幼儿教育的主流论述，导致全球范围内的幼儿“成形”和“测试”。经合组织对幼儿教育非常感兴趣，并且在今天起着非常重要的作用（Moss，2018年）。因此，政府已鼓励对幼儿进行测试，以确保他们获得成功学习者所需的公认知识，技能和性格。

在测试和标准化的背景下，本文将分享在一个苏格兰早期环境下开展的小型行动研究项目中获得的知识。该研究受到该环境的早期实践者的刺激，他们强烈反对地方当局进行的“还原主义者”正式的“勾号”评估。这些类型的教学形式的正式评估表明，教育的基础是对驯服，预测，准备，监督和评估学习的渴望。本文非常重要，因为它从从业者的角度考察了教学评估的实施。这项研究的从业者认为，“勾号”评估将儿童的身份减至对他们的学业能力或缺乏学业能力的判断列表。在政府和从业者关于哪些知识值得了解以及个人和团体可以学习什么的不同观点方面，“勾号”评估的引入给从业者带来了困境。许多来自早期保育和学习环境的从业者将自己和他们的工作定位为有意识地不同于更广泛领域的工作。本文采用的早期保育和学习环境介绍了一种捕获儿童学习的新方法，他们将其称为“真实故事”方法。在本文中，我们认为，“活着的故事”是一种叙事评估形式，旨在追踪儿童的学习进度，同时尊重他们学习的复杂性，他们在学习过程中的地位，他们的生活方式的流动性/流动性以及他们以激进，创新和创新的方式行动的能力。我们得出的结论是，通过使用“生动的故事”，从业人员能够减轻我们使用该语言的不确定性。这篇文章强调指出，当从业者撰写《活着的故事》并评估儿童的进步时，他们可以自由地使用诸如“神奇，困惑，思考，探索”之类的语言。反过来，我们证明了这种语言及其实现的思想是连续的。一生的旅程。思考，探索”。反过来，我们证明了这种语言及其实现的思想是连续的。一生的旅程。思考，探索”。反过来，我们证明了这种语言及其实现的思想是连续的。一生的旅程。