IV. Assessment approaches and criteria for selection of measures
IV.A: Formal assessment approaches include tests, developmental checklists and other
measures that have an established protocol. In most cases it is standard procedure to use
one or more norm-referenced instruments to determine eligibility because there needs to
be a reliable and valid comparison of the child’s developmental status against other
children the same age. Relying solely on norm-referenced instruments is not
recommended, however, because they lack good predictive validity, particularly for
children with developmental delays or disabilities. Additionally, few standardized
measures have included children with disabilities in their norming population. Part C of
IDEA recognizes these issues and allows evaluators to use informed clinical opinion to
assist in their determination of eligibility for services.
IV.B: Information collected through more informal approaches can be quite useful,
particularly when the purpose of assessment is program planning, or monitoring.
Informal approaches include observation and interview. Observational data can be
recorded anecdotally (after the observation occurs) or through a running record (during
the observation). Observations in naturalistic settings can provide the evaluator with
opportunities to see typical behavior patterns in familiar surroundings. While there are
protocols for interviews, assessment information can also be collected from caregivers
and family members and others using a non-structured format with open-ended questions.
IV.C: Assessment of young children with special needs should be:




Multi-measure – More than one measure should be used
Multi-method – Both formal and informal assessment approaches should be used
Multi-context – Assessments should occur across a variety of settings
Multi-purpose – Assessments can and should be used for more than one purpose
Assessment instruments generally fall into the following categories: play-based
assessment, ecological assessment, judgment-based assessment and adaptive assessment.
Bagnato, Neisworth and Munson (1997) developed criteria for systematically reviewing
assessment measures to determine their appropriateness for inclusion in an assessment of
a young child with special needs.
Six Operational LINK Standards, Incorporating the Most Desirable Early Childhood
Assessment Characteristics
Standard
Authenticity
LINK Dimension
Bases assessments on sequential authentic goals contained within a
curriculum’s developmental hierarchy or task analysis
Taps natural developmental competencies
Emphasizes areas of strength rather than areas of concern
Convergence
Collaboration
Equity
Sensitivity
Congruence
Requires use of developmentally appropriate and familiar toys and
materials or necessary adaptive toys
Promotes natural circumstances for assessments
Converts contrived test items into authentic tasks
Balances quantitative and qualitative performance information
Accepts/incorporates multiple data sources, including curriculumcompatible and authentic information
Focuses on assessment in natural contexts
Relies on play-style stagings of assessments to complement natural
displays of behavior
Ensures broader coverage of child and family’s developmental
ecology
Promotes inter-or transdisciplinary modes of teamwork
Is family centered in outlook and process
Relies on family as the primary source or authentic child
performance data
Supports consensus decision making and use of collaborative
problem solving and judgments as the most valid assessment
process
Fosters in situ cross-talking and consensus decisions among
parents and professionals about the child’s capabilities, needs, and
family priorities
Adapts tasks to accommodate child’s functional limitations
Emphasizes critical task/competencies demonstrated by the child,
irrespective of functional limitation
Uses test-teach-test approach to identify primary response mode
and to generalize its use by the child with various materials,
activities, and settings
Conducts assessments via a natural test-teach-test framework that
blends testing and teaching
Seeks to uncover and foster the child’s learning-to-learn skills and
abilities
Uses sequential curricular goals and graduated metrics to monitor
small increments of individual progress
Links authentic assessment tasks to authentic curriculum goals and
authentic curriculum goals to authentic interventions
Underscores activity-based interventions in natural home and
preschool settings and using natural activities
Links to real-life IEP/IFSP goals
Accomplishes major purposes and missions of early childhood and
special education
Uses developmentally appropriate styles of assessment that
emphasize play, natural observation and parent reports
Contains tasks and procedures that allow flexible accommodations
for young children with wide individual differences, in particular
developmental delays and disabilities
Encompasses content and procedures that have field-derived social
and treatment validities to support their suitability for use with
young children, particularly those with special needs.
Developmentally appropriate assessment ratings to gauge the
quality of curriculum-based instruments
Assessment is
When characterized by
Authentic
Real-life activities, settings, and methods that provide goals for
intervention
3. Clear emphasis on skills or activities that are useful and
worthwhile in natural settings
2. Many or most items have some relevance; items can be adapted
or contextualized to be useful objectives.
1. Emphasis on items with little real-life relevance; psychometric
tasks that were neither required nor desired in typical activities
and settings.
Collaborative
Consensual decision making through teamwork between parents
and professionals
3. Assessment items and methods are readily useful by parents
and various professionals
2. Materials can be used by professional teams after coaching,
although parent use is minimal.
1. Content and methods are discipline specific; use by parents
and other professionals not feasible.
Convergent
A confluence of information from multiple sources, settings,
occasions, domains, and measures of multiple purposes
3. Emphasizes the use of multiple sources of information,
including observation across settings and interview, as well as
scoring of activity in context.
2. Employs at least some information source other than testing
(eg., interview, and observation in natural contexts).
1. Focuses on direct testing, with little or no reliance on other
avenues for information gathering.
Equitable
Flexible and adaptive modifications to accommodate the needs and
priorities of young children and families
3.
2.
1.
Sensitive
Activity is phrased functionally (what gets done), rather than
requiring specific sensory or motor capability.
Administration permits normative skill or activity to be
modified to accommodate special sensory, motor, or cultural
needs.
Normative tasks or activities not feasible for child with
special sensory (seeing or hearing), motor, or cultural needs.
Range and density of tasks in the functional hierarchy to detect
even small increments of change
3.
Assessment procedures and wide range of high density of
items designed to detect even small changes
2.
Moderate array of items, but gaps between items that
preclude tracking of modest changes
1.
Psychometric high inference items; few items for gauging
child attainment of major developmental stages and
capabilities; spotty, low density.
Congruent
The extent to which an assessment instrument and its procedures
correspond, are compatible with the missions of early intervention,
responsive to the developmental demands and special needs of
young children, and suitable for and field validated with children
similar to those to be assessed.
3.
Assessment system shows specific design features, content
and procedures to detect and accommodate individual early
childhood needs; demonstrates its suitability through
formative field validations and/or standardization and
norming studies that establish its social and treatment
validities.
2.
Assessment system shows general design features, content,
and procedures that can accommodate individual early
childhood needs; but evidence of field-derived social and
treatment validities is weak or absent.
1.
Assessment system is developmentally inappropriate in
design, content, and procedures; fails to demonstrate fieldderived social and treatment validity with special needs
group(s) during its development; is normed and/or fieldvalidated with typical children and misapplied to children
with special needs.
Bagnato, S.J., Neisworth, J.T., & Munson, S.M. (1997). LINKing assessment and early
intervention: An authentic curriculum-based approach, Baltimore,
MD: Paul Brookes.
IV.D. Several measures used in early childhood assessment will be described in this
section.
Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning – Revised (DIAL-R) (MardellCzudnowski & Goldenberg, 1990) is a norm referenced instrument that is designed to
screen motor, concepts and language. It is designed for use with children ages 2 years and
5 years 9 months. The DIAL-R was normed on 2227 in 1990 and is often used in team
screenings using a station format.
Bayley Scales of Infant Development II is a 1993 revision of the original scales which
were developed by Bayley in 1969. The scales assess development of children from 1-42
months of age. There are three scales: 1) mental scale (assesses perceptual acuity,
discrimination, object constancy and memory, learning and problem solving, verbal
ability, generalization and classification) 2) motor scale (muscle control and
coordination); and 3)behavior rating scale (subscales address orientation/engagement,
attention, motor quality and emotional regulation). Developmental age equivalents for
motor, personal/socail, language and cognition are offered. Reliability and validity
reported by the authors seem adequate. 1700 children were included in the normative
sample and included children with special needs. The Bayley Scales of Infant
Development are frequently included in the assessment battery to determine eligibility
under Part C. It is generally administered by a trained school psychologist.
Battelle Developmental Inventory (Newborg et al., 1984) is a norm referenced tool used
to assess development of children birth to age 8. There are 341 items in five domains and
yields standard scores, percentile ranks and age equivalent. The normative sample
consisted of 800 children (50 infants). The instrument is considered by norm-referenced
and criterion referenced and can be used for evaluation and assessment purposes. The
psychometric properties are sound, but because the sample included so few infants, it is a
better choice for children 2 and older.
Hawaii Early Learning Profile (Furuno et al., 1988) is a criterion-referenced instrument
that is accompanied by a curriculum that can be used for intervention planning. There are
two versions, one for infants and toddlers and one for preschoolers. The Hawaii or HELP
contains items across all five developmental domains.
Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System (AEPS) for Infants and Children
(Bricker, 1993; Cripe, Slentz, & Bricker, 1993) is designed for use with children from 1
month of age to 3 years and their families. The AEPS represents a departure from
traditional assessment approaches in that it integrates assessment and intervention in one
approach.