Thirty-two moderately and severely retarded adults engaged in a vocational evaluation and training program to determine the predictive value of several dexterity measures as they relate to shop productivity. Results indicate the usefulness of common dexterity measures for predicting future unit rates, and the relative advantage of task analytic worksamples as a method of predicting accuracy and evolving individual training strategies.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CobbH.The forecast of fulfillment. New York: Teachers College Press, 1972.
2.
CrossonJ.A technique for programming sheltered workshop environments for training severely retarded workers. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1969, 73, 814–818.
3.
CunninghamT. and PresnallD.Relationship between dimensions of adaptive behavior and sheltered workshop productivity. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1978, 82(4), 386–393.
4.
DialJ. and SwearingtonS.The prediction of sheltered workshop performance: special application of the McCarron-Dial work evaluation system. Vocational Evaluation and Work Adjustment Bulletin, 1976, 9(4), 24–33.
5.
ElkinL.Predicting productivity of trainable retardates on experimental workshop tasks. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1967, 71, 576–580.
6.
GoldM.Research on the vocational habilitation of the retarded: The present, the future. In Ellis'N. R. (Ed.), International review of research in mental retardation, Vol. 6. New York: Academic Press, 1973, 97–147.
7.
GoldM. and BarclayC.The learning of difficult discriminations. Mental Retardation, 1973, 11(2), 9–11.
8.
GrossmanH. (Ed.). A manual of terminology and classification in mental retardation. Washington, D.C.: American Association on Mental Deficiency, 1973.
9.
GuarnacciaV.Factor structure and correlates of adaptive behavior in noninstitutionalized retarded adults. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1976, 80(5), 543–547.
10.
KarenR., EisnerM. and EndresR. W.Behavior modification in a sheltered workshop for severely retarded students. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1974, 79(3), 338–347.
11.
McCarronL. and DialJ.McCarron-Dial work evaluation system. Dallas, Texas: Common Market Enterprises, 1975.
12.
NihiraK., FosterR., ShellhaasM. and LelandH.AAMD Adaptive Behavior Scale. Washington, D.C.: American Association on Mental Deficiency, 1969.
13.
PackardR., HenkeR. and McCollumP.A concurrent validation of the McCarron-Dial work evaluation system as a pre-admission screening battery. Vocational Evaluation and Work Adjustment Bulletin, 1976, 9(2), 25–32.
14.
ParnickyJ. and KahnH.Evaluating and developing vocational potential of institutionalized retarded adolescents. Bordentown, N.J.: Johnstone Training Center, 1963.
15.
TizardJ. and LoosF.The learning of a spatial relations test by adult imbeciles. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1954, 59, 85–90.
16.
TobiasJ. and GorelickJ.The effectiveness of the Purdue Pegboard in evaluating work potential of retarded adults. Training School Bulletin, 1960, 57, 94–103.
17.
WagnerE. and HawyerD.Correlations between psychological tests and sheltered workshop performance for severely retarded adults. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 1965, 69, 685–691.
18.
WolfensbergerW.Vocational preparation and occupation. In BaumeisterA. (Ed.), Mental Retardation. Chicago: Aldine, 1967, 232–237.
