Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to begin validation of a scale that will be used by teachers of students with visual impairments to determine appropriate recommended type and frequency of services for their students based on identified student need.

Methods

Validity and reliability of the Visual Impairment Scale of Service Intensity of Texas (VISSIT) were evaluated using a mixed-methods survey research design. Participants used the VISSIT to determine services for at least one student and then completed an electronic survey regarding the use of the tool.

Results

Twenty-five participants completed at least one VISSIT and completed the electronic survey. Social validity was supported by 92% of the participants stating that the tool was easy to use as a way to determine service time and was also supported by 96% of the participants stating that they would use the VISSIT for determining the type and amount of service recommended for their students. Consequential validity was supported by 71% of the participants stating that the tool's results matched their professional judgment regarding student need and recommended service time and was also supported by 75% of the participants stating that the tool's results directly translated into type and amount of service they would recommend. Internal consistency reliability was demonstrated by the result of a factor analysis of Cronbach's Alpha statistic of .747 for the entire set of VISSIT items.

Discussion

The results demonstrate that the VISSIT is a moderately valid and reliable tool for helping teachers of students with visual impairments determine the type and amount of visual impairment services based on individual student need.

Implications for practitioners

The VISSIT is a tool that itinerant teachers of students with visual impairments can use to determine the appropriate amount of service for all students on their caseloads and offers a more objective way to recommend service intensity based on student need.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

AER Division 16. (2010). Caseload analysis: A critical component of quality services for students with visual impairments. Position paper of AER's Division 16, Itinerant Personnel (Goal 4 of the National Agenda). Retrieved from http://www.tsbvi.edu/national-agenda/1208–position-paper-of-aer-division-16-itinerant-personnel-goal-4-of-the-national-agenda-caseload-analysis-a-critical-component-of-quality-services-for-students-with-visual-impairments

Andrew

D. P. S.

Pedersen

P. M.

, & McEvoy

C. D.

(2011). Research methods and design in sport management. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

Correa-Torres

, & Howell

(2004). Facing the challenges of itinerant teaching: Perspectives and suggestions from the field. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 98(7), 420–433.

Durkel

, & Miller

(2009). Evidence-based practice for academic and non-academic visually impaired students. [TETN #30908 Notes]. Retrieved from http://www.tsbvi.edu/handouts/feb09/EvidBased_handout.doc

Hatlen

(1996). The core curriculum for blind and visually impaired students, including those with additional disabilities. RE:view, 28, 25–32.

Huebner

M. K.

Merk-Adam

Stryker

, & Wolffe

(2004). The national agenda for the education of children and youths with visual impairments, including those with multiple disabilities. New York: AFB Press.

Luiselli

J. K.

, & Reed

D. D.

(2011). Behavior sport psychology: Evidence-based approaches to performance enhancement. New York: Springer.

Messick

(1989). Validity. In Linn

R. L.

(Ed.), Educational measurement (3rd ed., pp. 13–103). New York: Macmillan

Michigan Department of Education. (2013). Michigan Vision Severity Rating Scale. In Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired Home (Resources). Retrieved from http://mde-lio.cenmi.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=VdBAWUzte8Y%3d&tabid=1901

10.

Pogrund

(2008). The role of the TVI and COMS in consultation: It's more than a “How's It Going?” Making consultation service delivery by vision professionals really work! Retrieved from http://www.tsbvi.edu/attachments/handouts/Jan08/RoleofTVI_handout.doc

11.

Silberman

R. K.

, & Sacks

S. Z.

(2007). Expansion of the role of the teacher of students with visual impairments: Providing for students who also have severe/multiple disabilities. Retrieved from http://community.cec.sped.org/dvi/resourcesportal/positionpapers

12.

Singh

(2007). Quantitative social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

13.

Spungin

S. J.

, & Ferrell

K. A.

(2007). The role and function of the teacher of students with visual impairments. Retrieved from http://community.cec.sped.org/dvi/resourcesportal/positionpapers

14.

Suen

H. K.

, & Rzasa

S. E.

(2004). Psychometric foundations of behavioral assessment. In Haynes

S. N.

, & Heiby

E. M.

(Eds.), Comprehensive handbooks of psychological assessment, behavioral assessment (pp. 37–56). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

15.

Toelle

N. M.

, & Blankenship

K. E.

(2008). Program accountability for students who are visually impaired. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 102(2), 97–102.

16.

United States Department of Education. (2004). Regulations: Part 300 [A]300.8 [c] 3. In Building the legacy: IDEA 2004 (child with a disability). Retrieved from http://idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/%2Croot%2Cregs%2C300%2CD%2C300%252E320%2C

17.

VISSIT. (2014). Visual Impairment Scale of Service Intensity of Texas. Retrieved from http://www.tsbvi.edu/vissit

Initial Validation Study for a Scale Used to Determine Service Intensity for Itinerant Teachers of Students with Visual Impairments