Obtaining accurate counts of children who are deaf-blind is important for planning resource distribution and program development and implementation. Yet accuracy has been difficult to achieve for a number of reasons. This article reports the results of policy research that examined various strategies implemented by the U.S. federal government to obtain data on child counts and the issues related to this effort and its outcomes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaylessD., ForbesR., SmithJ., and WomerF. (1985). Methodological, technological, and technical issues on data collection. In SilvermanL.J., TaeuberR.C. (Eds.), Synthesis of invited papers: Elementary/secondary Education Data Project: A public discussion draft (pp. 75–94). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
2.
BaldwinV. (1991). Understanding the deaf-blind population census.Monmouth, Oregon: Teaching Resource Assistance to Children and Youth Experiencing Sensory Impairments, Volume 1, Issue 2.
3.
ChelimskyE. (1983). Deaf-blind children and the centers serving them.Hearings before the Subcommittee on Select Education.Washington, DC: U.S. General Accounting Office.
4.
DantonaR. (1976). Services for deaf-blind children.Exceptional Children, 43, 172–174.
5.
DantonaR. (1977). A history of centers and services for deaf-blind children. In LowellE.L., RouinC.C. (Eds.), State of the art: Prospective on serving deaf-blind children (pp. 18–22). Sacramento: California State Department of Education.
6.
DantonaR. (1980). Demographic data for planning of services for deaf-blind persons: Implications for special education and rehabilitation. In WolfE.G. (Ed.), Proceedings: The 1980s—Partnerships in planning for progress: Delivery of services to deaf-blind persons (pp. 11–22). Boston: Mid-Atlantic, North and Caribbean Regional Center for Services to Deaf-Blind Children.
7.
Decision Resources Corporation. (1985). Problem in states’ responses to annual data reports (Contract No. 300-84-0246). Washington, DC: Author.
8.
DillmanD.A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design approach.New York: John Wiley & Sons.
9.
FranchakS.J., and SpirerJ.E. (1979). Evaluation handbook: Vol. 2. Guidelines and practices for follow-up studies of special populations. (Research and Development Series No. 172). Columbus: Ohio State University, National Center for Research in Vocational Education.
10.
KlibanoffL.S. (1982). Implementation factors and bias in national impact data on Title I. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
11.
National Deaf-Blind Information Center. (1984). Demographic Report (Grant No. G00-83-03003). Dallas: Author.
12.
New York City Board of Education. (1977). An analysis and critique of the comptroller's report “A survey of school system characteristics in 22 United States cities.”Brooklyn, NY: Author.
13.
PliskoV.W., GinsburgA., and ChaikindS. (1985). Education statistics: Assessing national data.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
14.
TallmadgeC.K., and HorstD.P. (1977, April). Using the data from state and local ESEA Title I reports. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
15.
U.S. Department of Education. (1981). Code of federal regulations: Parts 1 to 399.Washington, DC: Office of the Federal Register.
16.
U.S. Department of Education. (1984). Services for deaf-blind children and youth: Final Regulations (34 CFR Part 307).Federal Register.Washington, DC: Office of the Federal Register.
17.
WainerH. (1984). Research report on state education statistics.Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
18.
WaterhouseE. (1977). Education of the deaf-blind in the United States of America, 1937–1967. In LowellE.L., RouinC.C., (Eds.), State of the art: Perspectives on serving deaf-blind children.Sacramento: California State Department of Education.
19.
WolfE.G., DelkM.T., and ScheinJ.D. (1982). Needs assessment of services to deaf-blind individuals (Contract No. 300-81-0426). Silver Spring, MD: REDEX.
