One implication of the family focused philosophy of Part H of Public Law 99--457 is that child Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) goals and objectives reflect functional skills and activities that fit within family daily routines. This study compared two methods employed within an applied setting to develop child IFSPs. A rating instrument covering quality indicators derived from ecological and developmental frameworks was used to evaluate the quality of goals and objectives written from a curriculum-based assessment and a computerized list of goals and objectives based on professional judgment. Implications for best practices are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Able-Boone, H., Sandall, S., Loughry, A., & Frederick, L. (1990). An informed, family centered approach to Public Law 99--457: Parental views. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10(1), 100–111.
2.
Bagnato, S., & Hofkosh, D. (1990). Curriculum-based developmental assessment for infants with special needs: Synchronizing the pediatric early intervention team. In E. Gibbs & D. Teti (Eds.), Interdisciplinary assessment of infants: A guide for early intervention professionals (pp. 161–175). Baltimore: Brookes.
3.
Bagnato, S., & Murphy, J. (1989). Validity of curriculum-based scales with young neurodevelopmentally disabled children: Implications for team assessment. Early Education and Development, 1(1), 50–63.
4.
Bagnato, S., Neisworth, J., & Capone, A. (1986). Curriculum-based assessment for the young exceptional child: Rationale and review. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 6(2), 97–110.
5.
Bailey, D. (1987). Collaborative goal-setting with families: Resolving differences in values and priorities for services. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 7(2), 59–71.
6.
Bailey, D., Jens, K., & Johnson, N. (1983). Curricula for handicapped infants. In S. Garwood & R. Fewell (Eds.), Educating handicapped infants: Issues in development and intervention (pp. 257–297). Rockville, MD: Aspen.
7.
Bailey, D., Winton, P., Rouse, L., & Turnbull, A. (1990). Family goals in infant intervention: Analysis and issues. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(1), 15–26.
8.
Bailey, D., & Wolery, M. (1989). Assessing infants and preschoolers with handicaps.Columbus: OH: Merrill.
9.
Bernheimer, L.P., Gallimore, R., & Weisner, T.S. (1990). Ecocultural theory as a context for the Individualized Family Service Plan. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(3), 219–233.
10.
Bricker, D. (1986). Early education of at-risk and handicapped infants, toddlers, and preschool children.Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
11.
Bricker, D., Bailey, E., & Slentz, K. (1990). Reliability, validity, and utility of the Evaluation and Programming System: For Infants and Young Children: Developmentally 1 Month to 3 Years, and the Parent EPS-I. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(2), 147–158.
12.
Bricker, D., & Cripe, J. (1989). Activity-based intervention. In D. Bricker, Early education of at-risk and handicapped infants, toddlers, and preschool children (2nd ed., pp. 251–274). Palo Alto, CA: VORT.
13.
Bricker, D., Gentry, D., & Bailey, E. (1985). The Evaluation and Programming System: For Infants and Young Children. Assessment Level I: Developmentally 1 Month to 3 Years.Eugene: Center on Human Development, University of Oregon.
14.
Bricker D., & Gumerlock, S. (1988). Application of a three-level evaluation plan for monitoring child progress and program effects. The Journal of Special Education, 22(1), 66–81.
15.
Bricker, D., & Littman, D. (1982). Intervention and evaluation: The inseparable mix. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 1(4), 23–33.
16.
Brinker, R.P. (1985). Curricula without recipes: A challenge to teachers and a promise to severely mentally retarded students. In D. Bricker & J. Filler (Eds.), Severe mental retardation: From theory to practice (pp. 208–229). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
17.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments of nature and design.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18.
Brown, L., Nietupski, J., & Hamre-Nietupski, S. (1976). The criterion of ultimate functioning. In M.A. Thomas (Ed.), Hey, don't forget about me (pp. 2–15). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
Darby, B.L. (1979). Infant cognition: Considerations for assessment tools. In B.L. Darby & M.J. May (Eds.), Infant assessment: Issues and applications (pp. 103–111). Monmouth, OR: WESTAR.
21.
Dunst, C. (1981). Infant learning: A cognitive-linguistic intervention strategy.Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
22.
Fewell, R. (1983). Assessing handicapped infants. In S. Garwood & R. Fewell (Eds.), Educating handicapped infants: Issues in development and intervention (pp. 257–297). Rockville, MD: Aspen.
23.
Furuno, S., O'Reilly, K., Hosaka, C., Inatsuka, T., Zeisloft, B., & Allman, T. (1984). Hawaii early learning profile.Palo Alto, CA: VORT.
24.
Garwood, S. (1982). (Mis)use of developmental scales in program evaluation. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 1(4), 61–69.
25.
Johnson, N. (1982). Assessment paradigms and atypical infants: An interventionists's perspective. In D. Bricker (Ed.), Intervention with at-risk and handicapped infants: From research to application (pp. 63–76). Balitmore: University Park Press.
26.
Johnson, B., McGonigel, M., & Kaufmann, R. (Eds.). (1989). Guidelines and recommended practices for the Individualized Family Service Plan.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
27.
Mahoney, G., O'Sullivan, P., & Dennebaum, J. (1990). A national study of mothers' perceptions of family-focused early intervention. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(2), 133–146.
28.
McGonigel, M., & Garland, C. (1988). The Individualized Family Service Plan and the early intervention team: Team and family issues and recommended practices. Infants and Young Children, 1(1), 10–21.
29.
Notari, A., & Bricker, D. (1990). The utility of a criterion-referenced instrument in the development of individualized education plans for infants and young children. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(2), 117–132.
30.
Notari, A., Slentz, K., & Bricker, D. (1991). Assessment-curriculum systems for early childhood special education. In D. Mitchell & R. Brown (Eds.), Early intervention studies for children with special needs (pp. 160–205). London, England: Chapman and Hall.
31.
Robinson, C., & Robinson, J. (1983). Sensorimotor functions and cognitive development. In M. Snell (Ed.), Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped (2nd ed., pp. 227–266). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
32.
Robinson, C., & Rosenberg, S. (1987). A strategy for assessing infants with motor impairments. In I.C. Uzgiris & J. McV. Hunt (Eds.), Infants performance and experience: New findings with the ordinal scales (pp. 311–339). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
33.
Seibert, J. (1987). The scales in early intervention. In I. Uzgiris & J. McV. Hunt (Eds.), Infant performance and experience: New findings with the ordinal scales (pp. 340–370). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
34.
Tymitz, B. (1980, September). Instructional aspects of the IEP: An analysis of teachers' skills and needs. Educational Technology, 20(9) 13–20.
35.
Tymitz-Wolf, B. (1982). Guidelines for assessing IEP goals and objectives. Teaching Exceptional Children, 14, 198–201.
36.
Vincent, L., Salisbury, C, Strain, P., McCormick, C., & Tessier, A. (1990). A behavioral-ecological approach to early intervention: Focus on cultural diversity. In S.J. Meisels & J.P. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 173–195). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
37.
Weisenfeld, R. (1986, September). The IEPs of Down syndrome children: A content analysis. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 21(3), 211–219.
