An analysis of the amount and type of training of primary intervention agents in early intervention programs was conducted as part of a review of literature on the efficacy of early intervention with disadvantaged, at-risk, and handicapped preschoolers. Results indicated that intervenors who were certified were significantly more effective than those who were not certified. However, what is meant by "certification" and other critical characteristics of the intervenors is many times unclear in the research literature. Suggestions are offered for the study of characteristics and training of intervenors that produce effective child gains.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, K.E. (1978). Early intervention for young severely and profoundly handicapped children: The preschool imperative. AAESPH Review , 3(1), 30-41.
2.
Barbarch, C.R., & Horton, D.M. (1970). Educational intervention in the home and paraprofessional career development: A second generation mother study with emphasis on costs and benefits. Final report. Nashville: George Peabody College for Teachers, Demonstration & Research Center for Early Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 052 814)
3.
Blacher-Dixon, J., Leonard, J., & Turnbull, A. (1981). Mainstreaming at early childhood level: Current and future perspectives. Mental Retardation, 19, 235-241.
4.
Blum, E.R. (1971). Conversations in training and research. Exceptional Children, 37, 670-681.
5.
Carlberg, C.G., Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R., Maruyama, G., Kavale, K., Kulik, C-L.C., Kulik, J.A., Lysakowski, R.S., Pflaum, S.W., & Walberg, H.J. (1984). Meta-analysis in education: A reply to Slavin . Educational Researcher, 13(8), 16-23.
6.
Casto, G., & Lewis, A. (in press). Parent involvement in infant and preschool. Journal of the Division of Early Childhood.
7.
Casto, G., White, K., & Taylor, C. (1983). Final report 1982-83 work scope. Logan: Utah State University, Early Intervention Research Institution.
8.
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press .
9.
Creekmore, W.N., & Creekmore, N.N. (1983). Senior citizens as paraprofessionals in teaching severely handicapped children. Exceptional Children , 49, 455-457.
10.
Educational Research Service. (1980). Class size research: A critique of recent meta-analysis. Cap-pan, 62, 239-241.
11.
Eysenck, J.J. (1978). An exercise in mega-silliness. American Psychologist, 33, 515-517.
12.
Gallo, P.S. (1978). Meta-analysis-A mixed metaphor. American Psychologist, 33, 515-517.
13.
Glass, G.V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research . Educational Researcher, 5, 3-8.
14.
Glass, G.V. (1978). Reply to Mansfield and Bussey. Educational Researcher, 7, 3.
15.
Glass, G.V. (1980). On criticism of our class size/student achievement research: No points conceded. Phi Delta Kappan, 62, 242-244.
16.
Glass, G.V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M.L. (1981). Integrating research studies: Meta-analysis of social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
17.
Glass, G.V., & Smith, M.L. (1978). Rely to Eysenck. American Psychologist , 33, 517-518.
18.
Glass, G.V., & Smith, M.L. (1979). Meta-analysis of research on the relationship of class-size and achievement. Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 1, 2-16.
19.
Glass, G.V., Smith, M.L., & Miller, T.I. (1980). Benefits of psychotherapy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
20.
Gordon, I.J. (1969). Early childhood stimulation through parent education . Final Report to the Children's Bureau, Social and Rehabilitative Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (PHS-R-306, PHS-R-306[01]).
21.
Gray, S.W., Ramsey, B.K., & Klaus, R.A. (1982). From 3 to 20: The early training project. Baltimore: University Park Press.
22.
Herzog, E., Newcomb, C.H., & Cisin, J.H. (1973). Preschool and postscript: An evaluation of an inner-city program. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, The Social Research Group.
23.
Hodges, W.L., & Sheehan, R. (1978). Follow through as ten years of experimentation: What have we learned? Young Children, 34, 4-14.
24.
Horst, D.P., Tallmadge, G.K., & Wood, C.T. (1975). A practical guide to measuring project impact on student achievement (No. 1, Stock No. 017-080-01460-2). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
25.
Horton, K.B. (1976). Early intervention for hearing-impaired infants and young children. In T.D. Tjossem (Ed.), Intervention strategies for high-risk infants and young children (pp. 371-380). Baltimore: University Park Press.
26.
Jackson, G.B. (1980). Methods for integrative reviews. Review of Educational Research, 50, 438-460.
27.
Karnes, M.B., Teska, J.A., & Hodgins, A.S. (1969). The successful implementation of a highly specific preschool instruction program by paraprofessional teachers. The Journal of Special Education, 4(1), 69-80.
28.
Kavale, K. (1980). Meta-analysis of experiments on the treatment of hyperactivity in children. Riverside: University of California-Riverside Press.
29.
Kavale, K. (1982). The efficacy of stimulant drug treatment for hyperactivity: A meta-analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 15, 280-289.
30.
Mansfield, R.S., & Bussey, T.V. (1977). Meta-analysis of research: A rejoinder to Glass . Educational Researcher, 6, 3.
31.
McCarthy, J.M., Lund, K.A., & Bos, C.S. (1983). Assessment of young children with special needs . Focus on Exceptional Children, 15(5), 1-14.
32.
Miller, J.O. (1969). Review of selected research with young children . National Coordinator Center, The National Laboratory on Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Clearinghouse on Early Childhood)
33.
Nedler, S., & Sebra, P. (1971). Intervention strategies for Spanish-speaking preschool children. Child Development, 42, 259-267.
34.
Pezzino, J. (1984). Progress report. Cost effectiveness analysis: Paraprofessional vs. professionals in early intervention of the Developmental Center for Handicapped Persons. Logan: Utah State University, Developmental Center for Handicapped Persons.
35.
Rubin, K.H. (1976). A comparison of preschool curricula for disadvantaged children: ACanadian study. Canadian Journal of Beahvioral Science, 8, 145-155.
36.
Schontinghuis, M.S., & Froham, A. (1974). A comparison of paraprofessional and professional success with preschool children. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 7(4), 62-65.
37.
Seashore, M. (1981). Mother-infant separation: Outcome assessment. In V.J. Smeriglio (Ed.), Parent infant contact and newborn sensory stimulation (pp. 75-87). New Jersey: Erlbaum.
38.
Shaver, J.P. (1979). The usefulness of educational research in curricular/instructional decision-making in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 7(3), 21-46.
39.
Simpson, S.N. (1980). Comment on "meta-analysis of research on class-size and achievement." Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis , 2, 81-83.
40.
Slavin, R. (1984). Meta-analysis in education: How has it been used?Educational Researcher, 13(8).
41.
Sommers, P.A. (1982). Day care, public education, and exceptional children . Early Child Development and Care, 10, 29-40.
42.
Stile, S.W., Abernathy, S.M., Pettibone, T.J., & Wachtel, W.J. (1984). Training and certification for early childhood special educational personnel: A six year follow-up study. Early Childhood, 8(1), 69-73.
43.
Swan, W.W. (1981). Efficacy studies in early childhood special education: An overview. Journal of the Division of Early Childhood, 4, 1-4.
44.
Tallmadge, G.K. (1977). Ideabook: The Joint Dissemination Review Panel . Washington, DC: U.S. Office of Education.
45.
White, K.R., & Myette, B. (1982, March). Drug treatment of hyperactivity: A meta-analysis . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York City.
46.
White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals. (1977). Vol. I-Awareness papers. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
