Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Early childhood intervention requires assessment procedures that are designed and field-validated specifically for young children with disabilities, capture real-life competencies in everyday routines, help plan individual programs, and document incremental improvements in developmental competencies. Conventional tests and testing, which have dominated measurement in the field, fail to meet early intervention purposes and published professional recommended practice standards. Fundamental changes in assessment for early intervention are needed to produce practices that are authentic, universal, and useful. Due to the advocacy of parents and professionals working together, early childhood measurement is morphing into authentic assessment, the optimal alternative to conventional testing in early intervention. The research reported by Macy, Bricker, and Squires (2005) in "An Examination of the Validity and Reliability of a Curriculum-Based Assessment Approach Used to Determine Eligibility for Part C Early Intervention Services" is a welcome addition to the evidence-base for authentic and curriculum-based assessment in early childhood intervention that has quietly emerged over the past decade.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bagnato, S.J. , & Neisworth, J.T. (1991). Assessment for early intervention: Best practices for professionals. NY: Guilford.

Bagnato, S.J. , Neisworth, J.T. , & McCloskey, G.M. ( 1990). System to plan early childhood services (SPECS): Administration and technical manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

Bagnato, S.J. , Neisworth, J.T. , & Munson, S.M. (1997). LINKing assessment and early intervention: An authentic curriculum-based approach (3rd ed.). Baltimore: Brookes.

Bagnato, S.J. , & Neisworth, J.T. ( 1992). The case against intelligence testing in early intervention. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 12(1), 1-20.

Bagnato, S.J. , & Neisworth, J.T. (1994). A national study of the social and treatment "invalidity" of intelligence testing for early intervention . School Psychology Quarterly, 9(2), 81-102.

Bagnato, S.J. , Suen, H. , Brickley, D. , Jones, J. , & Dettore, E. (2002). Child developmental impact of Pittsburgh's early childhood initiative (ECI) in high-risk communities: First-phase authentic evaluation research. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17(4). 559-589.

Bredekamp, S. , & Copple, C. (Eds). ( 1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs. Washington, DC: NAEYC.

Bricker, D. , Yovanoff, P. , Capt, B. , & Allen, D. (2003). Use of a curriculum-based measure to corroborate eligibility decisions. Journal of Early Intervention, 26, 20-30.

Bricker, D. , Capt, B. , & Pretti-Frontczak, K. (2002). Assessment, evaluation, and programming system for infants and children: Test birth to three years and three to six years (2nd ed., Vol. 2). Baltimore: Brookes .

10.

Dunst, C.J. , Bagnato, S.J. , Gorman, E. , & Trivette, C.M. (2004). Sources of information about eligibility determination definitions and practices. Milemarkers. Asheville, NC: Puckett Institute, TRACE Center.

11.

Greenwood, C.R. , & Shinn, M.R. ( 1998). General growth outcomes for children between birth and age eight: Where do you want young children to go today and tomorrow? Minneapolis, MN: Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development, University of Minnesota .

12.

Macy, M. , Bricker, D. , & Squires, J. (2005). An examination of the validity and reliability of a curriculum-based assessment approach used to determine eligibility for Part C early intervention services. Journal of Early Intervention , 28, 295-310.

13.

McLean, M. , Kuschner, A. , Heal, H.B. , & Drouin, C. (2003). Inclusive assessment: Valid and feasible assessment of development for children with disabilities. Unpublished research manuscript.

14.

Meisels, S.J. , Bickel, D. , Nicholson, J. , Xue, Y. , & Atkins-Burnett, S. (2001). Trusting teacher's judgments: A validity study of a curriculum-embedded performance assessment in kindergarten to grade 3. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 73-95.

15.

Meisels, S.J. , Xue, Y. , Bickel, D. , Nicholson, J. , & Atkins-Burnett, S. (2001). Parental reactions to authentic performance assessment. Educational Assessment, 7(l), 61-85.

16.

Neisworth, J.T. , & Bagnato, S.J. (2005). DEC recommended practices: Assessment. In S. Sandall , M. L. Hemmeter , B. J. Smith , & M. E. McLean (Eds.). DEC recommended practice: A comprehensive guide for practical application in early interventionlearly childhood special education (pp. 45-70). Longmont, CO: Sopris West.

17.

Neisworth, J.T. , & Bagnato, S.J. (2004). The mismeasure of young children: The authentic assessment alternative. Infants and Young Children, 17, 198-212.

18.

Quay, L.C. , & Steele, D.C. (1998). Predicting children's achievement from teacher's judgments: An alternative to standardized testing. Early Education and Development, 9(3), 207-218.

19.

Simeonsson, R.J. , Lollar, D. , Hollowell, J. , & Adams, M. (2000). Revision of the international classification of impairments, disabilities, and handicaps: Developmental issues. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(3), 113-124.

20.

Suen, H.K. , Logan, C.R. , Neisworth, J.T. , & Bagnato, S.J. (1995). Professional congruence: Is it necessary? Journal of Early Intervention, 19, 243-252.

21.

Suen, H.K. , Lu, C.H. , Neisworth, J.T. , & Bagnato, S.J. (1993). Measurement of team decision-making through generalizability theory. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 11, 120-132.

The Authentic Alternative for Assessment in Early Intervention: An Emerging Evidence-Based Practice

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References