This study examined the psychometric properties of test presentation and response formats that were modified to be accessible with the use of assistive technology (AT). First, the stability of psychometric properties was examined in 60 children, ages 6 to 12, with no significant physical or communicative impairments. Population-specific differences were then examined with samples that included 24 children with cerebral palsy and matched control peers. Children were administered standard and modified versions of tests. The type of AT access did not have a statistically significant effect on modified test scores. Measurement stability between the standard and modified versions of quadrant forced-choice format tests was sufficient. The findings support the potential use of AT and accessible procedures for some test instruments in the assessment of children with cerebral palsy.
American Educational Research Association. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education.
2.
BerningerV. W.GansB. M.St JamesP.ConnorsT. (1988). Modified WAIS-R for patients with speech and/or hand dysfunction. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 69, 250-255.
BlandJ. M.AltmanD. G. (1986). Statistical-methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 1, 307-310.
5.
ByrneJ. M.DywanC. A.ConnollyJ. F. (1995). An innovative method to assess the receptive vocabulary of children with cerebral palsy using event-related brain potentials. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 17, 9-19.
6.
DaleE.O’RourkeJ. (1976). The living word vocabulary: The words we know: A national vocabulary inventory. Elgin, IL: Field Enterprises Educational Corporation.
7.
DropikP. L.ReichleJ. (2008). Comparison of accuracy and efficiency of directed scanning and group-item scanning for augmentative communication selection techniques with typically developing preschoolers. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 17, 35-47.
8.
DunnL. M.DunnL. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test–Third Edition. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
9.
EliassonA.Krumlinde-SundholmL.RosbladB.BeckungE.ArnerM.OhrvallA.RosenbaumP. (2006). The Manual Ability Classification System (MACS) for children with cerebral palsy: Scale development and evidence of validity and reliability. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 48, 549-554.
Hill-BriggsF.DialJ. G.MorereD. A.JoyceA. (2007). Neuropsychological assessment of persons with physical disability, visual impairment or blindness, and hearing impairment or deafness. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 389-404.
12.
LeeD.KohD.OngC. N. (1989). Statistical evaluation of agreement between two methods for measuring a quantitative variable. Computers in Biology and Medicine, 19, 61-70.
13.
MarkwardtF. C. J. (1998). Peabody Individual Achievement Test–Revised/Normative Update Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
14.
MizukoM.EsserJ. (1991). The effect of direct selection and circular scanning on visual sequential recall. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 34, 43-48.
15.
National Longitudinal Transition Study-2. (2008). Retrieved from http://www.nlts2.org/
16.
PalisanoR.RosenbaumP.WalterS.RussellD.WoodE.GaluppiB. (1997). Development and reliability of a system to classify gross motor function in children with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 39, 214-23.
17.
RankinG.StokesM. (1998). Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: An illustration of appropriate statistical analyses. Clinical Rehabilitation, 12, 187-199.
18.
RavenJ.RavenJ. C.CourtJ. H. (1998). Manual for Raven’s Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales: Section 2. Coloured Progressive Matrices. Oxford, England: Oxford Psychologists Press.
19.
SabbadiniM.BombardiP.CarlesimoG. A.RosatoV.PierroM. M. (2002). Evaluation of communicative and functional abilities in Wolf-Hirshhorn syndrome. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 46, 575-582.
20.
ShroutP. E.FleissJ. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
21.
SigurdardottirS.EiriksdottirA.GunnarsdottirE.MeintemaM.ArnadottirU.VikT. (2008). Cognitive profile in young Icelandic children with cerebral palsy. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 50, 357-362.
22.
Van TubbergenM.WarschauskyS.BirnholzJ.BakerS. (2008). Choice beyond preference: Conceptualization and assessment of choice-making skills in children with significant impairments. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53, 93-100.
23.
WagnerB.JacksonH. (2006). Developmental memory capacity resources of typical children retrieving picture communication symbols using direct selection and visual linear scanning with fixed communication displays. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 49, 113-126.
24.
WagnerR. K.TorgesenJ. K.RashotteC. A. (1999). The Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
