jiddt
Abstract : Reaching the Hard to Reach: Mobile Development Screening Van to the Rescue
|
|
Abstract: Currently more than 15% of children have an emotional, behavioral, or developmental concern. In spite of recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to conduct universal developmental surveillance and screening with children at 9, 18, and 24 months of age, fewer than 30% of children under 6 years of age ever receive a developmental screening. Children in low-income and diverse communities are even less likely to be screened by a medical provider and/or referred for further diagnostic evaluation when predictive concerns are identified. As part of a cross-agency collaborative effort involving a family resource center, a child care resource and referral agency, a regional center for developmental disabilities, and a master’s degree program in early childhood education, the Mobile Developmental Screening Van Project conducted outreach to provide free developmental screening with families of children 0-8 years of age in diverse and low-income communities within the greater Los Angeles County. Using the Parent Evaluation of Developmental Status (PEDS) screening tool, 94 children were screened over the course of 6 months, with 33% showing 2 or more predictive concerns that resulted in referrals for further diagnostic evaluation. The feasibility of reaching families in hard to reach communities using a mobile screening van, as well as study limitations and recommendations for next steps, are discussed. Keywords: Developmental screenings, low-income, mobile screening, early childhood, community collaboration.Download Full Article |
Abstract : Accuracy of Three Screening Instruments in Identifying Preschool Children at Risk for Autism Spectrum Disorder
|
|
Abstract: An efficient approach for screening and identifying children at risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD) remains a pressing need. The aim of this exploratory study was to examine the ability of two general developmental screening tests to identify children at risk for ASD. We compared the accuracy of one general developmental screening instrument, Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ), and one general social emotional screening instrument, the Ages and Stages Questionnaire: Social Emotional (ASQ:SE), with the Social Communication Questionnaire (SCQ), an ASD-specific screening instrument. Two hundred eight children between 36 and 66 months were recruited through 19 community ASD programs, websites, and magazines. The three screening instruments were given to 285 parent/child dyads with and without a diagnosis of ASD, online via a screening website linked to a university. Sixty-four children had been diagnosed with ASD and were receiving special education services (e.g., behavioral interventions) prior to their participation. The classification agreement of the ASQ (i.e., sensitivity = 84.38%, specificity = 81.45%) outperformed the other two screening instruments; classification agreement of the SCQ was sensitivity = 70.31% and specificity = 87.33%; and of the ASQ: SE, sensitivity = 82.81% and specificity = 72.40%. Agreement among the questionnaires ranged from moderate to strong as measured by Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficients. Children diagnosed with ASD had scores below the screening cutoff points, indicating risk, most often on three ASQ domains: (a) communication, (b) gross motor, and (c) personal social. This exploratory study indicated the feasibility of using the ASQ in screening clinics for finding children at risk for ASD, if the ASQ is followed by specific ASD assessments. Design limitations, including a sample of children with ASD already receiving intervention services may explain the somewhat lower sensitivity of the SCQ. Keywords: Autism Spectrum Disorder, Developmental-Behavioral Screening Instruments, ASQ, ASQ:SE, SCQ.Download Full Article |
Abstract : Utility and Validity of Authentic Assessments and Conventional Tests for International Early Childhood Intervention Purposes: Evidence from U.S. National Social Validity Research
|
|
Abstract: The reported U.S. incidence of delay/disability in young children, and thus need for services, is far higher than those currently receiving early intervention supports and services [1]. Government representatives and policymakers in the U.S. have concluded that traditional tests fail to capture sufficient numbers of young children who must access early intervention supports at a critical life moment [2], even though state regulations often mandate their use. The early intervention field regards authentic assessments as a more effective alternative. However, few U.S. studies have been conducted to compare and validate the use of either conventional tests or authentic assessments for early intervention purposes. National social validity research in the United States by Bagnato et al. [3,4] revealed that authentic assessments fulfill the qualities/needs of the early childhood intervention field better than conventional tests. However, no national studies had been conducted to examine the qualities and patterns of use for authentic and conventional measures among interdisciplinary professionals. Based on an expanded national internet survey in the current follow-up research, we compared the qualities/patterns of use among professionals for both types of measures in the early childhood intervention field. Overall, median ratings indicate that the top authentic assessments are more valid/useful than the most popular conventional tests to accomplish most early intervention purposes. Based on the results, we share the implications as “practice-based research evidence” to guide international policymakers, professionals, and parents to advocate, choose, and use “best measures for best practices.” Keywords: Authentic assessment, early care and education, early childhood intervention, developmentally-appropriate, assessment for developmental disabilities, early childhood special education.Download Full Article |
Abstract : Content Validity Analyses of Qualitative Feedback on the Revised Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for Infants and Children (AEPS) Test
|
|
Abstract: Early childhood assessment practices, procedures, and tools can lay the foundation for an effective intervention program. The purpose of this article is to report the results of a content validity study conducted on a revision of Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System for infants and children (AEPS®) Test, a widely used early childhood assessment/evaluation instrument. A panel of early childhood and early childhood special educator experts was assembled and asked to provide qualitative feedback on the content of the revised AEPS Test. Experts were asked to address five specific questions about item content, developmental sequences, and if assessment items represented quality teaching targets for young children. Qualitative results were used to modify items, developmental sequences, and area content. Keywords: Validity, AEPS®, early intervention, early childhood assessment.Download Full Article |
