Introduction This study analyzed survey responses from 314 teachers of students with visual impairments regarding the tools and procedures used in completing functional vision assessments (FVAs). Methods Teachers of students with visual impairments in the United States and Canada completed an online survey during spring 2016. Results The majority of participants reported that they primarily assess pre-academic and academic students in kindergarten through 12th grade (K-12). More than 95% of all participants indicated that they assess near and distance visual acuity. Other commonly assessed skills and abilities were tracking ( n = 298; 95%), peripheral visual fields (n = 296; 94%), and color perception (n = 293; 93%). Approximately 50% of survey participants indicated that they use a screening tool in determining the need for an orientation and mobility (O&M) evaluation. Discussion The procedures and tools used by participants in completing FVAs varied based on the specific student being assessed. There was also considerable variation in visual skills assessed, as well as in what was included in the assessment report by the participants. Based on comments from participants, it appears that there are complex factors that influence the decision-making process regarding possible referrals for an O&M evaluation or a clinical low vision evaluation. Implications for practitioners Teachers should reflect on their own practices and procedures to determine whether they are including all pertinent information in their FVA reports, as well as explore whether they should assess additional visual skills in order to provide a rich description of how the student uses his or her vision throughout the day in a variety of environments.

No abstract

Introduction: Within the field of visual impairment, there is no set of standards that guide teachers of students with visual impairments as they conduct, report, and share functional vision assessment (FVA) results with other educational team members, and university instructors vary in how they teach the assessment process to preservice teachers. Methods: In parallel, a group of teachers of students with visual impairments and a group of university instructors completed three rounds of a Delphi study. After providing background information in Round 1, they rated 84 statements about the FVA process. The level for consensus was set at 80%. Results: Of the 84 statements, consensus was reached for 45 statements regarding the level of importance by both groups. Participants rated 11 of 22 visual skills (e.g., near acuity, distance acuity) as extremely important to include in the FVA process. Discussion: There continues to be a need to build consensus on when FVAs should be conducted, what visual skills should be included when conducting them, what should be included in reports, and with whom assessment information should be shared. The importance of conducting such assessments for all students, including students under the age of 5 years and those with additional disabilities, needs to be recognized by the field of visual impairment. Implications for practitioners: University personnel need to work together to develop consistent curricula that focuses on the FVA process. Future studies that examine the FVA practices of individual teachers are necessary.

No abstract

Introduction: This study analyzed 39 data collection tools used by teachers of students with visual impairments when completing functional vision assessments (FVAs). Methods: In 2017, teachers of students with visual impairments submitted data collection tools used in the FVA process. These tools were then compared with the 23 FVA components suggested by two established resources, Erin and Paul and D’Andrea and Farrenkopf. Results: The most commonly assessed skills and abilities were near visual acuity, distance visual acuity, and color perception. Only five of the submitted data collection tools contained at least 80% of the FVA components identified by the established resources. Fewer than 25% of the tools incorporated an orientation and mobility (O&M) screening. Discussion: There was considerable variation in the background information, medical data, and visual skills information that was collected. Variability in the data collected during the FVA process may impact a teacher’s recommendations, including referrals for specialized evaluations such as O&M and clinical low vision evaluations. Implications for practitioners: Since FVA reports are used by Individualized Education Program teams, it is essential that data collection tools used during the assessment process are complete and address key areas such as near visual acuity and color perception. Teachers should carefully review their tools to determine whether the data collected are sufficient to make informed recommendations regarding accommodations, goals, and referrals. If the data collected are not sufficient, then the tools should be revised or additional data should be collected.