An Analysis of Data Collection Tools Used When Completing Functional Vision Assessments

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.

Exploring States’ Variations in Prevalence and Eligibility Criteria for Students With Visual Impairments Including Blindness

“…Meanwhile, other students have in-depth functional vision assessments 10 to 20+ pages long, examining all aspects of their functional vision. This range of practice and lack of standards result in inconsistently implemented functional vision assessments (Kaiser & Herzberg, 2021). As a result, the similar statistical impact in the statistical models of requiring functional vision assessments sometimes, and always, is plausible because the data collected in an assessment are arguably more dependent on the TVI collecting the data than the student being assessed.…”

“…In a recent survey of more than 300 TVIs (Kaiser & Herzberg, 2017), the majority of TVIs felt that there were some gaps, many gaps, or the TVIs received no training in how to conduct functional vision assessments in their university programs. Furthermore, TVIs significantly vary on the tools used for conducting these assessments (Kaiser & Herzberg, 2021) and the field has yet to establish standards of practice or consistent curricula regarding functional vision assessments (Kaiser et al, 2020). Without standards of practice, the quality of students' functional vision assessments remains questionable.…”