Goal Attainment Scaling with Moderately and Severely Handicapped Preschool Children

Abstract

Conventional assessment methods have serious limitations for measuring program impact with special education populations, and do not contribute much to managing effective IEP service delivery This article focuses on the utility of Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) as a methodology for meeting those dual needs of special educators. A feasibility study of GAS in a multicategorical preschool demonstration project pointed to the relevance of the method for improving IEP implementation effectiveness with severely impaired preschool students. However, there were serious limitations for using GAS as a measure of program impact. The advantages of GAS as an intervention to improve the overall functioning of the model program are discussed, along with considerations for improving its application to IEP management. ·Federal legislation under Public Law 94-142 has mandated the use of individualized education programs (IEPs) as a means for making the education system more responsive to the needs of the handicapped student. Regulatory provisions within the mandate are also designed to stimulate the use of evaluation procedures which are sensitive to the

Goal attainment scaling: Clinical implications for paediatric occupational therapy practice

“…Holroyd and Goldenberg focused on intervention outcomes reflecting accuracy of staff predictions rather than on progress of the client. The popularity of GAS as an assessment strategy for children increased with literature documenting its use in special education settings (Carr, 1979; Maher, 1983; Shuster, Fitzgerald, Shelton, Barber & Desch, 1984; Simeonsson et al ., 1982) in addition to children with behavioural difficulties in a hospital setting (Holroyd & Goldenberg, 1978).…”

Goal Attainment Scaling as an Outcome Measure in Randomized Controlled Trials of Psychosocial Interventions in Autism

“…However, these systems fall short of what is needed in an assessment system at the level of the individual student—the ability to discern whether or not children with individualized teaching plans are responding to their educational programs (i.e., idiographic assessment). For more than 30 years, educational researchers and practitioners have lamented the limitations of traditional assessment methods for monitoring the quality and impact of educational programs of children with disabilities (Shuster et al 1984). Similar challenges have been identified by researchers and clinicians from other fields when evaluating the quality and outcomes of their services for persons receiving individualized programming.…”

“…Originally developed as a measurement tool first applied in mental health settings (Cytrynbaum et al 1979; Kiresuk and Sherman 1968; Kiresuk et al 1994), goal attainment scaling was created for program evaluation purposes and was considered superior for its suitability for individual and group outcome analysis of highly diverse and individualized treatments (Kiresuk and Sherman 1968). Since then goal attainment scaling has become a standard outcome measurement approach for school consultation research (e.g., Ruble et al 2010a; Sheridan et al 2006; Sladeczek et al 2001), particularly because it is compatible with the IEP objectives that operationalize a student’s special education program goals (Oren and Ogletree 2000; Shuster et al 1984). …”

Creating communicative opportunities through a combined in‐service training and supervision package

“…The reliability and validity of GAS have been discussed in a number of papers, for example , Maher (1983), Maloney et al (1983), Shuster et al (1984. Reliability has been found to be satisfactory (0.6-0.9) but validity is less certain because it is dependent on the objectivity of the rater/goal-setter.…”