Implications of P.L 99-457 for Assessment

Abstract

With the passage of Public Law 99-457 come a number of challenges to early childhood educators throughout the country. One area of challenge, and the topic of this article, is assessment. Passage of this new federal law is having both quantitative and qualitative effects on assessment efforts. Quantitatively, far more educators are expected to be involved in early intervention and early assessment than have been in the past. This means that educators working with preschool and infant handicapped populations must become much more familiar with developmental assessment strategies. Educators (particularly those working with infants) must also become familiar with the limitations of those assessment strategies. Qualitatively, Public Law 99-457 will challenge educators to become involved in assessing complex and controversial family variables, including health and environmental risk factors and family strengths and needs. Such assessments must be truly useful, free of cultural stereotype, and psychometrically sound enough to be defended in litigation efforts that are likely to occur during the next several years.

Enierging Issues in the Assessment of Young Children With Disabilities: The Expanding Role of School Psychologists

“…Current Issues Assesstnertf t ' Many issues and challenges related to the assessment of young children have an extensive history in the literature. With the passage of new legislation in the United States and the consequent involvement of school psychologists with preschool children, there has been a resurgent interest in these issues including functional and curriculum-based assessment versus traditional assessment (e.g., standardized assessment, Fewell, 1984;Paget & Barnett, 1990;Strain et al, 1984), the technical adequacy of assessment instruments (Bracken, 1987;Kaufman, 1990;Schakel, 1986;Zeidner & Feitelson, 1989), consequences of categorical labeling (Mallory & Kerns, 1988;Sheehan & Sites, 1989), and the need to bridge the gap between assessment and intervention (Bagnato et a]., 1987;Paget & Nagle, 1986;Strain et al, 1984). Because many school psychologists with little or no training in conducting comprehensive assessments of preschool-aged children are now being faced with this task, a review of these assessment issues is warranted.…”

“…Use of this system raises serious concerns regarding the utility of these assessment tools to aid in classification decision making. Although many of these instruments are widely used and have historically aided in classification decision making among the school-aged population, it is estimated that only 10% of existing preschool measures have documented reliability and validity evidence and less than 10% have adequate reliability and validity for predicting a subsequent diagnostic category (Sheehan & Sites, 1989). Moreover, a quantitative implication of recent legislation is that legal action regarding the validity of preschool instruments is likely to ensue as services to preschoolers with handicapping conditions increase (Sheehan & Sites, 1989).…”

“…Although many of these instruments are widely used and have historically aided in classification decision making among the school-aged population, it is estimated that only 10% of existing preschool measures have documented reliability and validity evidence and less than 10% have adequate reliability and validity for predicting a subsequent diagnostic category (Sheehan & Sites, 1989). Moreover, a quantitative implication of recent legislation is that legal action regarding the validity of preschool instruments is likely to ensue as services to preschoolers with handicapping conditions increase (Sheehan & Sites, 1989). Given the lack of reliability and predictive validity evidence of preschool measures as well as recent advocacy for a non-categorical approach to identification and service delivery, it is disturbing to see that many states have chosen to adopt the same categorical labeling system for their preschool population as they use with their school-aged population.…”

“…For example, practitioners may use the least restrictive label for a'preschooler who exhibits a handicapping condition in order to reduce the stigma associated with some classification categories, for example, classifying a mental handicap as a language disorder. As a result of this least restrictive labeling, children may be placed in inappropriate treatment programs (Sheehan & Sites, 1989). In addition, categorical labels may hinder the child's probability for success in the public school because of parent and teacher misconceptions of the disability, damage to the self-esteem, and inappropriate placement in self-contained classrooms (Hobbs, 1975;Leigh, 1983;Mallory & Kerns, 1988;Mercer, Algozzine, & Trifiletti, 1979;Palmer, 1983).…”

Measurement Characteristics of the Inventory of Parent Experience Scales

“…Many researchers have, in fact, identified the failure to establish reliability and validity of development measures as one of the most troublesome methodological problems in past efforts to investigate early intervention program effects (Casto, 1988;Dunst, 1986;Neisworth & Bagnato, 1988). In fact, Sheehan (1989) found that, although the number of existing childfocused preschool measures probably exceeds 300, the percentage of these measures with documented reliability and validity is probably less than 10%.…”