The Use of the Battelle Developmental Inventory in the Prediction of Later Development

Abstract

This study was designed to assess the ability of the Battelle Developmental Inventory (BDI) to predict later achievement involving a sample of children with or at-risk for developmental delays. The investigation utilized BDI scores administered annually for one to three years involving children who were one to four years of age. Results were compared to those obtained on the Woodcock-Johnson Test of Achievement-Revised, standard battery (WJR-ACH: Woodcock & Johnson, 1989), which was administered one, two, and three years following the last administration of the BDI. Correlations between earlier BDI and later WJR-ACH scores for three combinations of scales tested generally increased from approximately r = .05 for BDI scores at age 1 to a mean of .72 for BDIs administered at age 3. For ages 3 years and greater, mean correlations remained relatively stable across ages and were also substantial in magnitude (ages 3 to 12 years = .74; range = .40 to .94). Thus, BDI scores from children at or above age 2 years appeared to consistently predict WJR-ACH scores received at ages 6 to 12 years; however, the ability of the BDI to predict later scores on the WJR-ACH was weak when administered to children less than 18 months of age.

Effectiveness of a large-scale home visiting programme (PIM) on early child development in Brazil: quasi-experimental study nested in a birth cohort

“…For age 4 years, the BDI instrument presents good validity for predicting later development. 30 Quality control was performed in the current study for 200 randomly selected children, through use of videos recording the application of the instrument to the child. The total score calculated, based on the coding by trained interviewers, showed strong agreement with the total score calculated from coding by senior psychologists who observed the videos, taking into account the application environment, the interviewers' approach and the children’s responses (kappa statistics indicated strong or excellent agreement for all the domains analysed).…”

“…For age 4 years, the BDI instrument presents good validity for predicting later development 30. Quality control was performed in the current study for 200 randomly selected children, through use of videos recording the application of the instrument to the child.…”

Effects of Regular Exercise During Pregnancy on Early Childhood Neurodevelopment: The Physical Activity for Mothers Enrolled in Longitudinal Analysis Randomized Controlled Trial

“…28,29 The instrument presented good and stable correlation to predict later development. 30 In each follow-up measure, children with severe disabilities did not have their neurodevelopment assessed due to incapacity to collect the data.…”

Learning Accomplishment Profile-Diagnostic Standardized Assessment (LAP-D)

“…However, the standardization sample contained only typically developing children. Many early intervention assessment experts have expressed concerns that most standardization samples do not contain children with delays and disabilities (Behl & Akers, 1996;Lerner, Lowenthal, & Egar, 1998;McLean, Bailey, & Wolery, 1996;Sattler, 1992;Sheehan, 1982). Bailey and Wolery (1996) noted, for example, there is an inherent unfairness in comparing the development of children with disabilities with that of typically developing children.…”

“…Bailey and Wolery (1996) noted, for example, there is an inherent unfairness in comparing the development of children with disabilities with that of typically developing children. Furthermore, the exclusion of children with special needs during normative processes precludes establishing the appropriateness of adaptations for children who have specific disabilities (Behl & Akers, 1996). Researchers conducting studies designed to compare reliability and validity indices calculated from normative samples reported in testing manuals with those obtained from testing young children with disabilities have produced highly discrepant results (see, for example, Snyder, Lawson, Thompson, Stricklin, & Sexton, 1993).…”