Search

Guidelines are presented for incorporating screening and assessment into a sequential and comprehensive model of preschool intervention services. At-risk children who may receive intervention services and an ecological intervention model are described. Three categories of children may benefit from services of early intervention programs: children who are biologically at risk because of organic problems; children who are suspected to be at risk because of organic difficulties often associated with later problems; and children who are environmentally at risk because of social and interactional influences. An ecological model of early intervention services consists of a series of comprehensive steps: (1) case finding; (2) screening; (3) comprehensive assessment; (4) development of an intervention plan; (5) implementation of the intervention plan; (6) program monitoring and follow-up; and (7) development and implementation of a transition plan. Among the technical issues in planning and evaluation are the limitations of standardized tests in terms of reliability and construct validity. The criteria used to make decisions from screening and assessment must incorporate information about referral and eligibility rates and the validity of decisions. Five tables present information from previous studies to illustrate the discussion. (SLD)

This study sought to extend previous research by investigating performance of intellectucally gifted children on the Mental Processing Composite of the Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children (K-ABC). A sample of 54 children (aged 6-12) referred for possible gifted placement were administered the Sequential and Simultaneous scales. Average scores on the Sequential and Simultaneous scales were analyzed, and ipsative comparisons were examined. There were no significant differences between mean scores from the Sequential and Simultaneous scales. Ipsative comparisons indicated that the majority, 57 percent, exhibited no statistically significant differences between Sequential and Simultaneous scores. Thirty-one percent of the sample had a significant Sequential strength, compared to only 11 percent who had a Simultaneous strength. Spatial Memory was the most difficult subtest for the sample; Number Recall and Matrix Analogies stood out as the subtests on which subjects performed the best. Results of the investigation did not strongly support a characteristic profile on the K-ABC for children referred for gifted programs. (JDD)

The Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales were administered to 134 emotionally disturbed children (9-15 years old), 323 hearing impaired children (6-13 years old), and 185 visually handicapped children (6-13 years old). Respondents were residential program staff familiar with the children's daily activities. Scores were computed for six domains: communication, daily living skills, socialization, motor skills, and two measures of maladaptive behavior. Means and standard deviations are presented across the six domains for each of the three populations. Results indicated that the difference between the visually handicapped and non-handicapped sample was much greater than differences between the other two handicapped samples and the nonhandicapped sample. Greater variability in adaptive behavior scores was noted for hearing impaired and visually impaired samples. In general, the intercorrelations among adaptive behavior domains were higher for the visually impaired sample. Data supported the need for special norming of the Vineland for these populations. (CL)