Assessment for Exceptional Learners

Assessment is as much a part of education as teaching academic subjects. Regular and special education teachers must possess a wide range of skills, have diverse knowledge, and have good interpersonal skills in order to be effective in the school environment. Regardless of the student, with or without disabilities, the teacher must assume the roles of teacher, evaluator, interviewer, parent counselor, record keeper, and consultant. In assessment, best practice dictates that any and all decisions in educational programming should be based on information gained from multiple sources and stakeholders.

Special Education > Assessment for Exceptional Learners

Overview

Assessment is as much a part of education as teaching academic subjects. Regular and special education teachers must possess a wide range of skills, have diverse knowledge, and have good interpersonal skills in order to be effective in the school environment. Regardless of the student, with or without disabilities, the teacher must assume the roles of teacher, evaluator, interviewer, parent counselor, record keeper, and consultant. In assessment, best practice dictates that any and all decisions in educational programming should be based on information gained from multiple sources and stakeholders.

Medical & Descriptive-Developmental Models

The medical and descriptive-developmental models of assessment are two of the approaches available in assessing the learning of children with disabilities. Many assessment practices in the field of special education operate from a medical model. The medical model follows the premise of identifying a deficit based on the symptoms of behavior. In other words, the medical model identifies common groups of deficits and makes a diagnosis based on these deficits.

The descriptive-developmental model is an assessment practice that is gaining momentum in public schools for identifying children with special needs. This model describes the student's current level of functioning in the school and home environment. Thus, the descriptive-developmental model describes the overall levels of an individual's functioning and compares the performance to developmental norms.

Goals & Purposes of Assessment

For the exceptional learner, assessment is an important part of the educational process of providing instruction. In fact, assessing an individual and determining the need for special education services is a tremendous responsibility. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (IDEA) uses the terms evaluation and assessment to describe different aspects of identifying individuals with disabilities. Evaluation is referred to as the process of determining eligibility for special education services. Assessment is the process that describes the individuals' levels of functioning; needs and strengths; and the resources or supports necessary to develop areas of need while maintaining or expanding areas of strength.

Individuals involved in the assessment process realize the tremendous undertaking and responsibilities involved. The ultimate goal in the assessment process is to determine the needs and strengths of the exceptional learner. Two major goals influence the assessment process:

• To determine the individuals' deficit area(s).

• To monitor the intervention process.

Often, needs are determined during the formal and informal assessment process. Literature suggests that for individuals with disabilities assessment should not stop with the placement of a diagnostic label or identification of strengths and weaknesses. The determination and identification of an individual's needs should continue in the intervention stage as well. Intervention services should be initiated as soon as a need is determined and should continue to be refined throughout the educational process. In monitoring and assessing intervention, educators can determine additional needs and/or changes in the intervention program.

Intervention is a dynamic process and not a single static procedure. Assessment is "a multilevel process, beginning with screening procedures and continuing through diagnosis, planning of intervention, and program monitoring and evaluation" (Richard & Schiefelbusch, 1991).

Tomblin, Morris, & Spriestersback conceptualized the goals of assessment as:

• Determining the nature of the compliant or referral;

• Determining if a disability exists;

• Determining the family and individual's attitudes toward the disability; and

• Determining intervention strategies.

Each point guides the evaluator in establishing if a disability does or does not exist.

Loeb stated that there are five purposes of assessment:

• Screening and identification;

• Diagnosis;

• Eligibility determination;

• Intervention planning; and

• Evaluating intervention progress.

In diagnosis, formal procedures are typically referred to as standardized tests where informal procedures include direct observation, parent/teacher interview, or developmental scales or checklists.

Screening & Identification

In the assessment process, the mechanism that determines who should continue being assessed and who should not is referred to as screening and identification. The goal of this process is to determine who may or may not be at-risk for academic or learning difficulties. Screening should be a quick process that determines if a student is or is not functioning within normal age expectations. The question in this step of the process is: "Does the child need further evaluation?" Informal procedures used in screening and identification include: teacher observation, parent/caregiver observation, student request, or a combination of the three.

Formal procedures include any of the developmentally appropriate standardized screening tools such as the Early Screening Profile, Battelle Developmental Inventory Screening Test, or the Child Development Inventory. It should be noted that children who have established risks (medical, sensory, or physical deficits) should immediately be referred for a formal assessment of strengths and needs.

Diagnosis

Diagnosis, eligibility determination, and intervention planning occur simultaneously as part of the assessment process. In assessing children with disabilities, the diagnosis often determines eligibility for special educational services and appropriate educational placement, intervention, or teaching strategies. It is important to state that eligibility should never determine a diagnosis.

In order to arrive at the diagnosis, certain actions must be completed. Individuals (i.e., parents, teachers, caregivers) must be interviewed to determine concerns and information should be collected from multiple sources (i.e., observations, medical, and standardized tests). Once all information is collected about the individual from each and every relevant source, the information should be analyzed to describe the needs, severity, and prognosis of the individual. The single most important aspect in diagnosis is to obtain information that will allow appropriate intervention planning.

Parents who seek assessment for special education purposes do so as they are concerned about a child's performance. Thus, one characteristic in conducting an assessment is to determine why the parent or caregiver is seeking an evaluation. In interviewing the parent or caregiver, the discussion should identify and discuss why a concern exists about the child's performance.

Eligibility Determination

Additionally, in order to receive special educational services, the assessment process must determine the existence of a disability and its effect on the individual and their educational program. However, assessment should always look at all areas of development (i.e., motor, communication, social) in addition to the areas of concern. In other words, assessment needs to focus on the whole individual not just the areas of concern as this will aid in determining the prognosis of the individual.

In focusing on the whole, additional associated problems or factors can be identified that may be causing or exacerbating the disability. For instance, the lack of communication skills may be causing or intensifying challenging behaviors in an individual with a severe mental disability. Without this knowledge, the prognosis may be poor for progressing in the educational program; but with understanding a need to communicate aids in determining strategies to decrease inappropriate behaviors and replace them with appropriate behaviors.

Successful Intervention

In the assessment process, the determination of the individual or family attitudes toward the disability is crucial in identifying the success of the intervention program. Literature is abundant in demonstrating the importance of participation by the individual or family in the assessment and intervention process.

The final and most important aspect of assessment is to determine what treatment strategies are necessary in order to design an appropriate educational program. If the individual does not have a disability, strategies can recommend educational resources to assist the individual in remaining a part of the regular classroom environment.

Assessment is an ongoing process, thus progress must be continuously evaluated prior to and during intervention. Continuous evaluation guides when or how to modify or discontinue a service or intervention method (i.e., specialized classes or related services).

Applications

Assessment Teams

According to Paul, three assessment team approaches commonly used are:

• Multidisciplinary

• Interdisciplinary

• Trans-disciplinary

Each team is composed of different disciplines involved in educational services (i.e., teacher, psychologist, speech-language pathologist, physical therapist, etc.). The primary difference between each team approach is how the team functions in assessing the individual.

The multidisciplinary team is a team composed of members of different professions. Each professional completes an independent evaluation and develops recommendations for the client and other team members. On an interdisciplinary team, a "case manager coordinates services among all disciplines" (Paul, 2007, p. 24). The transdisciplinary team engages in role release. Role release allows team members to collaborate across disciplinary lines and receive training from each other.

Assessment Methods

Interviews

Interviews are commonly used as a starting point in the assessment process. The most often-used interview procedure is obtaining a case history. A case history typically asks questions of an informant (i.e., parent, caregiver or child). Typically the questions investigate the birth and medical history, the attainment of developmental milestones, and then determine the nature of the complaint or concern. Once this information is obtained the assessment can be tailored to address the specific needs of the individual.

Interviews are also used with teachers and school personnel to gain an understanding of the child's functioning in the school environment to be compared to the information obtained about the child's functioning in the home and other environments. The types of instruments used to interview can be made up by the assessor, follow a standard format, or be a published instrument used for interviewing the various individuals who are familiar with the child. Regardless of the format, questions should focus on what the child is or is not doing in comparison to their peers.

Questionnaires

Another method used to obtain information is the use of written questionnaires. Questionnaires can be developed by the assessor or can be purchased from testing publishers. The biggest advantage in using questionnaires is they can be completed independently by the source which makes them efficient in terms of time management. The Bates-McArthur Communication Development Inventories, Social Communication Questionnaire, or the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-II serve as examples of standard interview or questionnaire formats available.

Standardized Tests

Standardized tests are a common tool used in the assessment process. Standardized tests are designed to measure a predetermined skill in the developmental areas. Standardized tests are different in that each measures a different characteristic or trait of the individual taking the test. Although standardized tests are thought to be subjective measures of an individual's performance, they can be used inappropriately. The inappropriate use of standardized tests is often cited as not selecting the test based on the individual needs of the person being assessed. In other words, examiners use the same test to assess all individuals referred to them. If this practice is followed, then it is possible that a test chosen could be biased in terms of appropriateness for voiced concerns or cultural differences.

Dynamic Assessment

The use of dynamic assessment is another method used in assessment. Dynamic testing methods include the use of observation. Observation can be used to gather information about how the individual functions in various environments with different people. Observing the individual in as many natural environments as possible is a powerful tool in the assessment process.

Dynamic & Static Assessment Procedures

Assessment procedures can be viewed from a dynamic and/or static viewpoint. Poehner defines dynamic assessment as "assessment occurs not in isolation from instruction but as an inseparable feature of it" (Poehner, 2007, p. 323). In other words, dynamic assessment assesses the potential of the individual versus what they cannot do on a standardized assessment instrument. Dynamic assessment practices emerge from Lev Vygotsky's theory that children learn from interacting with one another in their environment.

Static assessment is defined as a more conventional or long-standing method to assess the learning potential of an individual. Static assessment measures a student's ability based on a peer group. Critics often cite that static assessment fails in its attempts to develop intervention plans for individuals with disabilities.

Due to the discrepancies found in using only static assessment procedures, the literature discusses the need to perform dynamic assessment. Pena, Quinn, and Iglesias, as cited in Haynes and Pindzola, compared static and dynamic assessment. Static assessment procedures find the individual being a passive participant, who performs a task independently; the examiner observing and scoring the test instrument; the assessment identifying what the child can or cannot do; and that all tasks are presented in a standard format with no deviation from the format. In comparison, dynamic assessment procedures observe the individual as an active participant, who can receive feedback or ask questions of the adult; allows the examiner to interact with the child by providing feedback to the child; identifies learning or teaching strategies that the individual can use to progress in the curriculum; and allows assessment procedures to be flexible dependent on the needs of the individual.

Viewpoints

Pitfalls in Assessing Children & Adolescents

Haynes and Pindzola discuss the common mistakes assessors often make when learning how to assess children or adolescents. Beginning assessors often find that young children (Pre-K to 5th grade) are difficult to test. With a young child, the testing environment can be very intimidating and fearful, as the child does not know what to expect. Thus, they may refuse to answer questions or may become aggressive. There are many ways to gain cooperation with young children. A few suggestions include having the caregiver prepare the child for the tasks; limiting choices in the assessment environment; and asking less and observing more.

In the adolescent age group (5th through 12th grade), students are frequently withdrawn from the process. Again, this age group may refuse to answer questions. Haynes and Pindzola provided suggestions for facilitating cooperation such as: honesty in what and why you are performing the assessment, being yourself, and allowing the adolescent to participate in the process by asking them to voice their issues or concerns.

Legal Aspects in Assessment

Children who have special needs must have an assessment of skills in order to receive services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Public Law 101-476. IDEA outlines thirteen separate disability categories that a child may be classified in order to receive special education or related services (i.e., speech-language pathology, occupational therapy, etc.). The assessment process for children with special needs includes collecting information from various sources to determine if a disability exists and what services, educational placement options, and related services are required for the child in order to receive a free appropriate public education. A hallmark of this assessment process is that standardized testing alone is not sufficient in determining a disability. Parents, teachers, related service personnel, and the child must be involved in the assessment process to gain a comprehensive measurement of the child's needs and strengths.

Conclusion

Assessment is and will remain a part of the educational process in the United States. The federal government through the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and IDEA, 2004, mandate the use of assessment. The concern with using assessment is the possible overuse of static assessment procedures. Proponents of dynamic assessment argue that best assessment practices should include the use of static and dynamic assessment procedures. The use of both types of assessment procedures increases the validity and reliability of determining an individual's needs and educational possibilities.

Each stakeholder (e.g., parents, teachers, other school personnel) should contribute their knowledge base, goals, and professional opinions to the assessment process. The complexity of this dynamic process must be considered by each stakeholder to determine the strengths and needs of the individual being assessed. However, the most important consideration is that the individual being assessed must be treated with respect, fairness, and with equal opportunities and challenges during the assessment process. Additionally, each stakeholder must be allowed to contribute to the process individually and collectively within a team environment.

Assessment is the process of providing educators and parents with a working knowledge of a child's abilities and disabilities. Appropriate assessment methods should provide everyone with a better understanding of abilities and ways on which to capitalize on these strengths. Assessment that only identifies deficits has not met the goals or purposes of assessment. Again, assessment is a continuous process that should constantly identify what does and does not work in the learning environment for each child. Changes in abilities are the hallmark of education and assessment is the process that allows educators to realize when and how much change has occurred. Haynes and Pindzola (2004) summarized assessment as being a fruitless activity "if assessment focuses only on test administration, data collection, and client evaluation" and fails to provide a starting point for educational planning (p. 9).

Terms & Concepts

Assessment: In terms of exceptional learners, assessment is the process of measuring an individual's developmental and academic knowledge and skills.

At-Risk: At-risk is a term used to describe sources of developmental delays such as diagnosed conditions (e.g., Down syndrome); environmental conditions (e.g., low socioeconomic status); or biological conditions (e.g., low birth weight).

Direct Observation: Direct observation refers to watching someone in their environment to see if skills are present or absent.

Dynamic Assessment: Dynamic assessment is a model and philosophy of conducting assessments which focuses on the ability of the learner to respond to intervention.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA): Enacted in 1965, ESEA is the primary funding source for elementary and secondary education in the United States.

Exceptional Learner: An exceptional learner is a student who differs from their average peers in terms of developmental or academic skills.

Formal Assessment: Formal assessment is often described as a type of assessment in which the individual is given a standardized test which yields a score.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 2004 (IDEA 2004): IDEA 2004 is a federal law that continues to mandate special education and related services to individuals with disabilities age birth to 21 years.

Informal Assessment: Informal assessment is a type of assessment procedure in which activities such as observation, interviews, self-evaluation, and/or discussion are used.

Interdisciplinary Assessment: Interdisciplinary assessment is a team approach that allows greater interaction and sharing among team members through the coordination of activities.

Multidisciplinary Assessment: Multidisciplinary assessment employs a team composed of different disciplines that remain independent during the assessment process.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): NCLB is a federal law that requires states to develop basic skills assessments for all children enrolled in certain grades. The grades and achievement levels are set by each state.

Related Services: Related services include but are not limited to transportation, counseling, school health services, speech-language pathology etc. that are necessary for the individual with a disability to benefit from special education services.

Screening: Screening is part of the assessment process in which an individual is identified as needing an educational assessment or not.

Static Assessment: Static assessment is defined as a traditional assessment method that measures a student's ability based on comparison with a peer group.

Transdisciplinary Assessment: Transdisciplinary assessment involves "role release" by the team members by allowing the service provider to provide assessment activities.

Bibliography

Cornelius, K. E. (2013). Formative assessment made easy. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45, 14-21. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Fensen, L., Dale, P., Reznick, S., Thal, D., Bates, E., Hartung, J., Pethick, S., & Reilly, J. (1993). Bates-McArthur Communiation Development Inventories. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Harrison, P., Kaufman, A., Kaufman, N., Bruininks, R., Rynders, J., Ilmer, S., Sparrow, S., & Cicchetti, D. ( 1990). Early Screening Profile. Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.

Hasson, N. & Joffe, V. (2007). The case for Dynamic Assessment in speech and language therapy. Child Language Teaching & Therapy, 23 , 9-25. Retrieved September 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Haywood, C. & Brown, A. (1990). Dynamic approaches to psychoeducational Assessment. School Psychology Review, 19 , 411-423. Retrieved September 23, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Amendments 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).

Ireton, H. (2000). Child Development Inventory. Bloomington, MN: Pearson Assessments.

Loeb, D. (2003). Diagnostic and descriptive assessment. In L. McCormick, D. Loeb, & R. Schefelbusch (Eds.). Supporting children with communicative difficulties in inclusive settings. (pp.189-234). Needham Heights, MA : Allyn & Bacon.

Newborg, J. (2004). Battelle Developmental Inventory-II Screening Test. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Education Ltd.

Paul, R. (2007). Language disorders from infancy through adolescence: Assessment & intervention (3rd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Mosby-Elsevier.

Poehner, M. (2007). Beyond the test: L2 dynamic assessment and the transcendence of mediated learning. Modern Language Journal, 91 , 323-340. Retrieved September 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Richard, N. & Schiefelbusch, R. (1991). Assessment. In L. McCormick & R. Schiefelbusch (Eds.) Early language intervention. (pp.109-142). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Rutter, R. Bailey, A., & Lord, C. (1999). Social Communication Questionnaire. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.

Sparrow, S., Cicchetti, D., & Balla, D. (2006). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales—II. Circle Pines, MN: AGS Publishing.

Stockall, N., & Smith, R. E. (2013). Alternative assessment portfolios for students with intellectual disabilities: A case study. Exceptionality, 21, 127-146. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Tomblin, J. Morris, H. S, & Spriestersback, D.C. (2000). Diagnosis in speech-language pathology (2nd ed). San Diego, CA: Singular.

Turan, Y., & Meadan, H. (2011). Social validity assessment in early childhood special education. Young Exceptional Children, 14, 13-28. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Suggested Reading

Elliott, J. (2003). Dynamic assessment in educational settings: Realising potential. Educational Review, 55 , 15-23. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., Compton, D., Bouton, B., Caffrey, E., & Hill, L., (2007). Dynamic assessment as responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39 , 58-63. Retrieved September 20, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Kennedy, H. (2006). An analysis of assessment and intervention frameworks in educational psychology services in Scotland. School Psychology International, 27 , 515-534. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Mindes, G. Ireton, H., & Mardell-Czudnowski,C. (1996). Assessing young children. New York: Delmar Publishing.

Moore-Brown, B., Huerta, M., Uranga-Hernandez, Y., & Peña, E. (2006). Using dynamic assessment to evaluate children with suspected learning disabilities. Intervention in School & Clinic, 41 , 209-217. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Poehner, M. & Lantolf, J., (2005). Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9 , 233-265. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.

Rowntree, D. (1987). Assessing students: How shall we know them? London: Taylor & Francis.

Ruscello, D. (2001). Tests and measurements in speech-language pathology. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Shea, T. & Bauer, A. (1985). Parents and teachers of exceptional students: A handbook for involvement. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Publishing. Smith, D. & Luckason, R. (1995). Introduction to special education: Teaching in an age of challenge. (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon Publishing.

Swanson, H. & Howard, C. (2005). Children with reading disabilities: Does dynamic assessment help in the classification?. Learning Disability Quarterly, 28 , 17- 34. Retrieved September 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Academic Search Premier.

Zigmond, N., Jenkins, J.,Fuchs, L., Deno, S., Fuchs, D., Baker, J., Jenkins, L., & Couthino, M. (1995). Special education in restructured schools: Findings from three multi-year studies. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 531-540 Retrieved September 5, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete.