What Professionals & Parents Should Know About Child Assessment Testing

Undoubtedly, as professionals, we are the guardians of children, and we occupy fields that require comprehensive assessment tests to ensure each child has a bright future; that being said, it is important that we evaluate the validity and reliability of the tests we choose to administer, and administer them with care and caution; as, the effect we have on the children and their families is quite powerful and long-lasting. Accordingly, within each test design, there will be strengths and weaknesses, obviously, neither should be overlooked or undervalued. Also, it is imperative that professionals review guidelines as to the tests' purposes and appropriate target group. Most importantly, all of this information must be thoroughly researched before choosing a test for a specific child or group of children; and then, the chosen test must be administered by well-versed professional, and according to the guidelines required in order to maintain validity and reliability.

Although there are many different tests that assess infants and young children, according to Louise McCauley (1994-2004) there are two tests McCauley prefers for infancy through toddler ages, and four tests that most professionals favor for toddlers. All are listed in McCauley's article along with some excellent information about the tests and the process of assessing children. From this list, and a comprehensive overview of available tests for assessing infants and young children by Sue Wortham (2009), I've chosen two tests to compare. Reasonably, I'm looking for tests that are user-friendly in their directives and tools. Another concern is the approach taken with the child or children and their parents. For example, the test parameters should include parental involvement with infants and toddlers, the families should be interviewed in order to establish an understanding of the child's lifestyle and environment. Also, the questionnaires and the assessment processes should involve the family in a non-threatening manner. Additionally, with consideration to the budget issues within the world these days, the assessment tool need to be cost effective, while delivering the most comprehensive results.

The first, is titled, Communication and Symbolic behavior Scales (CSBS) (Wetherby & Prizant B.M (1993). The CSBS is a norm-referenced, standardized, language-based package for the professionals working within the field of linguistics, psychology, or special education. This instrument for assessing children, is used during natural play and structured interactions; furthermore, it assess not only the child's language skills, but the child's gestures, facial expressions, and behaviors while playing and interacting naturally. I am very impressed with this method of observation and assessment, as most communication from children within the age range specified for the CSBS (6 months to 72 months), are conferred through gestures with vocalizations that may or may not form words. Another important aspect of the CSBS is the parent or caregiver questionnaire. This is a great tool to collect extremely important background information about the child and his/her culture, family values, and lifestyle.

Additionally, within the CSBS instrument for assessment, are components that provide an easy atmosphere for the parents and child. For example, the kit provides familiar toys and manipulative designed to keep the child's attention, while creating a comfortable and fun environment. Also, the package is easy to use, takes approximately 60-75 minutes to administer, provides a manual with strong links to most standard curriculum, and supplies an array of additional components that make the test administrator's role less challenging. For example, within the CSBS package, there are video tapes packed with details for administering, scoring, recording assessments; plus, examples of successful assessments. In addition, there are blank video tapes the administrator can employ during the actual assessment process. For example, in most observations, the examiner must take notes and maintain live data logs; thankfully, the video's provided by CSBS kit, keep the actual test situation undisturbed by note taking or additional disruption caused by the professional's need to record live data.

Clearly, the manuals and instruction videos, spectrum of information collected, and the scoring method gives the CSBS reliability and Validity. Clearly, when this data is combined they employ thorough and comprehensive information. Case in point, according to Amy Wetherby, Ph.D., CCC-SLP; and, Barry Prizant, Ph. D., CCC-SLP (1993), CSBS's 22 5-point scale survey various domains (18 communicative, 4 symbolic). Data from the 'Caregiver Questionnaire' and play observations (the Behavior Sample) are tallied on a 'Record Form' that identifies the 22 communication and symbolic rating scales (1993) Wetherby & Prizant). In addition, norms according to chronological ages are included. In my opinion, after thoroughly researching the CSBS, I believe that it is comprehensive and well designed assessment vehicle.

Undoubtedly, the option to video tape the actual assessment, the CSBS's curriculum compatibility potential and the inclusion of detailed instructive videos makes the CSBS a user friendly option. Also, CSBS approach is more functional in many ways. Margo Dichtelmiller and Laura Ensler (1993-2004) point out in their article titled, "Infant Toddler Assessment," the results of an assessment will be more comprehensive and well-rounded when the approach is more functional in contrast to a task-based assessment (1993-2004 Dichtelmiller & Ensler). On the other hand, my hesitation about the CSBS is just as valid. For example, although the test is priced low (considering what the kit includes), it is limited to assessing linguistics alone, and with budgets at the forefront of every educational institution, it may be too costly for the assessment capabilities that it delivers. For example, the complete kit provides 25 assessments, at the cost of $599.00. Considering the amount of children one kit will assess, it may not be cost effective; especially, if the assessor requires additional data beyond what a linguistic assessments can provide (1993 Wetherby & Prizant).

The second assessment test package I've chosen to compare is titled, Infant-Toddler Developmental Assessment (IDA). The IDA assessment kit provides a low-restriction test curriculum that identifies children who are developmentally at risk between the ages of 0-3 years old. Additionally, it is funded by, 'Title I, IDEA,' which is a big plus when it comes to affordability for most learning institutions. Still, one of IDA's most attractive attributes is the value the program puts on the key people that interact with the child or children. For example, the training material is based on a 'team concept,' (which include the guardians or parents of the child or children), and also the assistance and other care givers. Case in point, included within the kit is material designed for qualified professionals to train other personnel (2010 Houghton, Mifflin and Harcourt).

Additional attributes of the program are far reaching and impressive. For example, there are forms available that accommodate Spanish speaking parents; furthermore, although the kit is more expensive than the CSBS, (a full kit costs $697.00), the tests touch on the whole child. For example, IDA gathers the health status of the child, and the family-social environment, plus, relevant family health and development information for the context in which the IDA is administered (2010 Houghton Mifflin and Harcourt). Additionally, video tapes for training and leader-guides are included that focus on the team concept and approach that includes the importance and impact the family has on the child's development and social/emotional behaviors. IDA provides multifaceted and integrated data that includes all the factors that influence and affect the child. In conclusion, IDA provides the necessary information to determine the child's needs such as, intervention, monitoring, consultations, and services like but not limited to, Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) (2010 Houghton, Mifflin and Harcourt).

Clearly, the technical assets of IDA are formidable. For instance, the standardization instrument used is Provence Profile, and IDA is administered in six phases. IDA system allows the user to integrate data, which is helpful when making recommendations for the child. In addition, after comprehensive studies were done in a longitudinal manner, and according to Anastasiow, (1988, and 1989). . . IDA is an effective, cost-efficient, valid, and reliable assessment process that provides recommendations similar to those of more-in-depth evaluations (as quoted by 2010 Houghton, Mifflin and Harcourt). In concurrence, for ages 1-18 months, reliability coefficients range from .90 to .96; and .79 to .96 for ages 19-36 months; and, Inter-rater results just get more impressive!

Obviously, the IDA is an impressive and wide-reaching assessment tool that is based on the whole child. Because of its basis of observation and naturalistic-style of assessment procedures, combined with a strong family and team involvement, the IDA a very easy test to move through once the data is collected. In addition, because there are multiple sources tested and multiple avenues in which data is collected, IDA is extremely comprehensive; and, when administered in the recommended fashion, the results are undeniably reliable and valid. Interestingly, IDA is only available to qualified professionals that are highly trained. It is my opinion that teachers not certified in special education and/or psychology might feel more comfortable with a different child assessment package.

My concern about the IDA is the intrusive information that must be collected from the parents. In my opinion, collecting in-depth medical data from parents of a child that is not diagnosed by a specialist or referred by a pediatrician prior to introducing IDA could frighten them, and is very invasive. In my opinion, because of this fact alone, the IDA should be administered (or overseen) by a specialized professional. Even so, I do believe that requesting information from the parents that is non-invasive and gaining permission to conduct a home visit can be very helpful. Obviously, when contact with the parents is done with care and respect, it is very possible to create a bond between the educator and the child's parents that will assist the child in areas of special need, and encourage progress in subjects that the child exhibits strong comprehension.

Case in point, regardless of which assessment type a professional chooses, it is imperative that the results encourage the child, and foster a bond between the professionals involved, the staff, parents and child. Also, when evaluating young children, it may be necessary to try many different avenues of assessment in order to find the best fit for the child and parents. Even though, the process may be time consuming, the end results will make the journey worth the trouble. In retrospect, we are guardians of children, and we occupy professions that require comprehensive assessment tests to ensure each child has a bright future; that being said, it is important that we evaluate the validity and reliability of the tests we choose to administer, use respect when accessing personal information or acquiring access to the child's home and family; and lastly, we need to become well acquainted with the chosen assessment tools; as, the effect we have on the children and their families are quite powerful and long-lasting.