Construction and validation of two parent-report scales for the evaluation of early intervention programs.

The State Performance Plan (SPP) developed under the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA 2004, Public Law 108-446) requires states to collect data and report on the impact of early intervention services on three key outcomes for participating families. The NCSEAM Impact on Family Scale (NIFS) and the NCSEAM Family Centered Services Scale (NFCSS) were developed to provide states with a means to address this new reporting requirement and to collect additional data that would inform program improvement efforts. Items suggested by stakeholder groups were piloted with a nationally representative sample of parents of children with developmental delays or disabilities ages birth to three participating in early intervention services in eight states. The 28-item NIFS had measurement reliabilities ranging from .93-.96 in a sample of 1,750; measurement reliabilities for the 135-item NFCSS ranged from .94 to .97 in a sample of 1,755 respondents. A 29-item version of the NFCSS had measurement reliabilities ranging from .87 to .92. Using data from the pilot study, stakeholders established a recommended performance standard, set at a meaningful point in the NIFS item hierarchy, for each of the three established outcome areas.

Alternative approaches to the definition and identification of learning disabilities: some questions and answers.

Recent consensus reports concur in suggesting major changes in the federal regulatory approach to the identification of learning disabilities (LD). These reports recommend abandoning the IQ-discrepancy model and the use of IQ tests for identification, and also recommend incorporation of response to instruction (RTI) as one of the identification criteria. These changes are also recommended to states in the current reauthorization of the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA). While not mandatory, states that follow these recommendations will experience major changes in identification and treatment of students served under the LD category. This paper reviews the basis for these recommendations, summarizing four recent consensus group reports on special education that concur in suggesting these changes. Seventeen commonly asked questions about these changes are presented, with responses. In order to ensure adequate instruction for students with LD, it is essential that identification practices focus on assessments that are directly related to instruction, that any services for students who are struggling prioritize intervention over eligibility, and that special education be permitted to focus more on results and outcomes and less on eligibility and process. Identification models that incorporate RTI represent a shift in special education toward the goals of better achievement and behavioral outcomes for students identified with LD, as well as those students at risk for LD.