Assessment Case Study

Assessment Case Study

Name:

Institution:

Assessment Case Study

Developmental disabilities tend to be common among children. In most cases, screening acts as a rational measure of assessing and identifying evidence of a developmental disability in a child. However, for screening tools, supplemental information is required concerning how fine these tools recognize children who surely possess any form of developmental delay. Additionally, more data is needed in order to verify how well screening tools may protect against the misclassification of children. Researchers generically understand that a few children at the behest of occurrences associated with developmental delays may be recognized by screeners. Even though this may raise concerns, various situations, including the sternness of the suspected delay, or the performance of the child or his or her mood on the day of screening, may pose an effect on the outcomes. As such, the significance of assessment is notable. In this particular case, assessment measures, specifically Differential Ability Scales Second Edition (DAS-II) and Preschool Language Scale – 5 (PLS 5) are implemented in order to assess a student receiving special education.

Background of the Assessment

The Student under Assessment

For the objective of confidentiality, the participant that was assessed remained anonymous. Ensuring the privacy of the student was in line with the ethical measures that guide any form of testing carried out on human subjects. For the respective participant, the name was private. However, other dimensions regarding the identity were availed for the aim of research. Hence, based on the accessibility to such information, the participant in this case was born on November 14, 2012. Aside from being a 3-year old male participant, the test subject was originally of the Hispanic nationality. The main developmental disability that the participant faced as a preschool student involved speech. Based on this respective disability, the program delivery model advocated for the implementation of articulation therapy. Moreover, the test participant was subject to a formal IEP assessment on November 5, 2015. The sole objective of the assessment involved understanding the presence and implications of developmental disabilities particularly among students within the special education framework.

Location and Type of Assessment

Consequently, the assessment took place at Juanita Blakely Jones Elementary School, which comprised an Early Intervention or Start Program class for infants as well as toddlers. Additionally, the service delivery model expected in respect to this context was either center-based or home-based. Aside from the nature of the expected service delivery model, the framework in question was also designated for children aged between 0 to 3 years. The location of the assessment center was San Bernardino City. For the participant, different forms of assessments were integrated in respect to the required service delivery model and the type of developmental disability. In this respect, three types of evaluation were carried out. The first one constituted the Developmental Activities Screen Inventory (DASI-II). The respective assessment was performed by a Special Education instructor. The second assessment comprised the Differential Ability Scales Second Edition (DAS-II). This evaluation was ideally performed by a psychologist. The last form of assessment constituted the Preschool Language Scale-5, which was implemented by a Speech Therapist.

Observation of the Assessment

Upon arrival with his mother and father, the child expressed a considerable degree of excitement. For the evaluation to take place, it was imperative for the test subject and his respective guardians to exhibit awareness of the different instructors that were tasked with the obligation of evaluation. As the assessments began, the child sat together with his father, the psychologist, and the speech therapist. Consequently, his mother and another psychologist sat in a different table. The purpose of this was to enable an informational conversation concerning the child. After the discussion was concluded, the nurse came and sparked a similar conversation that circled around the respective test subject. As the assessments began formally, the DAS-II assessment was used to evaluate the child while in the presence of his father. Particular dimensions of the assessment were implemented in respect to the child’s developmental delay. These comprised Block Building, Naming Vocabulary, Picture Similarities, and Verbal Comprehension.

In this respect, the conduction of the assessment by the psychologist incorporated a series of small cubes that were given to the child. Accordingly, the psychologist provided the material and allowed the participant to create a structure that he desired. For instance, the psychologist placed the cubes in a square arrangement and encouraged the child to build a similar set on his own. As the child worked on the cubes, the psychologist recorded the activity in a form meant specifically for the type of assessment performed. As an outcome of the assessment, the child exhibited positive results in relation to the work that he did. Even though he exhibited a high level of proficiency in most of the skills, the psychologist offered assistance in areas that seemed difficult for the participant. After the conduction of the first assessment, the speech therapist integrated the Preschool Language Scale-5 assessment. Accordingly, she asked the participant regarding the five main senses. At this point, the child displayed insufficient attention as illustrated by his inability to initiate a response to the speech therapist.

Because of this lack of response, the therapist provided the child with a teddy bear and a picture. Following this, she asked the child to identify the nose of the doll as well as the ear within the provided picture. After the respective exercise, the child began displaying attention and initiated a response to the speech therapist. Seeing this as a positive turn of events, the therapist together with the male guardian encouraged the child throughout the assessment. Similar to the psychologist, the speech therapist also utilized an evaluation form while testing the child. Consequently, the psychologist placed toys such as cars and animals in front of the child and asked him to choose between giving her a horse or a cat or a car. In this particular exercise, the child performed well. In another evaluation, the psychologist provided the participant with a series of images and animal toys and asked the child to match such physical aspects with the image file. On the other hand, the speech therapist placed a teddy bear and cutlery in front of the child and asked him to feed the doll. However, the child refused to respond.

Conclusion

Aside from the implementation of the DAS-II and the Preschool Language-5 assessments, the child was also evaluated via the integration of DASI-II by a specialist. The participant under evaluation displayed positive results despite the existence of a developmental disability. The application of the evaluation provided an understanding of the child’s comprehension and organization capabilities by integrating a series of rational or pragmatic exercises for the participant. In the end, the excited child illustrated strong mental and physical capacities for his age. As such, the measures of assessment that were implemented were beneficial to the child and his parents in respect to his developmental disability.