Informal checklists and observational tools offer parents and Teachers of the Deaf a practical way to track a child’s communication and language development over time.  Unlike formal assessments that provide a snapshot at a single point in time, these informal measures can be used regularly throughout the year to document growth, celebrate milestones, and identify areas where additional support may be beneficial. From infancy through high school, consistent monitoring helps families and educators make informed decisions about intervention strategies and ensure that each child’s unique developmental journey is well-documented. These tools complement formal testing by providing ongoing insight into real-world communication skills across home, school, and community settings.

Monitoring listening ability at home or school

Early Listening Function – ELF by Karen Anderson, PhD

Confused baby boy hand touch ear

Oticon Version  | Phonak Version | ELF Background Information and Scoring Examples  

• Discovery tool for parents to begin to understand the impact of
• hearing loss for their infant with newly diagnosed hearing loss
• Introduces the concept of the Listening Bubble and restrictions to incidental language learning
• Used to identify difficulties listening in noise, need for trial period with FM system in home/child care
• The ELF stimuli can also be used with early elementary-age students as an exercise for them to discover the relative size of their listening bubble in quiet and noisy conditions.
• The Oticon version was produced subsequent to the Phonak version and has a clearer scoring methodology.

ELF in Spanish | ELFLING checklist – adapation of the ELF test format using the Ling sounds | ELFLING procedure

Children’s Home Inventory of Listening Difficulties (CHILD) by Karen Anderson, PhD & Joseph Smaldino, PhD

CHILD Checklist to be completed by families – can be used for children ages 3-12 years; recommended especially for transition to school age (3-5 years).

CHILD Checklist to be completed by the child – recommended for children ages 8-12 years.

Introduction to using the CHILD, SIFTER, LIFE-R checklists

• Can be used as pretest and post-test for amplification use
• Can be used to determine need for assistive device use in home
• Used to assist in identifying listening strengths and needs prior to transition to school
• Can be used to advocate for classroom hearing technology (FM) re: functional listening in noise

CHILD in Spanish | CHILD in Arabic | Child in French | CHILD in Welsh | CHILD in Chinese

Children’s Auditory Performance Scale (CHAPS) by Walter Smoski, PhD, Michael Brunt, PhD & Curtis Tannahill, PHD.

• Can be used by teachers or parents to address suspected auditory processing issues
• Questions relate to 6 listening conditions including: noise, quiet, ideal, multiple inputs, auditory memory sequencing, and auditory attention span
• Recommended that person completing the checklist have observed the child over considerable time and situations.
  

The CHAPs has been made available for use with the permission of Dr. Smoski (wsmoski@ilstu.edu).

For a chart listing listening behaviors at specific ages ranging from 1-28 days through 22 years, see the Developmental Index of Audition and Listening (DIAL). From: Goals and Expectations of the Hearing Aid Fitting. Trends in Amp, 4(2), (1999).

Listening Inventory For Education- Revised (2021) by Karen Anderson, PhD, Joseph Smaldino, PhD & Carrie Spangler, AuD.

• Suite of 4 tools
• Structured way to measure listening difficulties and self-advocacy strategies using student and teacher input
• can be used on paper or online
• recommended for students 8 years and over
• online version can be used for all students on your caseload
• generates tailored reports that can be used in IEP meetings
• recommends goals for self-advocacy and tracking

Listening Inventory For Education – Revised (LIFE-R) Efficacy Materials: this link brings you to the LIFE-R webpage including the LIFE-R Student Appraisal, LIFE-R Student Appraisal with Pictures and the Teacher LIFE-R.

Functional Listening Evaluation by Cheryl D. Johnson, PhD, and P. Von Almen

• Can be performed with a variety of age-appropriate stimuli including single words, phrases, nonsense phrases and sentences
• Measures functional listening in a variety of conditions including quiet/noise; auditory-visual/auditory only; close/far; with/without HAT.

The Functional Listening Evaluation (FLE) was first described as a procedure in 1993 (developed by C. D. Johnson and P. Von Almen) and has become a ‘staple’ in most school systems as a means to estimate how well a student is able to access verbal instruction, and to what degree speechreading, distance and noise effect performance. The FLE can be performed with a variety of age-appropriate stimuli including single words, phrases, nonsense phrases and sentences depending upon if the desired information is about the precision of speech perception (words/nonsense material) or to estimate access to classroom communication (phrases for young children, sentences for grade 1 and above). A steady source of background noise and a means to control the loudness of the noise in comparison to the presenter’s voice is needed to perform the FLE in a valid manner.

The self-calculating FLE response form can be used with any stimuli material. Cheryl DeConde Johnson has made available this response form and Common Children’s Phrases (standard and nonsense version). The Recorded FLE Using Sentences controls the noise level (+5 S/N) and can be played via your phone, iPad or computer. The Recorded FLE is available from Supporting Success for Children with Hearing Loss. A 10-minute classroom noise file has been included on this website for educator use, however FLE presenters are cautioned to use a sound level meter so that the levels of speech and noise are measured during the evaluation.

Spanish Translation of Pediatric Common Phrases List (Word) (PDF)

Iowa Medial Consonant Test

• Test of precision listening ability
• Student repeats VCV phrases (i.e., eevee, eetee, eesee)
• Student with a hearing level difference of 70 dB HL or better should be able to repeat the VCV phrases with 100% accuracy when presented at 3 feet in quiet without visual cues; poorer than expected results can indicate improperly fit hearing aids and/or a lack of auditory development of fine auditory discrimination between phonemes.

Classroom Observation Form: Observational Record of Behavior of Deaf or Hard of Hearing Students

Screening Instruments For Targeting Educational Risk

Beautifully redesigned, fillable and self-calculating versions of all 3 SIFTER forms enable emailing a form to a teacher, having her complete it, and sending it back to the managing teacher of the deaf/hard of hearing or educational audiologist. Redesigned, fillable forms can be found at Teacher Tools Takeout (teachertoolstakeout.com). Paper versions below are still available at no cost.

Preschool SIFTER

by Karen Anderson, PhD & Noel Matkin, PhD Teacher completed questionnaire for children with hearing loss who are age 3 through age 5. Paper format only. It is unlawful to create an online version of the Preschool SIFTER or post to on other websites.

Preschool SIFTER in Spanish | Preschool SIFTER in Spanish | (alternate version) Preschool SIFTER in French | Preschool SIFTER in Arabic|Preschool SIFTER in Turkish

Elementary SIFTER

by Karen Anderson, PhD Teacher completed questionnaire for children with hearing loss in grade 1 through grade 5 or 6. It is unlawful to create an online version of the SIFTER or post to on other websites.

SIFTER in Spanish | SIFTER in Spanish | (alternate version) SIFTER in Danish | Danish Instructions |SIFTER in French | SIFTER in Arabic |SIFTER in Welsh | SIFTER in Turkish

Secondary SIFTER

by Karen Anderson, PhD Teacher completed questionnaire for children with hearing loss in middle and high school. It is unlawful to create an online version of the Secondary SIFTER or post to on other websites.

Secondary SIFTER in Spanish | Secondary SIFTER in Spanish  (alternate version) | Secondary SIFTER in Danish | Secondary SIFTER Danish Instructions | Secondary SIFTER in French | Secondary SIFTER in Portuguese |Secondary SIFTER in Turkish

Fatigue and Learning – Informal Assessment of Fatigue and Learning Scale

Children with hearing loss have fragmented hearing, which causes them to expend more effort, leaving fewer cognitive resources for listening comprehension and overall contributes to a higher level of fatigue than class peers and ultimately decreases pace of learning. This pair of brief checklists includes norms for typically developing children in grades 4-9. So a child is performing well in the classroom – at what cost (effort/fatigue)?  Another valuable informal measure of auditory fatigue is the Vanderbilt Fatigue Scale.

Developing Skills Related to Hearing Status

Audiology Self-Advocacy Checklist-ELEMENTARY SCHOOL (ASAC-ES) Audiology Self-Advocacy Checklist-MIDDLE SCHOOL (ASAC-ES) Audiology Self-Advocacy Checklist-HIGH SCHOOL (ASAC-ES) These checklists contains skills that students should develop during elementary, middle and high school related to their hearing status. To complete the checklist, enter the date the topic is introduced and then track performance using the progress levels (1, 2, or 3). If the skill has not yet been introduced (NI) the item is included but does not receive a score. If the skill is not applicable for a student, note NA and eliminate that item in the overall scoring. Specific skills that are being addressed may also be recorded as objectives on the student’s IEP. Skills should be re-evaluated at least annually. Follow the scoring directions at the bottom to obtain an overall performance level. A mastery level of 90-100% indicates the student’s audiology self-advocacy skills are functioning at the proficient level. If proficiency is not reached when the student transitions to middle school, work should continue on the deficient skills.

Monitoring social concerns and school interactions of children and (pre)teens with hearing loss

Children’s Peer Relationship Scale This scale is an elementary school survey that provides insights into the early elementary school student’s communication partners, socialization, and attitudes toward wearing hearing devices. It has been made available for use with the permission of Kris English, PhD. Children’s Peer Relationship Scale in French

Minnesota Social Skills Checklist for Students who are Deaf-Hard of Hearing This Minnesota Social Skills Checklist is designed to guide for teachers of the deaf/hard of hearing in looking at skills needed in the areas of: social skills, pragmatics or language as it relates to social communication, friendship and self-esteem. Many learners who are deaf/hard of hearing need additional teaching in these areas. These types of skills are most often learned through incidental learning which students who are deaf/hard of hearing often miss due to their hearing loss. This ambitious checklist was developed by a variety of experienced contributors and was made available to professionals by the Minnesota Department of Education (refer to the MDE website for the available PowerPoint training on how to use the Social Skills Checklist).

Minnesota Compensatory Skills Checklist This Checklist was developed collaboratively as a model for itinerant teachers to use with hard-of-hearing students; however, it can be adapted for use with any population with hearing loss. It was developed as a hierarchy of self-advocacy and compensatory skills specific to students with hearing loss from grades kindergarten through high school. It is not an evaluation but it can contribute to identifying student needs and monitoring progress. The following topics are included: understanding hearing loss, amplification management, resources and technology, communication strategies, and personal/interpersonal skills. This ambitious checklist was also developed by a variety of experienced contributors and was made available to professionals by the Minnesota Department of Education.

Pragmatics Checklist Fits on one page and can be completed individually by the parents or as part of an interview dialogue with the early interventionist. The majority (75%) of children will be able to use complex language (full expressions of more than 3 words) per the following: Age 3: 20 of 45 items; Age 4: 43 of 45 items; Age 5: 44 of 45 items; Age 6: 45 items. Therefore, at transition, a child should have mastered 20 of the items using complex language. By entry into kindergarten, all items can be expected using complex language. See the Social Communication – Pragmatics page for more information.

Self Assessment of Communication-Adolescent (SAC-A)  A questionnaire that assists adolescents in identifying problems due to hearing loss. As responses are discussed with a hearing professional, the student may gain understanding in how hearing loss is effecting him/her and provide insights on how the problems may be better managed. This test has been made available for use with the permission of Judy Elkayam (judy8590@comcast.net) and Kris English.

Significant Other Assessment of Communication – Adolescent (SOAC-A) A questionnaire for friends of students with hearing loss to assist in identifying problems that the hearing loss may be causing. SOAC-A and SAC-A answers are compared in a discussion with the individual with hearing loss and his/her friend(s) to result in new ways that problems can be managed. This test has been made available for use with the permission of Judy Elkayam (judy8590@comcast.net) and Kris English. Contact the author(s) for any questions on the SAC-A or SOAC-A.

Social Skills Functional Assessment Checklists: Social Skills Checklist (PreK/Elementary) | Social Skills Checklist (Secondary) | The Social Attributes Checklist

Does this student have a poor self concept? is a 15-item checklist to be completed by the classroom teacher or DHH teacher in discussion with the classroom teacher. All items are stated negatively, such as “Gives up easily.”

Think About It Quiz is a checklist to assess self concept that was developed for use with adolescents and focuses on five areas or domains in which this population typically judges themselves against their peers: Athletic Competence, Conduct/Morality, Peer Acceptance, Physical Appearance, and Scholastic Competence. Easy to score, the Think About It Quiz can identify if a student has a negative self-concept in one or more of these domains. By intervening to improve adolescents’ self-concepts it is possible to influence the social, academic, and behavioral adjustment of adolescents at a critical time in their development.

Placement and Readiness Checklists

Placement and Readiness Checklists (PARC) for students who are deaf and hard of hearing help Individualized Education Program (IEP) teams make decisions about programming and placement for students who are deaf and hard of hearing. Four readiness checklists focus on essential skills that students require in order to actively and meaningfully participate in their education programs. The placement checklist helps IEP teams evaluate the accessibility and appropriateness of the general education setting to support students who are deaf and hard of hearing.

PARC General Inclusion Checklist – A study in Iowa (2016) verified that the General Education Inclusion Readiness Checklist, one protocol from the PARC, is a reliable and valid tool for identifying the readiness skills of students who are deaf and hard of hearing. Students in grades K-7 were included. This reliability research compared student results on the PARC General Education Inclusion Checklist with the Iowa Assessments and Iowa’s Formative Assessment for Teachers (FAST). Mean ratings were significantly lower for students with hearing loss than their typically hearing peers. PARC checklists were developed for use in Colorado by a team lead by Cheryl DeConde Johnson permission has been provided for widespread use of the PARC Checklists.

Mainstream Assessment of Readiness – Preschool (MARC-P) by Cynthia S. Robinson and Judy Sexton.  A criterion-referenced assessment for families and educators to evaluate the strengths and needs of children who are deaf or hard of hearing and who are being considered for mainstream placement with their hearing peers or to help plan services for children already in the mainstream at the preschool level.

I want to tell you that you greatly helped me last year. I had a child with a cochlear implant. I used many of the assessments provided on your website to complete with her and her mother. The assessments helped us determine sooo much! She is thriving this school year. Last year she was not. I strongly believe she is thriving because your assessments helped us figure out what direction to take her in. So thank you from the bottom of my heart for your help! You rock!    -Candace, DHH Teacher

For a deeper dive, see our courses:

The post Tests – Informal Assessments for Parents, Students, Teachers first appeared on Supporting Success For Children With Hearing Loss.

The world of education has shifted sharply once we began our societal response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, we remain responsible for offering an equal educational opportunity to students with hearing loss. To do so we must identify and address access issues in online learning situations. Some current issues for our students who are DHH are:

• Concerns about equal access in distance learning
• Teaching practices to enhance or limit access
• Ways to gather information that shows a student’s level of access

Equal access was already a challenge! The Title II ADA requirement that schools are required to ensure that communication for students who are deaf and hard of hearing are as effective as communication for others [ADA Title II 28 C.F.R. 35.160 (a)(1)] was already a tall order for students who are hard of hearing since it is a fact that no hearing devices in current existence restore normal hearing ability. Even in a classroom setting the provision of hearing assistance technology, interpreter services, and captioning still are often not sufficient to close the access gap.

Encouragement is not the same as effective solutions. A 3/21/20 Supplemental Fact Sheet¹ from the US Department of Education clarified that special education and related services can be provided through distance instruction and that many disability-related modifications and services, like captioning and sign language interpreting, may be effectively provided online. The Fact Sheet encouraged parents and educators to collaborate creatively to use high-and low-tech strategies to meet the needs of students with disabilities. This encouragement resulted in a steep learning curve by all teachers, and especially those who work with students who have access issues due to hearing or vision limitations.

All instruction must be fully accessible to students who are deaf and hard of hearing.

Access Concerns:

1. a. When teachers provide online instruction during which only a PowerPoint presentation or documents are visible, the student is not able to speechread. Once we go back to meeting face-to-face in schools it is likely that many school staff will wear masks. How much is the student’s access impacted without speechreading?

1. b. When teachers instruct over an internet streaming service without using a microphone (standard mic that plugs-in to the computer or FM/DM microphone) the speech signal is degraded and adds to comprehension issues. How much is the student’s access to distance learning is impacted without the use of a microphone?

For students with hearing loss to experience equal access, we need to identify barriers first.

Perform a modified Functional Listening Evaluation procedure in an online teaching situation

We know that students with typical hearing respond with 90+% accuracy when listening in noise, even when the noise level is equal to the speech presentation level. It is reasonable to assume that the degradation in sound that occurs when a teacher’s voice is presented over an internet streaming service (like Zoom) will not significantly decrease the speech perception and auditory comprehension ability of students with typical hearing.

For equal access students with hearing loss should be able to perform with at least 90% accuracy during online learning presentations. Ideally, you will have performed the FLE under classroom conditions and have the percent scores under different listening conditions that can be compared to the following.

Suggestions on how to perform this functional check of listening accuracy during online learning:

1. a. Download and print out the Common Children’s Phrases.

1. b. Prepare to present Children’s Nonsense Phrases within the Common Children’s Phrases There are 8 lists of 20 items. You can place a + or o next to each sentence to record responses.

1. c. LIST 1: Use a microphone plugged into your computer as you present and encourage the student to watch your face. Even a standard SmartPhone headset will work with most media devices to improve speech signal clarity. This simulates the best listening condition.

1. d. LIST 2: Turn off your webcam or do not allow the student to watch your face. Continue to use your microphone. This simulates listening when the teacher is presenting a PowerPoint presentation while livestreaming and her face is not visible.

1. e. LIST 3: Unplug your microphone and present the list of words in the speechreading condition. These results will indicate how important it is for the student to have the teacher always use a microphone during online learning.

1. f. LIST 4: Present the nonsense phrases without using the microphone or allowing speechreading. Too many students are currently expected to learn in this situation. With the data you’ve now obtained you can demonstrate the level of barrier to understanding posed by not using a microphone and/or not allowing speechreading.

1. g. LIST 5 and 6: If you have a mask with a transparent inset available, repeat the conditions with and without using the microphone. This will provide you with some data as to just how important it is for a teacher to use a transparent mask once we return to school, and the potential barrier posed to having the teacher’s face viewed in this manner.

Check comprehension of what the student can hear (or see)

Schools have not been excused from conducting assessment or gathering progress monitoring data. Norm-referenced tests have strict administration protocols. That said, modifications can be made as long as they are referenced in the test report with the caveat that use of the norms may not be as accurate as if the original administration protocol was used.

For the purposes of students who are deaf or hard of hearing we really want to know how students perform on auditory (or sign interpreted) comprehension tasks relative to their typical class peers. Results will reflect (1) the degree to which hearing loss is posing as a barrier to comprehension along with (2) the impact of any language issues the student may experience. This is true whether the student is face-to-face in a quiet room, or in an online learning situation.

Suggestions for performing assessment of comprehension of spoken information

1. a. Gather comprehension data using the Oral Passage Understanding Scale (OPUS) for grades K-12. This test only takes 10-15 minutes to complete. It identifies how well a person can integrate and apply knowledge of use of words and word combinations, grammar and inferential meaning.

1. b. Gather comprehension data using the Listening Comprehension Test 2 for grades 1-6 or the Listening Comprehension Test Adolescent for grades 7-12. This test assesses comprehension of main idea, listening for details, vocabulary, reasoning and understanding messages. It takes about 30 minutes to administer.

1. c. Conduct an Informal Evaluation of Auditory Comprehension of Information with and without Accommodations. This functional assessment procedure refers to how to conduct comparison testing in a typical classroom environment (or simulated classroom noise vs. quiet). Adapt the procedure to online learning by reading a story and answering comprehension questions with and without a microphone, with and without speechreading, speechreading through a mask, with and without captioning, etc.

1. d. For hard of hearing students DO NOT ALLOW SPEECHREADING as this is an inconsistent listening condition.

1. e. If a HAT (FM/DM system) is typically used with the student be sure to use it while performing comprehension assessments.

1. f. If captioning is typically used during instruction it can be used while performing the assessments.

1. g. For students who are Deaf and use an interpreter, if at all possible have what you say when administering the test be presented by the interpreter the student uses in the classroom setting. Allow the student to view your face and the interpreter so the student’s ‘triangle of communication’ is as typical as possible.

LIST OF RECOMMENDED ASSESSMENTS: The list includes recommendations for both functional and formal assessments for ages 3-5 years and school-age students. In evaluations, it is appropriate to look closely at social/emotional, self-advocacy, and the possibly subtle phonological/morphological awareness and ‘Swiss cheese’ language skills that impact comprehension and reading fluency.

Read more information on tailoring assessment procedures to the needs of students with hearing loss.

References:

1. 1. March 21, 2020 Supplemental Fact Sheet Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Preschool, Elementary, and Secondary Schools While Serving Children with Disabilities
2. 2. The Effect of IQ on spoken language and speech perception development in children with impaired hearing. Cochlear Implants International, (11)1, June, 370-74.

The post Assessment of Online ACCESS first appeared on Supporting Success For Children With Hearing Loss.

The number of students who are deaf and hard of hearing (DHH) served in the general education setting continues to grow. However, these students still lag behind their hearing peers, specifically in language and reading, secondary to the impact of hearing loss. This has made the need for appropriate supports and services by personnel with highly specialized skills and knowledge a critical factor for success. Under IDEA, states must use information about the performance of children with disabilities in state and district-wide assessment programs to revise their State Improvement Plans, as needed, to improve their performance.

Educators cannot wait until the end of year to determine if teaching practices, accommodations, and services have been effective. Progress monitoring is critical.

Disadvantages of High-Stakes Testing for Students with Hearing Loss

• Results of high-stakes testing may underestimate a student’s actual skill and abilities. Students who are DHH, especially those included in a general education setting, are often at a disadvantage during high-stakes testing due to their limited knowledge of the language style and structure of the tests. Tests use phrasing, grammar, and syntax that differs from everyday English, often including idioms, multiple meaning words, and complex grammar that is unnecessary to comprehension of text. For a student with an interpreter, the interpreter may account for the student’s language ability and modify communication to assist comprehension. If familiar presentation of the language is not used during high-stakes testing, the consequence is an unfair disadvantage when the testing is presented in written form.
• For students who use sign language to communicate, some schools allow only a verbatim interpretation of the test. For a student who receives the accommodation of signed translation for test items and/or questions, the ASL interpreter must now change the communication system to present the test items as they are written.
• Students who are DHH being educated in the general education setting are typically the only student in that classroom with hearing loss. The student’s teacher is likely to be unfamiliar with the effects that hearing loss can have on equity of test results in comparison to typically hearing peers.

Is RTI the Same as Progress Monitoring?

Progress monitoring includes forming a baseline for present levels of performance and completing weekly or monthly assessments with a number of tools to verify small incremental gains in student progress. Response to Intervention (RTI) techniques are often used to monitor progress of students who are DHH included in the general education classroom. RTI was originally intended to identify hearing students who have learning disabilities. This type of monitoring includes selection and implementation of “evidence-based tools, with consideration for cultural and linguistic responsiveness and recognition of student strengths.”  According to the National Center on Response to Intervention, RTI is a framework for providing comprehensive support to students. It is not an instructional practice. RTI is a prevention-oriented approach linking assessment and instruction that can inform educators’ decisions about how best to teach their students. A goal of RTI is to minimize the risk for long-term negative learning outcomes by responding quickly and efficiently to documented learning or behavioral problems and ensuring appropriate identification of students with disabilities.” Though this type of formative assessment is used by districts, it is not intensive enough, tailored to DHH unique needs, nor can it be applied appropriately, as our students have education issues secondary to access barriers and not learning disorders.

Challenges in Collecting Valid Data on Students with Hearing Loss

Collecting accurate and valid data on students who are deaf or hard of hearing is an ongoing challenge. Educators in the field have struggled with finding, modifying, and “reinventing the wheel” when it comes to assessments that can provide parents, school teams, and administrators with valid information reflecting present levels of performance. Part of the difficulty for educators is that there is no one progress monitoring tool or assessment that is appropriate for all students with hearing loss. Student’s variability in type and degree of hearing loss, age of onset, language exposure, and modes of communication are a few of the variables that can complicate the process of choosing the correct monitoring instrument. In addition, assessment for students with hearing loss is largely misunderstood and assumed to be covered by the typical tests and data collection used with students who have common disability conditions. The type of assessment that is needed is often overlooked in favor of the type of assessment that schools require.  Many educators of the deaf and hard of hearing providing itinerant services, are forced to rely on the general education teacher, who is unfamiliar with the unique needs of a student with hearing loss, to collect informal data on a daily or weekly basis.

Common Progress Monitoring Procedures

To intervene with school teams appropriately, educators of the DHH must be attentive to the curriculum being presented to our students in order to plan, accommodate, modify and collaborate to provide tailored instruction prior to valid progress data collection. It is also essential that educators of DHH have a working knowledge of the progress monitoring tools used to assess students’ skills.

• Students in early elementary grades are often given formative assessments that test their ability to use phonological knowledge and apply it to the written word. Due to auditory access issues, phonological awareness is frequently delayed. Students who cannot access sound and whose teachers and interpreters are unfamiliar with Visual Phonics as a strategy may make little progress. Even if they are familiar, this strategy may not be implemented intensely or consistently enough to result in true progress. In this case, training may need to be offered to the educational team, a more appropriate monitoring instrument may need to be used. For some students, progress monitoring may need to be overseen by the Teacher of the Deaf. Equally, students who use ASL may not be assessed appropriately with data gathering that includes the phonological aspects of ASL.
• Concurrently, many schools use computer-based progress monitoring which depends upon auditory skills to access the information. This may not be appropriate for students who have delays in auditory skill development or minimal auditory access as well as those who use ASL or other manual communication systems. Measuring these skills equitably may (again) require alternate presentation methods such as the use of Visual Phonics. For a student who uses ASL, Gallaudet University has developed ASL Assessment Toolkits that measure ASL phonological awareness and receptive skills (insert link here).

Are Standardized Test Scores Enough as a Measure of Achievement?

No, high-stakes test results are an insufficient measure of achievement. Without additional data, standardized testing results have limited meaning, and provide little insight for planning instruction. When preparing for end of the year meetings with other teachers, parents, and professionals, it is essential to use data from additional sources as well as the data retrieved from high-stakes testing. IDEA mandates that other sources as well as high-stakes testing be considered when evaluating yearly student progress.

What Additional Data Should be Gathered?

• Progress data on standards-based goals and objectives (criterion)
• Progress data on curriculum-based measures (CBM) that have been administered equitably
• Comparison to age-anchored hierarchies of skill development (i.e., listening skill development, self-advocacy, independence with hearing aids, etc.)
• Observation data – this can be qualitative as well as quantitative.
• Teacher reports that include present levels of functional, behavioral, developmental, and academic performance.
• Parent information (i.e., Parent language survey)
• Language samples – spoken and/or signed, and written communication. This can be done with a voice recorder, video, and by collecting samples of written language throughout the year.
• Student interviews (when appropriate) – how does the student feel about his/her educational experience?
• Student-completed checklists (i.e., LIFE-R and After LIFE, CHILD)
• Social-emotional measures
• Daily records of hearing technology use.

With the amount of collaboration necessary among a child’s educational team, collecting data on students who are DHH is no small task. Teachers who provide services via the itinerant model and classroom teachers of the deaf and hard of hearing rarely have the time in their schedules required to do all that is needed to support good student outcomes (e.g., teach to the unique needs of students, consult enough with the school staff to accommodate or modify to meet student needs, and gather relevant and valid progress monitoring data). Therefore, relationships with school staff are a critical component of this data gathering process. It is often the responsibility of the teacher of the deaf/hard of hearing to establish relationships with campus administrators, general education teachers, and other service providers to effectively collaboration in data gathering.

The challenges presented touch only the surface of the issues with high-stakes testing and continuous monitoring of our students who are DHH. As long as high-stakes test results continue to be used as a primary gauge of adequate yearly progress, educators must be cognizant of the demands it places on students with hearing loss. It is critical to ensure that the progress monitoring tools being used are the most valid (appropriately matched) and accurate measure of student skill.

References

Steps to Equitably Include Deaf Students in Assessments (2013). Retrieved from http://resources.pepnet.org/files/356_2010_2_1_16_35_PM.pdf.; Cawton, S., & Leppo, R. (2013). Assessment accommodations on tests of academic achievement for students who are deaf or hard of hearing: A qualitative meta-analysis of the research literature. American Annals of the Deaf, 158(3), 363-376.

U.S. Department of Education. Adequate Yearly Progress. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/standardsassessment/guidance_pg5.html

Retrieved from http://www.wrightslaw.com/law/osep/faqs.idea.assessment.htm

Anderson, K.  (2018). Is the inclusion model good for students with hearing loss. Retrieved from http://successforkidswithhearingloss.com/2017/10/01/is-the-inclusion-model-good-for-students-with-hearing-loss/. Antia, S.D., Jones, P.B., Reed, S., & Kreimeyer, K.H.. (2009). Academic status and progress of deaf and hard of hearing students in general education classrooms. Journal of Deaf Education and Deaf Studies 14(3), pp. 311. Doi 10.1093/deafed/enp 009

PePNet Test Equity Summit Highlights. (2008).

PePNet Test Equity Summit Highlights. (2008).

Center on Multi-Tiered System of Supports. Retrieved from https://mtss4success.org/essential-components

About the Author: Brenda Wellen has been a teacher of the deaf/hard of hearing in center-based and itinerant settings for 28 years. She recently completed a graduate degree in Deaf Education and Reading Specialist certification.

Download this Article

The post Determining Annual Yearly Progress first appeared on Supporting Success For Children With Hearing Loss.

We need to not only strive to close language and learning gaps, we need to simultaneously support our students in keeping up with the day-to-day learning in the classroom. We MUST monitor progress to know if full access is truly occurring and to ensure that our students are keeping pace with classroom expectations. Without appropriate support, the trajectory of educational performance shown above is all too likely. Students who are deaf or hard of hearing with no other learning issues – with full access to school communication – CAN progress at the expected rate IF they are receiving the appropriate intensity of focused support.

Monitor and Compare – Progress from Year-to-Year

Review your student files semi-annually for young children and annually for school-age students. Specifically, look at norm-referenced test results, like the high-stakes tests or language evaluations. Have the student’s percentile scores stayed constant? With your focused intervention and appropriate supports, has the student’s percentile scores improved? Or, like the figure above depicts, has the student experienced inappropriate access issues and insufficient supports causing a decrease in performance over time.

For example, consider a student who scored in overall reading in grade 2 at the 48^th percentile, at the 38th percentile in grade 3, and at the 30^th percentile in grade 5. The student still continues to fall within 1 standard deviation from the mean, or within the ‘average’ range. However, a drop of 18 percentile points over 3 years certainly raises the question about adequate yearly progress and if the access accommodations and services have truly ‘leveled the playing field’ for the student with hearing loss. The school team may not be concerned because the student still scores ‘average’ but to a professional with a background in the impact of hearing loss on learning, this trend should demand that more focused and appropriate supports/access accommodations be provided.

Infants and Toddlers

An integral part of early intervention services includes monitoring the growth in skill development for young children with hearing loss. If a child was identified at birth and received amplification/intervention within a couple of months, then the goal is one month of development per one month of age. If the hearing loss was identified and amplification/intervention not provided until 3 months or later, then the goal is more than one month of growth per one month of age. If a child with a delay only gains 6 months of development in a 6-month period then he or she will never catch up to age peers by school entry.

The following are resources that can be used by interventionists/parents to track skill growth over time.

• Communication Development Monitoring – checklists for parents of children ages 8-36 months to complete every 6 months to track expressive vocabulary growth as compared to typically developing peers. Checklists can hang on refrigerator as a reminder to families about words appropriate for them to include in daily conversations. It will also be handy to mark when a word has been learned. Graphs for boys and girls show growth via percentile ranks. Scoring examples are also posted to assist in identifying the growth in months for every 6-month period.

Auditory Skills Checklist 1   Auditory Skills Checklist 2– Approximately 85% of children with hearing loss have hearing loss of 70 dB or better. Of the approximately 15% who have 71-110+ dB hearing loss, about half receive cochlear implants. Finally, based on one state’s 2013 data (NC), of the families who chose a communication option, 92% chose spoken language for their children. Only 2% chose ASL and 6% chose simultaneous communication. Fewer than 1% chose Cued Speech. Based on this, it is clear that for the vast majority of children, growth in auditory skill development is very, very important to their future success and should be diligently tracked from infancy.

• ASL Development for those families and children who use sign language, skill development should also be monitored. Information on this webpage includes an extensive developmental checklist for ASL skills. Once a child is in kindergarten the ASL Content Standards below should be used as a guide to development.

• Pragmatics Checklist – as children transition from early intervention it is critical to determine language performance in all areas. Pragmatics is often overlooked. Pragmatics, or social communication, will not develop at a typical rate, or in the same way for children with hearing loss unless addressed. It is typical for a 7-year-old with hearing loss to have the pragmatics skills of a 3-year-old!

• Hearing aid use and independence is a concern, even for our youngest children with hearing loss. Families need to develop confidence in monitoring hearing devices and supporting full time use. Strategies for Keeping Hearing Aids On and Achieving Effective Hearing Aid Use in Early Childhood are resources to assist in these goals.

School Age

NEW!  ASL Content Standards – K – 12. Developed by Gallaudet, these comprehensive standards are truly impressive! They were developed to ensure that deaf and hard of hearing children acquire and learn ASL in much the same way that hearing children in the US acquire and learn English.  Whichever communication modality is used by a student, he or she must have the prerequisite skills to adequately communicate both receptively and expressively.  Most families at this point prefer that their child learn to listen and speak. This preference does not always result in a child who has school entry skills. Whether the family has chosen to use sign from birth, or it is the modality deemed to be most effective for learning by a school team due to child’s lack of progress learning to listen and speak – a student must progress through learning ASL in a developmental sequence to prepare them to make academic gains at least at the rate of their class peers. The ASL Content Standards for K-12 grade students is a huge step forward in determining instruction needed and progress monitoring of ASL knowledge and use.

CURRICULUM BASED MEASURES: There is a need for functional assessments to monitor students’ academic performance. Curriculum based measures provide a specific approach to measuring student learning that includes repeated measurement (weekly, monthly) across extended periods of time using general outcome indicators that are sensitive in the rate of change demonstrated in the performance of a task of the same difficulty. While curriculum-based measures (CBM) have been commonly used in public education, it is appropriate to consider CBM use for students who are deaf/hard of hearing specifically. Developed as part of a grant from the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs, the University of Minnesota has developed extensive progress CBM materials designed specifically for teachers of the deaf/hard of hearing to monitor students who have hearing loss and/or language differences.

Go to the Education Resources for Teachers of Deaf/Hard of Hearing Students resource page for extensive training resources for teachers and specific means to monitor student progress. This truly is an amazing resource and would be great for professional learning collaboratives or self-study. The measures take only a few minutes each week!

MAZE ASSESSMENT: Monitoring performance via the MAZE assessment is a common form of curriculum-based measurement. Maze presents sentences or short stories with every 7th word missing. The student must select which of 3 words best fits the missing word in the sentence. Clearly, as can be seen in the bar graph, even our students with hearing loss who do not have IEP services and supports are not performing like their age peers. Learn more about creating MAZE reading passages here.

Monitoring Progress of Expanded Core Skills

Expanded core curriculum refers to those skills that students with hearing loss need to learn to be able to access the general education curriculum and fully participate. Even if a student is provided access to effective communication as required by Title II of the ADA, he or she still needs to learn the skills to independently, and confidently, navigate as a person with hearing loss in a mainstream setting. These areas will not be taught specifically and yet they must be learned if full participation in the classroom is expected.

Per the Iowa Expanded Core Curriculum guidance, hearing loss adds a dimension to learning that requires explicit teaching, such as information gained through incidental learning. It has been estimated that for persons without hearing loss, 80% of information learned is acquired incidentally. No effort is required. Any type of hearing loss interrupts this automatic path to gain information. This incidental information must be delivered directly to students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Most teachers without specialized training related to hearing loss do not have the expertise to address the unique needs of students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Therefore, IFSP & IEP team collaboration with educational audiologists and teachers of students who are deaf or hard of hearing is necessary in addressing academic and social instruction and the assessment of these areas. In order to close this information gap, the Expanded Core Curriculum for Students who are Deaf or Hard of Hearing (ECC-DHH) was developed. Texas has developed a Livebinder with extensive information about ECC and resources to support implementation.

Download This Article

The post Progress Monitoring – Gains Equal to Peers? first appeared on Supporting Success For Children With Hearing Loss.

IDEA §300.304 Evaluation procedures

(b) Conduct of evaluation. In conducting the evaluation, the public agency must—

(1) Use a variety of assessment tools and strategies to gather relevant functional, developmental, and academic information about the child, including information provided by the parent, that may assist in determining—

(i) Whether the child is a child with a disability under §300.8; and

(ii) The content of the child’s IEP, including information related to enabling the child to be involved in and progress in the general education curriculum (or for a preschool child, to participate in appropriate activities);

(2) Not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for determining whether a child is a child with a disability and for determining an appropriate educational program for the child; and

(3) Use technically sound instruments that may assess the relative contribution of cognitive and behavioral factors, in addition to physical or developmental factors.

             (1) Assessments and other evaluation materials used to assess a child under this part—  (iv) Are administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel;

              (2) Assessments and other evaluation materials include those tailored to assess specific areas of educational need and not merely those that are designed to provide a single general intelligence quotient.

              (3) Assessments are selected and administered so as best to ensure that if an assessment is administered to a child with impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills, the assessment results accurately reflect the child’s aptitude or achievement level or whatever other factors the test purports to measure, rather than reflecting the child’s impaired sensory, manual, or speaking skills (unless those skills are the factors that the test purports to measure).

             (6) In evaluating each child with a disability under §§300.304 through 300.306, the evaluation is sufficiently comprehensive to identify all of the child’s special education and related services needs, whether or not commonly linked to the disability category in which the child has been classified.

             (7) Assessment tools and strategies that provide relevant information that directly assists persons in determining the educational needs of the child are provided.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1414(b)(1)-(3),1412(a)(6)(B))  

Gathering relevant functional and academic information – How are these defined?

Academic achievement. According to the US Department of Education:

“Academic achievement” generally refers to a child’s performance in academic areas (e.g., reading or language arts, math,  science, and history). We believe the definition could vary depending on a child’s circumstance or situation, and therefore, we do not believe a definition of “academic achievement” should be included in these regulations. (71 Fed. Reg. at 46662)

Functional performance. With respect to the meaning of “functional performance,” the Department of Education points to how the term is generally understood as referring to “skills or activities that are not considered academic or related to a child’s academic achievement.” This term “is often used in the context of routine activities of everyday living.”  The reason that examples of functional skills were not included in IDEA was because “the range of functional skills is as varied as the individual needs of children with disabilities” (71 Fed. Reg. at 46661). [T]he evaluation procedures used to measure a child’s functional skills must meet the same standards as all other evaluation procedures [described in IDEA at §300.304(c)(1)]. (71 Fed. Reg. at 46661).

The “present levels” statement is intended to comprehensively describe a child’s abilities, performance, strengths, and needs. It is based on, and arises out of, all the information and data previously collected and known about the child, most especially the full and individual evaluation of the child that must be conducted in accordance with IDEA’s evaluation/eligibility provisions of §§300.301 through 300.311. A well-written present level will describe:

• the child’s strengths and weaknesses,
• what helps the child learn,
• what limits or interferes with the child’s learning,
• objective data from current evaluations of the child, and
• how the child’s disability affects his or her ability to be involved and progress in the general curriculum.

A fully developed, well-written “present levels” is the foundation upon which the rest of the IEP can be developed to specify appropriate goals, services, supports, accommodations, and placement for the child. 

Source http://nichcy.org/schoolage/iep/iepcontents/present-levels

The post Evaluation Considerations first appeared on Supporting Success For Children With Hearing Loss.