Kay Alicyn Ferrell

Developmental growth curves of preschool children with vision impairments

In this study, we used growth curve analysis based on 566 assessments with the Battelle Developmental Inventory (BDI) to describe the development of 186 children (ages 12-73 months) with vision impairments. Developmental patterns varied markedly among the children, with part of that variability related to co-occurring disabilities and amount of functional vision. Children with co-occurring disabilities-in this case, mental retardation or developmental delay (MR/DD)- had lower developmental age scores overall and slower rates of growth. Visual function of 20/800 or worse was associated with significantly lower developmental ages across time on all domains measured by the BDI (personal -social, adaptive, motor, cognition, and communication) and with slower rates of growth in the personal-social and motor domains. Amount of functional vision and MR/DD did not interact, indicating that these 2 factors had additive, not multiplicative, effects on development during early childhood.

Perceived Needs of Students with Low-Incidence Disabilities in Rural Areas

We examined the current perspectives of service providers, administrators, and parents who are linked to the provision of special education and related services to learners with low-incidence disabilities in the United States. The purposes of the investigation were to gain information from the various respondents concerning the adequacy and availability of appropriate educational services for students with low-incidence disabilities and provide information regarding the need for additional services and supports. A detailed survey instrument that included a variety of open-ended response items was developed and mailed to the membership of two professional organizations with strong connections to rural special education. Responses indicated that the biggest areas of need were for highly qualified personnel with the necessary skills and knowledge to meet the needs of learners with low-incidence disabilities and for timely information that would support the education of these learners. Implications for how these concerns can be addressed are provided within the framework of four major functions including: information provision, teacher preparation, local school support, and research.

Evidence-Based Practices for Students with Visual Disabilities.

Forty years of peer-reviewed research in literacy and 50 years of research in mathematics were systematically analyzed to determine the evidence supporting instructional pedagogy for students with visual disabilities. Review teams identified 30 intervention studies that utilized an appropriate comparison group. Although some studies had large effect sizes, none of the qualifying studies had been replicated. The analysis failed to establish the highest standard of evidence recommended by the What Works Consortium, but does suggest several promising practices that should be subjected to further study.Forty years of peer-reviewed research in literacy and 50 years of research in mathematics were systematically analyzed to determine the evidence supporting instructional pedagogy for students with visual disabilities. Review teams identified 30 intervention studies that utilized an appropriate comparison group. Although some studies had large effect sizes, none of the qualifying studies had been replicated. The analysis failed to establish the highest standard of evidence recommended by the What Works Consortium, but does suggest several promising practices that should be subjected to further study.

Multiple Perspectives on Inclusive Education: Reflections of a University Faculty

Special and general education faculty at one university articulate issues and concerns regarding inclusive education within the fields of hearing loss, learning disabilities, emotional/behavioral disorders, severe disabilities, and visual impairments, followed by reflections from a general educator. For each area, outcomes for students with disabilities are discussed within the context of historical contemporary educational placement patterns, followed by discussions of inclusion issues specific to each disability area. For the general education area, selected patterns of pull-out are reviewed, followed by a discussion of inclusion issues specific to general education. The article concludes with a synthesis of common themes, including the need for adequate classroom supports, the need to increase collaboration in schools, the need for changes in teacher preparation practices at the preservice level, and the need for special educators to become more purposefully involved in general education reform.

A Summary of the Communication and Literacy Evidence-Based Practices for Students Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing, Visually Impaired, and Deafblind

The Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform (CEEDAR) Center at the University of Florida (http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/) is a national technical assistance center dedicated to supporting states in their efforts to develop teachers and leaders who can successfully prepare students with disabilities to achieve college and career-ready standards. One of the objectives of the project is to organize and synthesize the literature on evidence-based practices for students with disabilities. The purpose of this article is to share a summary of the evidence-based practices in the areas of communication and literacy for students who are deaf, hard of hearing, visually impaired, or deafblind, as well as recommendations for service providers and researchers.

Assessment of Students With Sensory Disabilities: Evidence-Based Practices:

This article presents an overview of recommended practices for assessing students who are deaf/hard of hearing, visually impaired, or deafblind. These recommendations were originally derived from a systematic review of research studies, policy documents, and professional literature on assessment (1990–2013) for the Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform (CEEDAR) Center. This review was then updated through 2016 on select topics identified in the original review with the addition of research on assessment accommodations, dynamic assessment, and curriculum-based assessment. The authors applied the CEEDAR Center rubric criteria for evaluating the strength of evidence for each identified practice. Across the disability groups, evidence was at the emerging to moderate levels, with the highest level of evidence for assessment accommodations specific to each disability.