Adaptive Behavior Assessment System, 2nd Edition (ABAS-II)
Authors: Harrison, P., and Oakland, T. 
Ages: Birth to eighteen years.
Published: 2003, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in clinical psychology and assessment.
Stated Purpose: An assessment of an individual’s responses to daily demands and capacity to live independently.  
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-2nd Edition (ABAS-II) is an assessment of an individual’s daily living skills, developed along the guidelines of the American Association of Mental Retardation.  The three major areas of functioning assessed include Conceptual Reasoning, Social Interactions, and Practical Functioning.   Specific aspects of functioning assessed include, communication, community use, functional activities, home living, health and safety, leisure, self-care, self-direction, social, work, and motor skills (for children).   An overall Adaptive Behavior Score is derived.  Information is gathered from parents, caregivers, teachers, and the individual assessed, assuming he/she is an adult.  Computer scoring is available.  
Normative Data: Norms are age-based, but one can also obtain a profile of strengths and weaknesses with the scoring software.  There is no specific mention of inclusion of those with visual impairment and multiple disabilities in the normative studies. It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The ABAS-3 does not require standardization in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities as it is a series of checklists completed by parents, teachers and/or caregivers.  
Adaptations: No adaptations have been made or are required, as it is a questionnaire completed by others either independent of or with the individual with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  


       Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale, 3rd Revision (Arizona-3)
Authors: Fudala, J. B. 
Ages: One to eighteen years.
Published: 2001, Western Psychological Services.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training as a speech-language pathologist.
Stated Purpose: A clinical measure of articulatory competence in children and adolescents.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale, Third Revision (Arizona-3), contains an updated set of picture stimuli that are utilized to assess single phoneme or consonant and vowel pronunciation.  Both Intelligibility Ratings and Severity Ratings, as well as standardized scores and percentile rankings can be calculated.  The examinee is asked to name pictures viewed or to read the names of the pictures from a single card, as adolescents frequently prefer.  In addition, on the back of most picture cards, a question about the card can be asked of the examinee to elicit information about vocabulary.  One major difficulty with the Arizona-3 is that the examiner must make accurate judgments concerning sound pronunciation by the student.  Thus the Arizona-3, according to the authors, must only be administered by professionally trained speech pathologists. The visual stimuli were not designed to assess students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Normative Data: New to this edition, norms are gender specific up to age six years, reflecting differences in language development between the sexes during these years.  The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The Arizona-3 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  In addition, the new optional assessment tasks have not been standardized for any population.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Assessment of Phonological Processes-Revised (APP-R)
Author: Hodson, B. W.
Ages: Three to twelve years.
Published: 1986, PRO-ED.
Qualifications to Administer: Speech-language pathologist or student with speech-language assessment training.
Stated Purpose: To identify and evaluate the severity of phonological disorders.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Assessment of Phonological Processes-Revised (APP-R) yields three scores: Total Score, Phonological Deviation Score, and Severity Interval Rating for Phonology.  The APP-R also elicits an interpretable Miscellaneous Error Patterns score.  There are two kinds of omission measures: Phonological Omissions (Syllabic Reduction, Consonant Sequence Reduction, and Consonant Singleton Omissions) and Class Deficiencies (Stridents, Velar, Obstruents, Liquid-l, Liquid-r, Nasals, and Glides).  The APP-R is described by many clinicians as complicated to use and score.  Visual stimuli may present significant difficulty for students with visual impairment.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Further, the normative data available is dated, and should be applied at this time with caution.
Standardization: The APP-R has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.

Battelle Developmental Inventory, 2nd Edition (BDI-2)
Authors: Newborg, J.
Ages: Birth to eight years.
Published: 2004, Riverside Publishing Company.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in early childhood testing, or special appraisal methods appropriate for an early development test.
Stated Purpose: To identify the developmental strengths and weaknesses of handicapped and nonhandicapped children in infant, preschool, and primary programs.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Battelle Development Inventory, 2nd Edition (BDI-2) assesses five domains: Personal-Social (Adult Interaction, Self-Concept and Social Growth, and Peer Interaction), Adaptive (Personal Responsibility, and Self-Care), Motor (Fine Motor, Perceptual Motor, and Gross Motor), Communication (Receptive and Expressive), and Cognitive (Perceptual Discrimination/Conceptual Development, Reasoning and Academic Skills, and Attention and Memory).  This revision of the original BDI seeks to provide information both for the assessment and classification of students and about students developmental progress with intervention in terms of meeting developmental milestones by evidencing critical skills or behaviors.  The BDI-2 can be administered in its standardized structured or observational formats which are largely a series of activities, but there is also a set of Interview items, which the examiner asks of parents and/or teachers.  
Normative Data: Normative data was collected based upon the 2000 census, and there are both computerized and hand scoring options available.  Though the publisher states that the BDI-2 was designed to assess those with visual, speech, hearing orthopedic emotional and/or other health impairments, there is no mention of their inclusion in the data set, nor of any specific data collected for application to students with visual impairment.  It is therefore unclear precisely how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment.  
Standardization: The BDI-2 has been standardized in terms of administration for those with visual impairment and multiple disabilities by eliminating items requiring vision.  Reliability studies have demonstrated both reliable and valid domain and total scores.
Adaptations: Given the availability of the interview format, reliable conclusions can be drawn about those with too little vision to complete the standard administration formats.    

Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, 3rd Edition 
(Bayley-III)
Author: Bayley, N.
Ages: Birth to four years.
Published: 2005, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess the current developmental functioning of infants and children.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bayley Scales of Infant Development, 3rd Edition (Bayley-III), is composed of five major developmental domains: Cognitive (assessing mental processing, planning, memory, sensorimotor, and concept formation), Language (assessing gestural vocabulary, morphology, social referencing, visual communication, and comprehension), Motor (assessing prehension, visual-motor, perceptual-motor integration, static positioning, dynamic movement, and balance) , Social-Emotional (assessing joint attention, affect, and social referencing), and Adaptive Behavior (assessing communication, self0care, and self-direction).  An optional Behavior Rating Scale can also be completed by the examiner.  There is also scoring software available for use with a PDA.  Parents and/or caregivers are now a larger part of the assessment for a more realistic perspective on a child’s abilities.
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Standardization: The Bayley-III was standardized on a large population of full-term infants and toddlers, children born prematurely, and those with medical conditions affecting normal cognitive development.  However, the author stipulates that the use of the Bayley-III with children with visual or auditory disabilities is problematic, since the three scale scores must be calculated without inclusion of items requiring response to visual stimulation.  
Adaptations: In the test manual, the author suggests some adaptations for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, but stipulates that there has been no standardization of these adapted items.  As such, comparison of performance on adapted items with performance on non-adapted items, as well as inclusion of adapted items with standard items for the calculation of scores on the three scales, may not be valid.

Bayley-III Screening Test
Author: Bayley, N.
Ages: Birth to four years.
Published: 2005, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To quickly screen the developmental functioning of infants and children for more comprehensive assessment.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bayley-III Screening Test is a shortened version of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-3rd Edition.  It is comprised of select items from three of the subtests: Cognitive, Language, and Motor.  It is estimated to take roughly 15-25 minutes to administer.  It will be published in the Fall of 2005.
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Standardization: The Bayley-III Screening Test was standardized on a large population of full-term infants and toddlers, children born prematurely, and those with medical conditions affecting normal cognitive development.  However, the author stipulates that the use of the Bayley-III Screening Test with children with visual or auditory disabilities is problematic, since the three scale scores must be calculated without inclusion of items requiring response to visual stimulation.  
Adaptations: In the test manual, the author suggests some adaptations for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, but stipulates that there has been no standardization of these adapted items.  As such, comparison of performance on adapted items with performance on non-adapted items, as well as inclusion of adapted items with standard items for the calculation of scores on the three scales, may not be valid.


Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener (BINS)
Author: Aylward, G.
Ages: Birth to two years.
Published: 1995, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree or equivalent training, with relevant clinical experience. 
Stated Purpose: To quickly screen for infants at risk for neurological impairment or developmental delay.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bayley Infant Neurodevelopmental Screener (BINS), is composed of eleven of the main items chosen from the Bayley Scales of Infant Development – Second Edition.  It assesses basic neurological function, auditory and visual receptive abilities, verbal and motor expressive abilities, and basic cognitive processes.  The BINS first discriminates a student into either clinical or nonclinical classifications.   Those falling into the clinical range are classified as being at low, moderate or high risk for impairment/delayed development.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Standardization: The BINS was standardized on a large population of full-term infants, children born prematurely, and those who returned for NICU follow-up care.  However, the author stipulates that the use of the BINS with children with visual or auditory disabilities is problematic, since the three scale scores must be calculated without inclusion of items requiring response to visual stimulation.  
Adaptations: In the test manual, the author suggests some adaptations for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, but stipulates that there has been no standardization of these adapted items.  As such, comparison of performance on adapted items with performance on non-adapted items, as well as inclusion of adapted items with standard items for the calculation of scores on the three scales, may not be valid.


Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF)
Author: Gioia, G.A., Isquith, P.K., Guy, S.C., and Kenworthy, L.
Ages: Five to eighteen years.
Published: 2003, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure impairment of executive function.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments:  The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) is a rating form completed by the parent and/or teacher.  It was designed to assess the executive functioning of individuals with development or acquired neurological conditions in the home and school setting.  There are 86 items organized according to scales: Behavior Regulation (Inhibit, Shift, Emotional Control), and Metacognition (Initiate, Working Memory, Plan/Organize, Organization of Materials, and Monitor).  
Normative Data: There is no mention of the inclusion of individual’s with visual impairment and multiple disabilities in the normative studies that were conducted.   It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: As the BRIEF is a questionnaire completed by the parent and /or teacher, standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate.  
Adaptations: As an interview-type instrument that may be given to a student’s parent(s) and/or teacher(s), there is no need to adapt the BRIEF.


Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Version (BRIEF-P)
Author: Gioia, G.A., Espy, K.A., and Isquith, P.K., 
Ages: Two to six years.
Published: 2003, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure impairment of executive function in preschool-age children.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments:  The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Preschool Version (BRIEF-P) is a rating form completed by the parent and/or teacher.  It was designed to assess the executive functioning of individuals with development or acquired neurological conditions in the home and school setting.  There are 63 items that assess a child’s Inhibition, Shifting of Attention, Emotional Control, Working Memory, Planning/Organizing, Organization of Materials, and Monitoring.  A Global Executive Composite score is obtained.  
Normative Data: There is no mention of the inclusion of individual’s with visual impairment and multiple disabilities in the normative studies that were conducted.   It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: As the BRIEF-P is a questionnaire completed by the parent and /or teacher, standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate.  
Adaptations: As an interview-type instrument that may be given to a student’s parent(s) and/or teacher(s), there is no need to adapt the BRIEF-P.


Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Self-Report Version (BRIEF-SR)
Author: Guy, S.C., Isquith, P.K., and Gioia, G.A.
Ages: Eleven to eighteen years.
Published: 2005, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure an adolescent’s view of his/her ability to guide, direct, and manage cognitive, emotional and behavioral functions.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments:  The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Self-Report Version (BRIEF-SR) is a rating form completed by the individual who is the subject of the assessment.  It was designed to assess the executive functioning of adolescents with development or acquired neurological conditions.  It was designed to complement the information obtained from the standard forms of the BRIEF completed by a parent or teacher.  It provides a greater degree of information with respect to insight into the adolescents’ difficulties/limitations.  There are 80 items that assess ones ability to Inhibit Attention, Shift Attention, Emotional Control, Working Memory, Plan/Organize, Organization of Materials, Monitor, and Task Completion.  
Normative Data: There is no mention of the inclusion of individual’s with visual impairment and multiple disabilities in the normative studies that were conducted.   It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: As the BRIEF-SR is a questionnaire completed by the adolescent, it must be administered either as a structured interview or after ascertaining that there are no reading difficulties.     
Adaptations: There are no adaptations specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items may require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale, 2nd Edition (BERS-2)
Author: Epstein, M.H.
Ages: Five to nineteen years.
Published: 2005, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure a child’s strengths and competencies.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments:  The Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale, 2nd Edition (BERS-2) is a rating of an individual’s behavioral and emotional strengths and weaknesses.  There are three forms completed, one by the subject of assessment (Youth Rating Form), a parent’s observational report (Parent Rating Scale), and the observations of another professional, such as a caregiver/teacher (Teacher Rating Scale).  It was designed to assess interpersonal functioning, in/at school and home, affective strength, intrapersonal strength, family involvement, and career strength 
Normative Data: For each of the forms, there are two sets of normative data, one for those identified with behavioral and/or emotional disorders, and those not identified as such.  There is no mention of the inclusion of individual’s with visual impairment and multiple disabilities in the normative studies that were conducted.   It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The form completed by the subject of assessment may require a non-standard administration, such as a structured interview format.  However, for the other tow forms, as they are questionnaires completed by the parent and /or teacher, standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate.  
Adaptations: There are no adaptations available for those with vision impairment and multiple disabilities.  Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.  


Bender Visual-Motor Gestalt Test, 2nd Edition (BVMGT-II)
Author: Bender, L.
Ages: Four to 85 years.
Published: 2003, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure perceptual-motor abilities.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments:  The Bender Visual Motor Gestalt Test, Second Edition (BVMGT-II) is the first significant overhaul of the original BVGMT from 1963.  It was designed to assess an individual’s ability to organize visual stimuli into configural wholes.  The person is asked to reproduce a figure that is viewed in an untimed format.  By virtue of its quick administration and interpretation, the BVMGT-II is likely to be used as part of a battery of instruments.  The visually demanding nature of this test is not well suited to those with visual impairment.  It is difficult to assess how well an individual visualizes the stimuli and, consequently, how well the task can be completed.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The BVMGT-II has not been standardized in terms of administration procedures and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Beyond Arms Reach: Enhancing Distance Vision
Authors: Smith, A., and O’Donnell, L. M.
Ages: Four years to adult.
Published: 1992, Pennsylvania College of Optometry Press.
Qualifications to Administer: Training as an orientation and mobility specialist or a teacher of the visually impaired. 
Stated Purpose: To assist a child in becoming more proficient in identifying and using visual cues.
Type of Instrument: Non-assessment focused teaching curriculum. 
Comments: The Beyond Arms Reach: Enhancing Distance Vision program is a series of sequential lessons from which a child can build a visual foundation and develop skills.  The child learns to identify cues, such as simple form discrimination, and develop more complex visual skills, such as distance and depth cues.  The program covers basic visual-motor skills; feature, shape, and object formation; moving through the environment (position, distance, and depth cues); and increasing experiential knowledge through visual exploration.
Normative Data: The Beyond Arms Reach: Enhancing Distance Vision program is not an assessment tool, but rather a teaching curriculum.  As such, normative data is not provided for determination of age appropriateness of skills level development.
Standardization:  This program was designed specifically for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: As Beyond Arms Reach: Enhancing Distance Vision is designed specifically for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, adaptations are not necessary.


Bielefeld Developmental Test for Blind Infants and Preschoolers
Authors: Brambring, M., Dobslaw, G., Hauptmeier, M., Hecker, W., Latta-Webster, E., and Troester, H.
Ages: Nine months to four years.
Published: Not yet available commercially.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To evaluate crawling, walking, and advanced locomotive behavior.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bielefeld Developmental Test for Blind Infants and Preschoolers was designed as a locomotive, orientation and mobility assessment for infants and preschool- age children.  The test is a series of 183 tasks, for which the evaluator is to assign up to 340 points.  The test manual states that the test was designed to be administered in the child’s house.  The Bielefield Developmental Test for Blind Infants and Preschoolers takes up to three hours to administer, including breaks.  A structured interview of the child’s parents is also conducted.  
Normative Data: The Bielefeld Developmental Test for Blind Infants and Preschoolers is currently being normed on a larger representative sample of students with visual impairment than the samples used in determining norms for the experimental form currently used for research purposes only. 
Standardization:  This program was designed specifically for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: Not necessary for visual impairment, although there is no mention regarding adaptation for those with multiple disabilities.   


Blind Learning Aptitude Test (BLAT)
Author: Newland, T. E.
Ages: Six to sixteen years.
Published: 1971, University of Illinois Press (Out of print).
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To obtain a picture of the learning potential of young blind children.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: To reduce the use of cultural learning, the Blind Learning Aptitude Test                (BLAT) uses six types of nonverbal items, such as geometric shapes, and assesses intelligence through the subjects’ ability to discern their interrelationships.  Although the stimuli are raised dots on cards, the ability to read Braille is not a requirement of the BLAT, since the stimuli can be perceived simply as patterns of dots.  A raw score is obtained based on the number of correct responses, which is transformed into a “Learning Aptitude Age Equivalent.”  This age equivalent is similar to the mental age of other intelligence quotient tests.  
Normative Data: The normative sample for the BLAT was large and representative of the blind population as a whole.  However, normative data has not be made available since it’s original release, and the numbers must be currently applied with great caution.  As such, the BLAT may presently be more useful as a criterion measure, a guide for determining the student’s functional level, rather than as an instrument providing standardized scores per se.  It is not clear if the BLAT assesses aptitude equivalently in those with low vision, as compared with those who are blind.  Reliability and validity data for the BLAT, however, are poor and incomplete.
Standardization: The BLAT was designed for those without vision. The manual states that aptitude is reliably discerned only up to twelve years of age.  
Adaptation: As an instrument designed for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, the BLAT does not require adaptation.


Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children
Author: Cratty, B.
Ages: Five years to adult.
Published: 1968, American Foundation for the Blind (Out of Print).
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To assess orientation and mobility and perceptual motor skills of blind children. 
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children was designed to provide information about movement, spatial awareness, and body-image concepts, which are essential to the development of effective travel skills in children who are blind.  
Normative Data: As a criterion-referenced assessment tool, the Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children is only designed to provide a general picture of orientation and mobility skills, rather than determination of age appropriateness of skills level development.  A “Developmental Stage” can be determined.  Given that the Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children is criterion-based, the fact that it is dated does not necessarily lead to doubts as to its current validity as an orientation and mobility assessment instrument. 
Standardization: The Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children was designed for those without vision. It is not clear if the Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children assesses orientation, movement and perceptual awareness skills equivalently in those with low vision, as compared with those who are blind.
Adaptation: As an instrument designed for those who are blind, the Body Image Screening Test for Blind Children does not require adaptation.  


Boehm Test of Basic Concepts – 3 Preschool (Boehm – 3 Preschool)
Author: Boehm, A.
Ages: Three to five years.
Published: 2001, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree in psychology, with courses and relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure understanding of basic concepts to pinpoint specific areas of reduction.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Boehm Test of Basic Concepts-Preschool Version (Boehm – 3 Preschool) is a downward extension of the Boehm Test of Basic Concepts – Third Edition.  The Boehm – 3 Preschool was designed as a screening instrument for the identification of cognitive and language concepts in preschool children, such as size, direction, position in space, quantity, and time.  It purports to measure concepts relevant to early childhood curricula efficiently.   
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to young children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The Boehm – 3 Preschool has not been standardized in terms of administration procedures and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Parents are also asked for information, which does help make this test more appropriate for use with students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  A Spanish-Language version of the test has been released for those who are primarily Spanish speakers.
Adaptations: The publisher states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  An adapted form of the Boehm – 3 Preschool is currently being standardized and normed.  Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Boehm Test of Basic Concepts – 3rd Edition (Boehm – 3)
Author: Boehm, A.
Ages: Five to nine years.
Published: 2000, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree in Psychology, with courses and relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure understanding of basic concepts to pinpoint specific areas of reduction.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Boehm Test of Basic Concepts – Third Edition (Boehm - 3) was designed as a screening instrument for the identification of relational concepts of space, quantity, and time in terms of persons, objects, and situations.  It was intended to be part of a battery of tests for assessing readiness or identify those who may be at risk for learning difficulty and who may need referral for additional testing. 
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The Boehm – 3 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedures and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Parents are also asked for information, which does help make this test more appropriate for use with students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  A Spanish-Language version of the test has been released for those who are primarily Spanish speakers.
Adaptations: The publisher states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  An adapted form of the Boehm – 3 is currently being standardized and normed.  Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R)
Author: Bracken, B. A.
Ages: Two to eight years.
Published: 1998, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree in psychology or education, with relevant courses and clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure a subset of children’s receptive vocabulary-basic concepts.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised (BBCS-R) was designed to measure basic concepts, which the author defines as word labels for colors, letters, numbers/counting, sizes, comparisons, shapes, direction/position, self-awareness, social awareness, texture/materials, quantity, and time/sequence.  The examiner names the concept displayed, and the student must identify the appropriate picture verbally or by pointing.  While the new items are presented in color, stimuli may be difficult for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities to discern because they may lack the fine visual acuity necessary for distinguishing elements of a picture.  The publisher states that children with limited vision are at a disadvantage because the stimuli are presented visually.  Spanish-Language components have been recently added to asses those individuals presenting with Spanish as their primary language.
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The BBCS-R has not been standardized in terms of administration procedures and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. The author has created a standardized system for evaluating students with color blindness, which is discussed in the test manual.
Adaptations: The publisher states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The author has suggested prorating scores for students with visual impairment, but even this non-standard administration may not appropriately assess students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  

  Bracken School Readiness Assessment (BSRA)
Author: Bracken, B. A.
Ages: Two to eight years.
Published: 2002, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree in psychology or education, with relevant courses and clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure a child’s knowledge and mastery of school “readiness” traditionally mastered in preschool and kindergarten.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bracken School Readiness Assessment (BSRA) was designed to measure a child’s knowledge of and facility with concepts upon entry to formal; primary education.  Concepts assessed include colors, letters, numbers/counting, sizes, comparisons, and shapes.  Essentially a screening test, these represent the first six tasks of the Bracken Basic Concept Scale-Revised.  The examiner names the concept displayed, and the student must identify the appropriate picture verbally or by pointing.  While the new items are presented in color, stimuli may be difficult for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities to discern because they may lack the fine visual acuity necessary for distinguishing elements of a picture.  The publisher states that children with limited vision are at a disadvantage because the stimuli are presented visually.  Spanish-Language components have been recently added to asses those individuals presenting with Spanish as their primary language.
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The BSRA has not been standardized in terms of administration procedures and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. The author has created a standardized system for evaluating students with color blindness, which is discussed in the test manual.
Adaptations: The publisher states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The author has suggested prorating scores for students with visual impairment, but even this non-standard administration may not appropriately assess students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
       

Brief Infant-Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (BITSEA)
Authors: Carter, A. and Briggs-Gowan, M..
Ages: One to three years.
Published: 2005, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in psychology with coursework in development and assessment.
Stated Purpose: To provide a brief screen of social-emotional development.  
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There Brief Infant-Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (BITSEA) is a short (42-item) screen of social-emotional development in young children.  It is based on the more comprehensive Infant-Toddler Social Emotional Assessment (ITSEA) discussed later.  As with the ITSEA, there are both a Parent Form and a Care Provider Form, which may also be administered as a structured interview.  Spanish-Language forms are also being made available when the instrument is released in the Fall of 2005.  
Normative Data: The normative studies were large and representative.  The publisher states that children with language delays, premature birth, and other “diagnosed disorders” were included, yet there is no mention of inclusion of children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, it is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for these individuals.  
Standardization: As a parent or caregiver completed questionnaire, or a structure interview administered to these individuals, standard procedures are appropriate.  Adaptations: No adaptations are necessary, as the BITSEA is a questionnaire completed by the parent and caregiver about a child’s abilities.

Brigance Comprehensive Inventory of Basic Skills, Revised Braille Edition (CIBS-R)
Author: Brigance, A. H.
Ages: Five to thirteen years.
Published: 2004, American Printing House for the Blind.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant supervised clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess basic skills in the areas of readiness, reading, listening, research and study skills, spelling, language, and mathematics.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument. 
Comments: There are 198 test items in the Brigance Diagnostic Comprehensive Inventory of Basic Skills (CIBS).  They are organized into seven categories: Readiness, Reading, Listening, Research and Study Skills, Spelling, Language, and Mathematics.  Some of the tasks are too broadly designed for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  This is a Braille format version of the standard instrument of achievement published by Curriculum Associates.
Normative Data: There are separate normative data for the ITBS-Braille Edition, based on how sighted students performed on the items selected from the standard form of the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, Forms K, L, and M.
Standardization: This form of the ITBS was designed specifically for use with students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The student must demonstrate proficiency in Braille to use this format of the ITBS.  Administration of the Braille adaptation is considered nonstandard, and time limits may be exceeded.  
Adaptations: Braille adaptations are not available for each test level, and the publisher should be contacted regarding availability.  Items that could not be adapted were eliminated from the Braille Edition. 


Brigance Diagnostic Inventory of Early Development-II (IED-II)
Author: Brigance, A. H.
Ages: Birth to seven years.
Published: 2004, Curriculum Associates.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant supervised clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To determine the developmental or performance level of the infant or child.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.  There is also a criterion-referenced tactile supplement.
Comments: The Brigance Diagnostic Inventory of Early Development-II (IED-II) measures five aspects of development: Pre-Ambulatory Motor Skills and Behaviors (Supine Position, Prone Position, Sitting Position, and Standing Position), Gross Motor Skills and Behaviors (Standing, Walking, Stairs and Climbing, Running, Hopping, Kicking, Balance Beam, Catching, and Rolling, Throwing), Fine Motor Skills and Behaviors (Eye/Finger Manipulation, Tower Building, Pre-Handwriting and Cutting), Self-Help Skills (Feeding/eating, Dressing, Undressing, Toileting, Grooming, and Bathing), Speech and Language Skills (Prespeech Gesturing/Vocalization, Receptive Language, Sentence Length, Verbal Directions, Picture Vocabulary, Sentence Memory, Social Speech, and Singing) and Social-Emotional Development (Play Skills and Behavior, and Initiative/Engagement.  General knowledge is assessed, asking about body parts, colors, shapes, and other classification categories, as well as knowledge of how to deal with particular social situations.  Early academic performance is assessed in terms of basic reading skills, manuscript writing and basics of mathematics.  The IED-II was designed as a form of the Brigance Comprehensive Inventory of Basic Skills for preschool-age and younger school-age children. 
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The tactile supplement provides no normative information, rather an overview of a student’s abilities on those items.  
Standardization: The IED-II has not been standardized in terms of administration procedures and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The American Printing House for the Blind has produced a tactile supplement for the original IED.  This is not available yet for the newly-released IED-II.


Brigance Employability Skills Inventory (ESI)
Author: Brigance, A. H.
Ages: Thirteen years and older.
Published: 1995, Curriculum Associates.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant supervised clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess an individual’s potential for employment.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument. 
Comments: The Brigance Employability Skills Inventory (ESI) was designed to assess the individual’s readiness for employment, and to help the individual select a type of employment.  In all, 124 skills are assessed including speaking and listening, reading level, pre-employment writing skills, mathematics skills and concepts, career awareness and self understanding, and job seeking abilities.
Normative Data: As a criterion-referenced assessment tool, the EI is only designed to provide a general picture of employment potential, rather than determination of age appropriateness of the individual’s employment potential.
Standardization: As the EI is primarily a series of questions to be responded to by an observer, standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate for evaluating individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: As the EI is completed by an observer based upon the responses of the individual being evaluated, no adaptations are necessary.  Items not completed by students are eliminated.


Brigance Life Skills Inventory (LSI)
Author: Brigance, A. H.
Ages: Thirteen years and older.
Published: 1994, Curriculum Associates.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant supervised clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess an individual’s functioning within daily life situations.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument. 
Comments: The Brigance Life Skills Inventory (LSI) was designed to assess the individual’s ability to conduct daily life activities.  A series of questions are answered by the assessor, based upon observations of the individual.  The student also directly responds to some items.  Areas of assessment include speaking and listening skills, functional writing skills, knowledge of words on common signs and warning labels, telephone skills, money and finance, knowledge of food vocabulary and labels, knowledge of acquiring and selection of clothing, knowledge of basic health matters, and knowledge of travel and transportation,  
Normative Data: As a criterion-referenced assessment tool, the LSI is only designed to provide a general picture of daily living skills, rather than determination of age appropriateness of daily living skills development.
Standardization: As the LSI is primarily a series of questions to be responded to by an observer, standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate for evaluating individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: As the LSI is completed by an observer based upon the responses of the individual being evaluated, no adaptations are necessary.  Items not completed by students are eliminated.


Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency
Author: Bruininks, R. H.
Ages: Four to fifteen years.
Published: 1978, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests, measurement, guidance, or psychological assessment.
Stated Purpose: To assess the motor functioning of children.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency contains eight subtests that are grouped according to two categories: Gross Motor Development (Running Speed and Agility, Balance, Bilateral Coordination, and Strength) and Fine Motor Development (Response Speed, Visual-Motor Control, Upper Limb Speed, and Dexterity).  In addition, Gross Motor and Fine Motor Composite scores can be computed.  This instrument was meant to assess proficiency, particularly of those with physical impairment. 
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The normative data is likewise old, and must be used cautiously for interpretation of age-appropriate development of skills.
Standardization: The Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The publisher states that the Bruininks-Oseretsky Test of Motor Proficiency is poorly suited to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities since a significant number of items require the integration of visual and motor skills.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.
 

California Verbal Learning Test, 2nd Edition (CVLT-II)
Author: Delis, D.C., Kramer, J.H., Kaplan, E., and Ober, B.A.
Ages: Sixteen to 89 years.
Published: 2000, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests, measurement, guidance, or psychological assessment.
Stated Purpose: To assess the verbal memory abilities of students and adults.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The California Verbal learning Test-2nd Edition (CVLT-II) is a list learning task with repetition.  A series of 16 words categorized according to vegetable, furniture, means of transportation, and animal are presented five times during the learning phase.  After a second distraction list, the free and cued recall trials are administered.  This verbal memory tasks with repetition, but no context, is well suited for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  However, as it is entirely verbal, there is no reason the normative data should not be suitable.  
Standardization: The CVLT-II has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, but standard procedures are appropriate.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, but none are needed.


Callier-Azusa Scale: G Edition
Author: Stillman, R.
Ages: Birth to twelve years.
Published: 1978, Callier Center for Communication Disorders, University of Texas at Dallas.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience. 
Stated Purpose: To aid in the assessment of deaf-blind and severely/profoundly handicapped children so that developmentally appropriate activities can be provided.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Callier-Azusa Scale: G Edition has eighteen measures in six different areas: Motor Development (Postural Control, Locomotion, Fine Motor, and Visual Motor), Perceptual Development (Vision, Auditory, and Tactile), Daily Living Skills (Dressing, Personal Hygiene, Feeding, and Toileting), Cognition, Communication and Language (Receptive, Expressive, and Speech), and Social Development (Adults, Peers, and Environment).  
Normative Data: The normative sample is representative of the blind population as a whole. Obviously, all the normative data available are appropriate for students who are deaf-blind, but the utility for those who do use some vision, those with only visual impairment, or those with multiple impairments not including deafness, is unclear.
Standardization: The Callier-Azusa Scale: G Edition was designed for those without vision, and standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate.  It is completed by a trained assessor, based on observation.  The author stipulates that an examiner who is thoroughly familiar with the student must administer the Callier-Azusa Scale: G Edition, and that observation should last for at least two weeks, after which the scale is completed.
Adaptation: As an instrument designed for students who are blind or those that have multiple disabilities, the Callier-Azusa Scale: G Edition does not require adaptation.


Callier-Azusa Scale: H Edition
Author: Stillman, R., and Battle, C.
Ages: Two to seventeen years.
Published: 1985, Callier Center for Communication Disorders, University of Texas at Dallas.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience. 
Stated Purpose: To view the communicative abilities of deaf-blind and severely/profoundly handicapped persons.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Callier-Azusa Scale: H Edition has four measures: Representational and Symbolic Activities, Receptive Communication, Intentional Communication, and Reciprocity.  The Callier-Azusa Scale H Edition provides assessment information needed to plan individualized, communication-based interventions, and a means of documenting changes in communication development, and its cognitive and social processes. 
Normative Data: The normative sample is representative of the blind population as a whole. Obviously, all the normative data available are appropriate for students who are deaf-blind, but the utility for those who do use some vision, those with only visual impairment, or those with multiple impairments not including deafness, is unclear.
Standardization: The Callier-Azusa Scale: H Edition was designed for those without vision, and standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate.  It is completed by a trained assessor, based on observation.  The author stipulates that an examiner who is thoroughly familiar with the student must administer the Callier-Azusa Scale: H Edition, and that observation should last for at least two weeks, after which the scale is completed.
Adaptation: As an instrument designed for students who are blind or those that have multiple disabilities, the Callier-Azusa Scale: H Edition does not require adaptation.


Cardiff Acuity Test
Authors: Woodhouse,J.M.
Ages: One to three years.
Published: 1993, Keeler UK Ltd.
Qualifications to Administer: An individual who is suspected of having a visual impairment must have an acuity test administered and interpreted by a M.D. or O.D.
Stated Purpose: To measure distance acuity in children one to three years old.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Cardiff Acuity Test was designed for younger children for whom standard letter or number based acuity tests would not be appropriate.  It is a preferential looking task with vanishing optotypes.  Each stimulus card features a picture and a plain area.  The premise is that an infant or toddler will fixate on the visible object (a house, car, duck, etc.), rather then on the plain stimulus area of each card.  There are a total of eleven acuity levels for precise determination.  Eye movements are observed and recorded, based upon a viewing distance of either 50 centimeters or one meter.  
Normative Data: The Cardiff Acuity Test is a criterion-referenced assessment tool, designed to provide an accurate measure of distance acuity, rather than any normative information
Standardization:  The Cardiff Acuity Test was designed specifically for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: As the Cardiff Acuity Test is designed specifically for assessment of visual acuity, adaptations are not necessary.


Career Assessment Inventory, Revised Edition (CAI)
Author: Johansson, C. B.
Ages: Thirteen years to adult.
Published: 1982, NCS Professional Assessment Services.
Qualifications to Administer: School guidance counselors, psychologists, and other similarly trained individuals.
Stated Purpose: A vocational interest tool for individuals planning to enter occupations requiring up to two years of post-secondary training.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Career Assessment Inventory (CAI) is composed of six Basic Interests Scales (Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional), and scores for 111 Occupational and Nonoccupational Scales.  The CAI was developed for those who want to enter a career immediately after graduating from high school, or those interested in entering a technical or trade school.  It compares an individual’s interests with those of employed adults who have not attained a four-year college education.  The subject marks answers next to questions.  Items are divided into Activities, School Subjects, and Occupations.  The CAI has been found to be especially helpful for those with a moderate degree of ability.  It was worded according to a sixth-grade reading level.  Interpretation demands the skills of a trained expert in the areas of interpretation and integration of vocational interests.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Further, the instrument is somewhat dated, and may not reflect changes to respect to current vocational interests and opportunities. 
Standardization: The CAI has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. It must likewise be ascertained that the occupational options suggested can in actuality be performed by one with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.    
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Career Decision Making System-Revised (CDM)
Authors: Harrington, T. F., and O’Shea, A. J.
Ages: Eight years to adult.
Published: 2004, American Guidance Service.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To clarify interests, values, and abilities, allowing people to make successful career choices.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Career Decision Making System-Revised (CDM) is available for two levels: Middle School/Junior High School (Level One) and High School and Adults (Level Two).  The Level One version is written at a fourth-grade reading level, containing 96 gender-neutral items.  The Level Two version is written at a seventh-grade reading level, containing 120 gender-neutral items.  Potential college majors are also suggested by the Level Two version.  The CDM-Revised aims to match the students “abilities, interests and values” to the best career option, while contemplating from among 400 career options.  Specifics about education and training requirements are considered.   
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The CDM has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. It must likewise be ascertained that the occupational options suggested can in actuality be performed by one with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.    
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Career Occupation Preference System (Picture Inventory of Careers)
Author: Knapp-Lee, L.
Ages: Elementary school age to adult.
Published: 1993, EdITS/Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To measure career interest for persons with language difficulties.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There are fourteen scores to the Career Occupation Preference System: Science-Professional, Science-Skilled, Technical-Professional, Technical-Skilled, Consumer Economics, Outdoor, Business-Professional, Business-Skilled, Clerical, Communication, Arts-Professional, Arts-Skilled, Service-Professional, and Service-Skilled.  Although the picture items of this instrument may make it appropriate for use with individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, the clarity of test items must be determined at the outset.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: Career Finder Plus has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment and multiple disabilities.  It must likewise be ascertained that the occupational options suggested can in actuality be performed by one with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.    
Adaptations: The publisher also states that the Career Occupation Preference System has not been formally adapted for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Carolina Curriculum for Infants & Toddlers with Special Needs–2nd Ed.
Authors: Johnson-Martin, N., Jens, K. G., Attermeier, S. M., and Hacker, B. J.
Ages: Birth to two years.
Published: 1986, Paul H. Brookes Publishing Company.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To assess infants and toddlers with special needs. 
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment focused teaching curriculum. 
Comments: The Carolina Curriculum for Infants and Toddlers with Special Needs–2nd Edition was developed to assess infants and toddlers up to two years’ developmental age across a broad range of impairments.  Five domains are assessed: Cognition, Communication, Social Adaptation, Fine Motor Skills, and Gross Motor Skills.  The curriculum sequences twenty-four different content areas.  It also offers teaching suggestions and information about motor development.  
Normative Data: The Carolina Curriculum for Infants and Toddlers with Special Needs–2nd Edition curriculum is not a norm-referenced assessment tool, but rather a criterion-referenced one, which measures the ability to complete a task.  As such, normative data is not provided for determination of age appropriateness of skills level development, rather an overall view of a child’s abilities is determined.
Standardization: The Carolina Curriculum for Infants and Toddlers with Special Needs–2nd Edition curriculum is designed for students with visual impairments as well as other disabilities.
Adaptations: Specific adaptations to test items are provided for infants and toddlers with visual impairment.  As an instrument to be completed by a child’s caregiver, the Carolina Curriculum for Infants and Toddlers with Special Needs–2nd Edition is suited for use with children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.


Chicago Early Assessment and Remediation LaboratorY 
(Chicago EARLY)
Author: Board of Education of the City of Chicago.
Ages: Three to five years.
Published: 1988, Educational Teaching Aids.
Qualifications to Administer: Classroom or special education teacher.
Stated Purpose: To assess individual abilities and provide remedial instructional activities in weak areas of functioning.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment and instruction instrument.
Comments: The Chicago Early Assessment and Remediation LaboratorY (Chicago
EARLY) has five scores: Gross Motor, Fine Motor, Language, Visual Discrimination, and Memory.  The Chicago EARLY is described in material included with the test as a complete evaluation, whereas some of the supporting material refers to it as a screening test.  
Normative Data: The publisher does not specify whether the studies conducted to gather normative data assessed only those without visual impairment, or if those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities were included.  It is unclear how applicable the normative data provided are to draw conclusions about those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Further, the normative data is dated, and any functional determinations may not accurately reflect current normative functional levels.
Standardization: Chicago EARLY has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.      
Adaptations: The publisher also states that the Chicago EARLY has not been formally adapted for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Children’s Memory Scale (CMS)
Authors: Cohen, M.
Ages: Five to sixteen years.
Published: 1997, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To comprehensively compare memory and learning to ability, attention, achievement.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Children’s Memory Scale (CMS) has seven subtests grouped according to three domains assessed: Auditory Verbal (Stories I and II, and Word Lists I and II), Attention/Concentration (Numbers, Sequences, and Picture Locations), and Visual/Nonverbal (Dot Locations, Faces I and II, and Family Pictures).  This test measures both immediate and delayed recall of visual and verbal information.  Conceptually, this test is analogous to a downward extension of the Wechsler Memory Scale used for adults.  It has been linked to the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-IV in terms of validation/normative studies.  Visual stimuli are large, but the efficient attention to detail may render many of the nonverbal memory and the visual attention/concentration tasks of limited use for those with low vision. 
Normative Data: The normative sample was large and representative of most children, but the publisher states that the children included in the normative studies did not have any visual, physical, speech, language, learning, mental, or attention impairments or disorders.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The CMS has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals Preschool, 2nd Edition (CELF Preschool-2)
Authors: Wiig, E. H., Secord, W. A. and Semel, E.
Ages: Three to six years.
Published: 2004, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure a broad range of expressive and receptive language skills in preschool-age children.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Clinical Evaluation of Language Skills Preschool-2nd Edition (CELF Preschool-2) has nine scores grouped according to two broad categories: Receptive Language Total (Linguistic Concepts, Sentence Structure, and Basic Concepts), Expressive Language Total (Recalling Sentences in Context, Formulating Labels, and Word Structure), and an overall Total score.  The CELF Preschool-2 was designed to be a downward extension of the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-4th Edition, with some of the subtests being eliminated because they were not deemed appropriate for preschool age children.  It purports to measure language skills necessary for the classroom, pre-literacy, and phonological awareness.  It relies heavily on color pictures.
Normative Data: The normative sample was large and representative of most children, but the publisher states that the children included in the normative studies did not have any visual, physical, speech, language, learning, mental, or attention impairments or disorders.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The CELF Preschool-2 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, 4th Edition (CELF-4)
Authors: Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., and Secord, W. A.
Ages: Five to twenty-one years.
Published: 2003, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree in psychology, with relevant courses and clinical experience in tests and measurement.
Stated Purpose: To identify, diagnose, and do follow-up evaluation of language-skill deficits in school-age children.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-4th Edition (CELF-4) utilizes a fundamentally different approach from previous editions.  With this “Four-Level Process Model” approach, the first issue is whether a language disorder is present.  It determines if a student qualifies for services.  Second, Language skills are explored in terms of Receptive and Expressive abilities (see below), and a determination of strengths and weaknesses is made.  Language Content, Structure and Memory are also considered during this phase of assessment.  Third, the clinical skills or behaviors behind the language disorder are determined.  Finally, an evaluation of the impact of the language disorder on classroom is conducted.  Rating scales are used during this phase.  Subtests for language assessment include Expressive Vocabulary, Word Definitions, Number Repetition, Familiar Sequences, Phonological Awareness, and the Pragmatics Profile and Observational rating Scales.  The subtests generate Language Content, Language Memory, and Working Memory Index scores.  
Normative Data: The normative sample was large and representative of most people, but the publisher states that the individuals included in the normative studies did not have any visual, physical, speech, language, learning, mental, or attention impairments or disorders.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The CELF-4 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals, 4th Edition Screening Test (CELF-4 Screening Test)
Authors: Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., and Secord, W. A.
Ages: Five to twenty-one years.
Published: 2004, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Master’s degree in psychology, with relevant courses and clinical experience in tests and measurement.
Stated Purpose: To identify, school-age children at risk for a language disorder prior to formal in-depth testing.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-4th Edition Screening Test (CELF-4 Screening Test) is a brief measure of language development in school-age children.  It does not use the in-depth “Four-Level Process Model” approach of the CELF-4, rather it is a brief measure of Receptive Language, Expressive Language, Grammatical, and semantic language skills.  Items parallel those of the CELF-4, but are different.  
Normative Data: The normative sample was large and representative of most people, but the publisher states that the individuals included in the normative studies did not have any visual, physical, speech, language, learning, mental, or attention impairments or disorders.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The CELF-4 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data


Clinical Observations of Motor and Postural Skills, 2nd Edition (COMPS-2)
Authors: Wilson, B. N., Pollock, N., Kaplan, B. J., and Law, M.
Ages: Five to fifteen years.
Published: 2004, PRO-ED.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience. 
Stated Purpose: To assist occupational therapists in performing assessments of children with suspected developmental and coordination disorders.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Clinical Observations of Motor and Postural Skills-2nd Edition (COMPS-2) has six measures: Slow Movement, Finger-to-Nose Touching, Rapid Forearm Rotation, Prone Extension Posture, Asymmetrical Tonic Neck Reflex, and Supine Flexion Posture.  The COMPS-2 takes between fifteen and twenty minutes to administer and was intended to be used as a screening device.  Raters must be trained professionals with the ability to assess these skills, which places limits on who may administer this instrument.  
Normative Data: The publisher does not specify whether individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities were included in the normative studies conducted.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data from these studies may be for drawing conclusions about those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The COMPS-2 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment and multiple disabilities.  While the COMPS-2 poses tasks that are appropriate for students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities it must be standardized on a sample of such students.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for such individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Cognitive Test for the Blind and Visually Impaired (CTB)
Author: Dial, J. G. 
Ages: Thirteen years to adult.
Published: 1992, McCarron Dial Systems
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To measure cognitive, intellectual, and information processing skills. 
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Cognitive Test for the Blind and Visually Impaired (CTB) consists of a Verbal Scale and a non-visual Performance Scale, from which a Total score is derived.  There are six Verbal Subtests: Auditory Analysis and Sound Repetition, Immediate Digit Recall, Language Comprehension and Memory, Letter-Number Learning, Vocabulary, and Abstract Reasoning.  There are five non-visual Performance tests: Category Learning, Category Memory, Memory Recognition, Pattern Recall, and Spatial Analysis.  Six factors are derived from both the Verbal and Performance tasks: Conceptual, Learning, Verbal Memory, Non-Verbal Memory, Language, and Spatial.  The CTB differs from most measures of intelligence, claims its author, in that it focuses on active problem solving, learning, and memory.  
Normative Data: A separate set of normative data is available for those with visual impairment and those who are blind.  The publisher does not specify whether individuals with multiple disabilities were included in studies resulting in the available normative data.  
Standardization: The CTB is a central component of the Comprehensive Vocational Evaluation System, an assessment curriculum designed specifically for individuals who are blind or visually impaired.  Standardization procedures have been established separately for individuals with visual impairment, as well as those who are blind.
Adaptations: There is no need for any adaptation, as the CTB was designed for individuals with visual impairment.


Color Vision Testing Made Easy
Author: Waggoner, T.L.
Ages: Three to six years.
Published: 1999, Bernell Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Individuals suspected of having a visual impairment must have tests administered and interpreted by a M.D. or O.D.
Stated Purpose: To test for inherited and acquired defects in color vision.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: Color Vision Testing Made Easy contains a series of 14 cards, which is divided into two parts.  The first part has a series of simple symbols (circles, stars, squares, etc.) that are each printed in colored dots against a background.  The cards also display two other objects in a different color, to study for particular color deficiency, and to prevent a child from being discouraged from not seeing a particular color.  The second part of the test has other objects that require either matching or tracing based upon color.  
Normative Data: Color Vision Testing Made Easy is a criterion-referenced assessment tool, designed to provide an accurate measure of distant acuity, rather than any normative information
Standardization:  Color Vision Testing Made Easy was designed specifically for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: As Color Vision Testing Made Easy was designed specifically for assessment of those with visual impairment, adaptations are not necessary.


Comprehensive Receptive and Expressive Vocabulary Test, 2nd Edition (CREVT 2)
Author: Wallace, G., and Hammill, D.D.
Ages: Four to 89 years.
Published: 2004, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests and measurement with relevant supervised clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To obtain an estimate of an individual’s expressive and receptive vocabulary.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: Comprehensive Receptive and Expressive Vocabulary Test, 2nd Edition (CREVT 2) measures receptive vocabulary through the ability to identify each of a series of objects printed on a single page, arranged around a single theme.  Identification is after the examiner asks for the target object.  Each of the 61 items requires the individual to provide a one-word response that best describes a picture.  The recently updated stimulus book is a collection of color pictures, with six items assessing an individual theme.  Those with visual impairment may not perceive the critical elements of a picture.  This does not, however, indicate that the expected word is not a part of the individual’s vocabulary.  This would likely underestimate the student’s maximal performance level.  The expressive vocabulary test asks the individual to define the 25 words read by the examiner.  These items too are arranged around a series of themes.    
Normative Data: The publisher states that the recently updated normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The (CREVT 2) has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Obviously, the (CREVT 2) may not be used to assess the vocabulary of a student who is blind. The (CREVT 2) is one of many visually loaded vocabulary tests, and thus, the publisher states that it is not suitable for use with students with visual impairment.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.



Conners’ Rating Scales-Revised (CRS-R)
Author: Conners, C. K.
Ages: Three to seventeen years.
Published: 1996, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To evaluate the reported problem behavior of the child.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Conners’ Rating Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is composed of three instruments: the Parent Form, the Teacher Form, and the Adolescent Self-Report form.  As was the case for the original Conners’ Rating Scales, there are long and short forms for the assessment of problem behaviors.  The CRS-R has been widely used for the identification of ADHD, specifically for the identification of inattentiveness, hyperactivity, conduct problems, perfectionism, social-emotional problems, and anger control.  The publisher reports that items for the Self-Report instruments may be presented verbally, and responses are recorded for scoring. 
Normative Data: The publisher does not specify whether individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities were included in the normative studies conducted.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data from these studies may be for drawing conclusions about those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: Parent and teacher forms are completed in their regular format, assuming that these individuals have no visual or other impairment.  For the student with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, items are to be read aloud, and the examiner records responses.
Adaptations: Specific items of the CRS-R do not require adaptation, as an adapted format, in the form of reading items aloud and recording responses, is allowed. 


DeGangi-Berk Test of Sensory Integration
Authors: DeGangi, G. A. and Berk, R. A. 
Ages: Three to five years.
Published: 1983, Western Psychological Services.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training as an occupational or physical therapist.
Stated Purpose: To overcome problems in detecting sensory integrative dysfunction in the early years.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There are four scores to the DeGangi-Berk Test of Sensory Integration: Postural Control, Bilateral Motor Integration, Reflex Integration and a Total.  This instrument was designed for the early detection of sensory integration deficits, permitting the initiation of intervention.  The DeGangi-Berk Test of Sensory Integration is not well suited, according the publisher, to children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, since all the tasks are physical and visual.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Further, the normative data is dated and must be used with caution when making normative characterizations of a student’s skills and abilities.  
Standardization: The DeGangi-Berk Test of Sensory Integration has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Denver Developmental Screening Test-II (DDST-II)
Authors: Frankenberg, W. K., Dodds, J., Archer, P., Shapiro, H., and Bresnick, B.
Ages: Birth to six years.
Published: 1992, Denver Developmental Materials.
Qualifications to Administer: Two days of training by a Denver Developmental Materials master trainer. 
Stated Purpose: To screen for developmental delays.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Denver Developmental Screening Test-II (DDST-II) has item scores in four areas: Personal-Social, Fine-Motor-Adaptive, Language, and Gross Motor.  In addition, it has five test behavior ratings: Typical, Compliance, Interest in Surroundings, Fearfulness, and Attention Span.  The DDST-II was designed for administration to children presumed to be healthy, as a screen for developmental impairment.  However, it is far from a complete assessment; it merely indicates the need for a more complete assessment of those evidencing developmental deficits or delays.  Parents are asked a number of questions, and children are asked to perform a number of tasks.  According to age-based norms, children are classified as being Normal, Questionable, or Abnormal.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual, hearing or other impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The DDST-II has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.   However, the publisher states that roughly three fourths of the items do not require vision.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is possible that elimination of items requiring vision may lead to an adapted version of the DDST-II, which must then be standardized and normed on a representative group of children. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Detroit Test of Learning Aptitude, 4th Edition (DTLA-4)
Author: Hammill, D. D.
Ages: Six to seventeen years.
Published: 1998, PRO-ED.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement.  
Stated Purpose: To measure general intelligence and discrete ability areas.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Detroit Test of Learning Aptitude, 4th Edition (DTLA-4) has ten subtest scores: Word Opposites, Design Sequences, Imitation, Reversed Letters, Story Construction, Design Reproduction, Basic Information, Symbolic Relations, Word Sequences, and Story Sequences.  There are also sixteen composite scores: General Mental Ability Composite, Optimal Level Composite, Domain Composites (Verbal, Nonverbal, Attention-Enhanced, Attention-Reduced, Motor-Enhanced, and Motor-Reduced), and Theoretical Composites (Fluid Intelligence, Crystallized Intelligence, Associative Level, Cognitive Level, Simultaneous Processing, Successive Processing, Verbal Scale, and Performance Scale).  
Normative Data: Although the publisher specifies the inclusion of students with impairments, it is unclear whether students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities are adequately sampled.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The DTLA-4 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.   
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Detroit Test of Learning Aptitude-Primary, 3rd Edition (DTLA-P3)
Author: Hammill, D. D., and Bryant, B.R.
Ages: Three to twelve years.
Published: 2004, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement.  
Stated Purpose: To measure general intelligence and discrete ability areas.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Detroit Test of Learning Aptitude-Primary, 3rd Edition (DTLA-P3) has six subtest scores that collectively measure language, attention/concentration, and motor abilities.  This instrument relies heavily on pictoral content to assess skills, and may not be well suited for use with those with visual impairment and multiple disabilities.  
Normative Data: Although the normative data collected is from a broad spectrum of students based upon recent census data, the does not specify the inclusion of and students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, or if they were adequately sampled.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The DTLA-P3 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.   
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Developmental Activities Screening Inventory, 2nd Edition (DASI-II)
Authors: Fewell, R. R. and Langley, M. B.
Ages: Birth to five years.
Published: 1984, PRO-ED.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To provide early detection of developmental difficulties.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Developmental Activities Screening Inventory-2nd Edition (DASI-II) assesses fifteen primary functions: Sensory Intactness, Sensorimotor Organization,
Visual Pursuit/Object Permanence, Means-End Relationships, Causality, Imitation,
Behaviors Relating to Objects, Constructing Objects in Space, Memory, Discrimination, Association, Quantitative Reasoning, Seriation, Spatial Relationships, and Reasoning.
Items are grouped according to eleven developmental levels (1-2 months, 3-5 months, 6-11 months, 12-17 months, 18-23 months, 24-29 months, 30-35 months, 36-41 months, 42-47 months, 48-53 months and 54-60 months).  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual or other impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Further, the normative data is older, and must be used cautiously for interpretation purposes, perhaps best as a descriptive measure of a student’s abilities.
Standardization: The DASI-II has been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment. The child is to rely on tactile experience in place of visual exploration.  Specifically, the child evaluates size, shape, and texture rather than color and position in space.
Adaptations: In the test manual, the authors specify using the tactile adaptation for children with visual impairment, but no adaptations for students with multiple disabilities. 


Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning, 3rd Edition (DIAL-3)
Authors: Mardell-Czudnowski, C. and Goldenberg, D. S.
Ages: Three to seven years.
Published: 1998, American Guidance Service.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests, measurement, guidance, or psychological assessment.
Stated Purpose: To identify children with potential developmental problems and children who appear to be developing in an advanced manner.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Developmental Indicators for the Assessment of Learning, 3rd Edition
(DIAL-3), has five subtests: Language (Personal Data, Articulation, Naming Objects or Actions, Phonemic Awareness, and Rhyming), Concepts (Naming Colors, Identifying Body Parts, Rote Counting, Counting Blocks, Positioning, Identifying Concepts, and Sorting Shapes), Motor (Catching, Jumping, Hopping, Skipping, Building with Blocks, Cutting, Copying Shapes and Figures, and Finger Touching), Social Development (Social Skills with Peers and Parents, Rule Compliance, Sharing, Self-Control, Empathy), and Self-Help Development (Dressing, Eating, and Grooming).  The administrator observes the child engaging in a behavior and scores his or her willingness to perform the task and the manner in which it is performed.  Recently, Spanish Language materials have been included for use with students for whom Spanish is their primary language. 
Normative Data: Although the publisher specifies the inclusion of students with impairments in the normative studies, students with visual impairment were not included. It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The DIAL-3 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. The publisher states that the DIAL-3 is not suitable for the assessment of students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, since most test items require the use of vision.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for such individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Developmental Profile II (DP-II)
Authors: Alpern, G., Boll, T., and Shearer, M.
Ages: Birth to nine years.
Published: 1986, Western Psychological Services.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess a child’s functional, developmental age level.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Developmental Profile II (DP-II) is composed of five scales: Physical Age, Self-Help Age, Social Age, Academic Age, and Communication Age.  It was designed as a parent/teacher report of a student’s developmental abilities with respect to independent functioning.  The test manual states that the functional utility is reliable only until seven years of age, despite a stated upper age limit of nine years.  
Normative Data: Although the publisher specifies the inclusion of students with impairments, no psychometric information is provided for the establishment of norms for these children, nor is there mention of inclusion children with visual or multiple impairments.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Further, the normative data is older, and must be used cautiously for interpretation purposes, perhaps best as a descriptive measure of a student’s abilities.
Standardization: The DP-II may be administered as an interview with parents, a combination of an interview and direct testing of the child, or an interview completed by the teacher.  As such, there is a set of administration procedures for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: As an interview-type instrument that may be given to a student’s parent(s) and/or teacher(s), there is no need to adapt the DP-II.
 

Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, 5th Edition (VMI)
Authors: Beery, K. E., Buktenica, N. A., and Beery, N.A.
Ages: Two to eighteen years.
Published: 2004, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Stated Purpose: To screen for visual-motor problems.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration, 5th Edition (VMI), evaluates a child’s ability to copy a series of geometric designs presented in order of increasing difficulty.  There are a total of twenty-seven items in the VMI, which yields a Developmental Age score and a standard score from which a percentile is derived.  It is meant to assess children with neurological impairments, learning disabilities, and motor/perceptual problems.  The performance score is based on the number of correct reproductions. The newer version was extended downward with simpler copy-paradigm items.  Further, supplemental visual perceptive and motor coordination tasks may be utilized.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the large set of normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The VMI has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment and multiple disabilities. The publisher states that the VMI is not suited to students with significant visual impairment, since they likely will have difficulty recognizing fine details of the more complex figures, and the quality of their reproductions’ may be adversely affected.  An inability to clearly view a figure does not imply a lack of motor reproductive ability, and a student’s abilities may be underestimated.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for such individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Diagnostic Achievement Battery, 3rd Edition (DAB-3)
Authors: Newcomer, P. L.
Ages: Six to fourteen years.
Published: 2001, Psychological Assessment Resources.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess student’s abilities in listening, speaking, reading, writing, and mathematics.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Diagnostic Achievement Battery, 3rd Edition (DAB-3), has fourteen subtests: Story Comprehension, Alphabet/Word Knowledge, Spelling, Math Calculation, Characteristics, Reading Comprehension, Contextual Language, Phonemic Analysis, Synonyms, Capitalization, Story Construction, Grammatic Completion, Punctuation, and Math Reasoning.  These subtests can be used to calculate the following composites: Total Achievement, writing, Listening, Mathematics, Speaking, Spoken Language, Reading, and Written Language. 
Normative Data: The large, representative, new set of normative data was collected only on those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The DAB-3 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Diagnostic Reading Scales, Braille Edition (DRS)
Author: Spache, G. D.
Ages: Children six to twelve years, and poor reading adolescents age thirteen to eighteen years.
Published: 1981, American Printing House for the Blind.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To identify strengths and weaknesses that affect reading proficiency at the grade levels in which reading is normally taught.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Diagnostic Reading Scales, Braille Edition (DRS) yield three outcome scores: Instructional Level, Independent Level, and Potential Level.  The Instructional Level score is determined by asking a student to read the questions out loud and then answer them. For the Independent Level score, the student is asked to read the questions silently and then answer them out loud.  For the Potential Level score, the student answers questions based on a passage read out loud by the examiner.  Oral-reading skills, silent-reading skills, listening comprehension skills, word analysis, and behaviors related to reading are assessed.  
Normative Data: There are separate normative data for the Diagnostic Reading Scales, Braille Edition, based on how sighted students performed on the items selected from the standard form of the Diagnostic Reading Scales.
Standardization: The Braille format of the DRS was designed specifically for use with students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  The student must demonstrate proficiency in Braille to use this format of the DRS.  Administration of the Braille adaptation is considered nonstandard, and time limits may be exceeded.  
Adaptations: As the Braille adaptation of the DRS was designed for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, no additional adaptations are necessary. 


Diagnostic Reading Scales, Large Print Edition (DRS)
Author: Spache, G. D.
Ages: Children six to twelve years, and poor reading adolescents age thirteen to eighteen years.
Published: 1981, American Printing House for the Blind.
Qualifications to Administer: Graduate training in tests and measurement, with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To identify strengths and weaknesses that affect reading proficiency at the grade levels in which reading is normally taught.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Diagnostic Reading Scales, Large Print Edition (DRS) yield three outcome scores: Instructional Level, Independent Level, and Potential Level.  The Instructional Level score is determined by asking a student to read the questions out loud and then answer them. For the Independent Level score, the student is asked to read the questions silently and then answer them out loud.  For the Potential Level score, the student answers questions based on a passage read out loud by the examiner.  Oral-reading skills, silent-reading skills, listening comprehension skills, word analysis, and behaviors related to reading are assessed.  
Normative Data: There are separate normative data for the Diagnostic Reading Scales, Large Print Edition, based on how sighted students performed on the items selected from the standard form of the Diagnostic Reading Scales.
Standardization: The Large Print Edition of the DRS was designed specifically for use with students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.    
Adaptations: As the adapted Large Print Edition of the DRS was designed for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, no additional adaptations are necessary. 


Early Coping Inventory (ECI)
Authors: Zeitlin, S., Williamson, G. G., and Szczepanski, M.
Ages: Birth to three years.
Published: 1988, Scholastic Testing Service.
Qualifications to Administer: A professional or paraprofessional trained in the specific use of this instrument by someone with knowledge of it.
Stated Purpose: To measure adaptive behavior.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There are four scores to the Early Coping Inventory: Sensorimotor Organization (behaviors used to regulate psychophysiological functions and to integrate sensory and motor information), Reactive Behavior, Self-Initiated Behavior (to meet demands of the environment), and Total.  The administrator rates the child’s efficacy for the demonstrated behaviors.  An Adaptive Behavior Index (an average of the three scores) may be determined as well.  The Coping Profile indicates the strengths and weaknesses of the various areas assessed.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available older set of normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: While the ECI has not been specifically standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities, the format of an administrator assigning scores for completed behaviors renders standard administration techniques appropriate for those with visual impairment.
Adaptations: Specific items of the ECI do not require adaptation, as oral presentation of items and recording of responses by the assessor suit a child with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.


Early Learning Accomplishment Profile (E-LAP)
Authors: Glover, M. E., Preminger, J. L. and Stanford, A. R. 
Ages: Birth to three years.
Published: 1978, Kaplan Companies.
Qualifications to Administer: Teacher, special educator or parent.
Stated Purpose: To assess a child’s development in the areas of motor skills, cognition, language, self-help, and social-emotional.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Early Learning Accomplishment Profile (E-LAP) is a criterion-referenced instrument that breaks down the stages of development to be assessed.  Items to be administered are to be selected from nineteen developmental assessments.  The items are organized into the following areas: motor development (gross and fine), cognitive development, language development, self-help behaviors, and social-emotional development. 
Normative Data: As a criterion-referenced assessment tool, the E-LAP is only designed to provide a general picture of early development of motor, cognitive, language, self-help, and social skills, rather than determination of age appropriateness and metrically determined degree of skills level development.  The fact that this instrument is older does not diminish its overall value for making statements regarding a student’s abilities, as it is criterion referenced.  
Standardization: The E-LAP has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptation: The test manual contains instructions regarding several adaptations for use with children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  However, there is little discussion of standardization of these adaptations, and there is no normative data for them.  


Early Reading Success Indicator (ERSI)
Authors: Not Specified.
Ages: Six to twelve years.
Published: 2004, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of doctoral training in psychology or education with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To assess the processes and skills predictive of early reading ability, difficulties and failure.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There are five subtests to the Early Reading Success Indicator (ERSI): Rapid automatic Naming-Letters, Phonological Processing, Speeded Naming, Pseudoword Decoding, and Word Reading.  The tasks are drawn from the {Process Assessment of the Learner, The Wechsler Individual Achievement Test, and the NEPSY described below. It was designed as an abbreviated tests measuring both cognitive/intellectual and achievement skills without needing to administer each of the source tests separately.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The ERSI has not been specifically standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.  


Emotional or Behavior Disorder Scale-Revised (EBDS-R)
Author: McCarney, S. B. and Arthaud, T.J.
Ages: Five to eighteen years for the Behavioral component, twelve to eighteen years for the Vocational component.
Published: 2003, Hawthorne Educational Services.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To identify behavior problems of students in the home or school environment.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Behavioral component of the Emotional or Behavior Disorder Scale-Revised (EBDS-R) assesses Academic Progress, Social Relationships, and Personal Adjustment.  The Vocational; Component of the EBDS-R assesses Work Related Issues, Interpersonal Relations, and Social/Community Expectations.  This is a rating scale completed by a parent(s) and/or teacher(s).  There is also a companion Emotional or Behavioral Disorder Intervention Manual – Revised offering advice and therapeutic interventions for students with emotional or behavioral disorders.   
Normative Data: The publisher does not specify whether individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities were included in the normative studies conducted.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data from these studies may be for drawing conclusions about those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: Parent or teacher forms are completed in their regular format, assuming that these individuals have no visual or other impairment. 
Adaptations: Specific items of the EBDS-R do not require adaptation, as it is completed by the parent or teacher, not an individual with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. 


Erhardt Developmental Vision Assessment, Revised (EDVA)
Author: Erhardt, R. P.
Ages: Birth to six years.
Published: 1989, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Teacher, special education teacher, or other individual greatly familiar with the child.
Stated Purpose: To measure visual-motor development.
Type of Instrument: Assessment focused, criterion-referenced teaching and assessment curriculum.
Comments: The Erhardt Developmental Vision Assessment, Revised (EDVA) was designed to be administered along with the Developmental Visual Dysfunction: Models for Assessment and Management curriculum developed by the author.  Together these instruments provide sample assessments for management programs and models integrating visual components.  The EDVA, which is designed for all cognitive levels, specifically evaluates involuntary visual patterns (reflexive responses) and voluntary eye movements (that are cognitively directed). 
Normative Data: The EDVA is a criterion-referenced teaching and assessment curriculum, which is focused on determining a child’s visual ability, rather than determining age-appropriateness of the child’s vision skills.  The fact that this instrument is older does not diminish its overall value for making statements regarding a student’s abilities, as it is criterion referenced.  
Standardization:  Standard administration and scoring procedures are appropriate, as the EDVA was designed specifically for children with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: Not necessary for visual impairment, although there is no mention regarding adaptation for those with multiple disabilities.


Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test-2000 Edition (EOWPVT)
Author: Brownell, R.
Ages: Two to eighteen years.
Published: 2000, Academic Therapy Publications.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests and measurement with relevant supervised clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To obtain an estimate of an individual’s expressive vocabulary.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Test-2000 Edition (EOWPVT) measures the ability to identify an object or a group of objects based on a single concept.  Each page requires the individual to provide a one-word response that best describes a picture.  The recently updated stimulus book is a collection of color pictures, mostly one picture per page, but many items with four or more pictures assessing identification of a group, such as an apple, orange, banana and pear identifying the concept fruit.  Those with visual impairment may not perceive the critical elements of a picture, or be able to integrate several pictures.  This does not, however, indicate that the expected word is not a part of the individual’s vocabulary.  The author theorizes that this would likely underestimate the student’s maximal performance level.  Recently, Spanish Language materials have been included for use with students for whom Spanish is their primary language.
Normative Data: The publisher states that the recently updated normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The EOWPVT has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  Obviously, the EOWPVT may not be used to assess the vocabulary of a student who is blind. The EOWPVT is one of many visually loaded vocabulary tests, and thus, the publisher states that it is not suitable for use with students with visual impairment.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


FirstSTEp Screening Test for Evaluating Preschoolers (FirstSTEp)
Authors: Miller, L.J.
Ages: Two to six years.
Published: 1993, The Psychological Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Masters degree psychology or education with relevant clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: A screening instrument for the detection of children at risk for developmental delays.
Type of Instrument: Both a Criterion-referenced and Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: Three primary areas are evaluated by the FirstSTEp Screening Test for Evaluating Preschoolers (FirstSTEp): Cognition, Communication, and Motor skills with 12 individual subtests.  FirstSTEp also comes with an optional Social-Emotional Scale and a Parent/Teacher Rating checklist that assesses Attention, Activity Level, Social Interactions, Personal Traits, and Serious Behavior Problems.  Finally, there is an Adaptive Behavior Checklist that surveys Daily Living skills, Self-Control, Relationships and Interactions, and Functioning in the Community.  The FirstSTEp is essentially a series of game-like activities children are asked to engage in.  
Normative Data: The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The FirstSTEp has not been specifically standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.  Obviously, the Rating Scales and Checklists completed by parents/teachers are applicable.


Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test, 2nd Ed. (Fluharty-2)
Author: Fluharty, N. B.
Ages: Three to seven years.
Published: 2000, Riverside Publishing Corporation.
Qualifications to Administer: Not specified.
Stated Purpose: To rapidly identify preschool-age children for whom a comprehensive speech and language diagnostic evaluation is needed.
Type of Instrument: Criterion-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Fluharty Preschool Speech and Language Screening Test, 2nd Edition (Fluharty-2) has five scores: Articulation, Repeating Sentences, Responding to Directives & Answering Answering Questions, and Sequencing Actions.  Items utilize color picture identification skills (fifteen familiar objects), speech sound articulation (producing thirty consonant sounds by naming fifteen objects), syntactic comprehension (pointing to a response to a verbal request), and sentence imitation skills.  Teacher questionnaires allow for provision of descriptive information with respect to a student’s specific abilities.  The Fluharty-2 is meant to only be a brief screening test for language skills development in preschool students. 
Normative Data: Unlike the original Fluharty test, the Fluharty-2 PSLST is a normative-referenced test, with data collected on samples of individuals without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The Fluharty-2 has not been specifically standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.  


Functional Skills Screening Inventory (FSSI)
Authors: Becker, H., Schur, S., Paoletti-Schelp, M., and Hammer, E.
Ages: Six years to adult.
Published: 1985, Functional Resources Enterprises.
Qualifications to Administer: Classroom or special education teacher.
Stated Purpose: To be used in natural settings to assess critical living and working skills in persons with moderate to severe handicapping conditions.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There are nine scores to the Functional Skills Screening Inventory (FSSI): Basic Skills and Concepts, Communication, Personal Care, Homemaking, Work Skills and Concepts, Community Living, Social Awareness, Functional Skills Subtotal, and Problem Behaviors.  The FSSI is a behavioral assessment, an evaluation of current abilities, not a predictor of potential ability.  It is a checklist of 343 items grouped into three priority levels that is completed by the evaluator by informally observing the student’s behavior in his or her daily environment. 
Normative Data: The publisher does not specify whether individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities were included in the normative studies conducted.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data from these studies may be for drawing conclusions about those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. The FSSI was originally designed for students with deaf-blindness and other multiple disabilities.  It has correlated well with the Callier-Azusa Scale: G Edition, which does lend it validity.  Further, the normative data is older, and must be used cautiously for interpretation purposes, perhaps best as a descriptive measure of a student’s abilities.
Standardization: Parent or teacher forms are completed in their regular format, assuming that these individuals have no visual or other impairment. 
Adaptations: Specific items of the FSSI do not require adaptation, as the FSSI is completed by the parent or teacher, not the individual with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.


Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation, 2nd Edition (G-FTA-2)
Authors: Goldman, R., and Fristoe, M.
Ages: Two to twenty-one years.
Published: 2001, Western Psychological Services.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests and measurement, and relevant, supervision clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To provide a systematic means of assessing an individual’s articulation of the consonant sounds.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: There are three subtests to the Goldman-Fristoe Test of Articulation, Second Edition (G-FTA-2): Sounds-in-Words, Sounds-in-Sentences, and Stimulability.  A total of 39 consonant sounds and blend are sampled.  Spontaneous and imitative sound production is assessed.  Color cards are presented to the individual, who is required to identify an object or activity.  The examiner evaluates the individual’s sentence abilities by reading a story to the subject, after which the subject repeats the story.  The Stimulability subtest provides an opportunity for the individual to correctly pronounce mispronounced sounds.  To diagnose error types, a trained speech pathologist must interpret the results of the G-FTA-2.  Computerized scoring is now available from the publisher.  
Normative Data: New to this edition, a separate set of normative data has been collected for each gender, reflecting differences in language development between the sexes.  The publisher states that the normative data collected assessed only those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  It is unclear how applicable the available normative data may be for those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Standardization: The G-FTA-2 has not been standardized in terms of administration procedure and interpretation for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. The publisher notes that the visual stimuli render this instrument poorly suited to students with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.
Adaptations: The publisher also states that no adaptations have been made specifically for individuals with visual impairment or multiple disabilities. Any informally adapted items require standardization and normalization before comparison of performance on adapted items to existing normative data.


Gray Oral Reading Tests, 4th Edition (GORT-4)
Authors: Wiederholt, J.L., and Bryant, B.R.
Ages: Six to nineteen years.
Published: 2001, PRO-ED.
Qualifications to Administer: Completion of graduate training in tests and measurement, and relevant, supervision clinical experience.
Stated Purpose: To provide an objective measure of growth in a student’s oral reading skills.
Type of Instrument: Normative-referenced assessment instrument.
Comments: The Gray Oral Reading Tests (GORT-4) provides a Fluency score that is derived by a combination of rate of reading with accuracy of reading.  A Comprehension score also assesses the degree to which information read is assimilated.  A total Oral Reading Quotient is derived from the oral reading measures.  Fourteen stories are included in this test overall.  Given the emphasis placed on reading standard print material in an expedient fashion, this test is not well-suited for use with those with visual impairment or multiple disabilities.  
Normative Data: The large, representative set of normative data was collected only on those without visual impairment, and no set of data was collected for administration to students with visu