Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Convergent Validity of Infant/Toddler Developmental Progress Monitoring Tools

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Child & Youth Care Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Using progress monitoring data to make effective and timely decisions in early intervention (EI) requires high quality assessment. Infant/toddler individual growth and development indicators (I/T IGDIs) have been developed to be brief, reliable and engaging progress monitoring tools that are sensitive to change over short time periods (Greenwood et al. in J Early Interv 33:254–267, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815111428467).

Objective

The current study examined the convergent validity of IGDIs in three developmental areas: the early communication indicator, early problem solving indicator (EPSI), and the early movement indicator (EMI), with standardized criterion measures. In addition, growth patterns in the current study of children receiving EI services were examined.

Method

One hundred twenty-three children along with their service provider practitioners (N = 50) participated in the study. Practitioners administered IGDIs with children on their regular caseloads; data were examined for comparison with criterion measures and growth patterns.

Results

Significant relationships were found between I/T IGDIs and corresponding domains on the Battelle Developmental Inventory-2nd edition and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales-2nd edition. Linear and quadratic growth trajectory patterns from the current study resembled those of comparable samples from prior studies, where available.

Conclusions

Results supported the convergent validity of these I/T IGDIs with established criterion measures. Growth trajectory patterns for key skills and total scores were similar to those in prior studies, where available, with a few exceptions. Growth trajectory patterns for the EPSI and EMI with children from EI programs were demonstrated for the first time and supported hypothesized patterns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bagnato, S. (2005). The authentic alternative for assessment in early intervention: An emerging evidence-based practice. Journal of Early Intervention, 28, 17–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/105381510502800102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayley, N. (1993). Bayley scales of infant development—II. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buysee, V., & Peisner-Feinberg, E. S. (2013). Response to intervention: Conceptual foundations for the early childhood field. In V. Buysee & E. S. Peisner-Feinberg (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention in early childhood (pp. 3–23). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzhardt, J., Greenwood, C., Walker, D., Anderson, R., Howard, W., & Carta, J. (2011). Effects of web-based support on early head start home visitors’ use of evidence-based intervention decision making and growth in children’s expressive communication. NHSA Dialog: A Research-to-Practice Journal for the Early Childhood Field, 13, 121–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/15240754.2011.587614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carta, J., Greenwood, C., Walker, D., & Buzhardt, J. (2010). Using IGDIs: Monitoring progress and improving intervention for infants and young children. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deno, S. L. (1997). Whether thou goest… Perspectives on progress monitoring. In J. W. Lloyd, E. J. Kameenui, & D. Chard (Eds.), Issues in educating students with disabilities (pp. 77–99). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunst, C. J., Trivette, C. M., & Cutspec, P. A. (2007). Toward an operational definition of evidence-based practice (Winterberry research perspectives, v.1, n.1). Morganton, NC: Winterberry Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Early Childhood Technical Assistance Center. (2016). Outcomes measurement: Instrument crosswalks. Retrieved November 30, 2017 from http://ectacenter.org/eco/pages/crosswalks.asp.

  • Feinberg, E., Silverstein, M., Donahue, S., & Bliss, R. (2011). The impact of race on participation in part C early intervention services. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics: JDBP, 32(4), 284–291.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Folio, M. R., & Fewell, R. R. (2000). The peabody developmental motor scales (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gettinger, M., & Stoiber, K. (2008). Applying a response-to-intervention model for early literacy development in low-income children. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 27, 198–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Buzhardt, J., Walker, D., McCune, L., & Howard, W. (2013). Advancing the construct validity of the early communication indicator (ECI) for infants and toddlers: Equivalence of growth trajectories across two early head start samples. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28, 743–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.07.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., & McConnell, S. (2011). Advances in measurement for universal screening and individual progress monitoring of young children. Journal of Early Intervention, 33, 254–267. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815111428467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C., Carta, J., Walker, D., Hughes, K., & Weathers, M. (2006a). Preliminary investigations of the application of the early communication indicator (ECI) for infants and toddlers. Journal of Early Intervention, 28, 178–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/105381510602800306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C., Luze, G., Cline, G., Kuntz, S., & Leitschuh, C. (2002). Developing a general outcome measure of growth in movement for infants and toddlers. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 22, 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/02711214020220030201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., & McConnell, S. R. (2011). JEI guidelines for manuscripts describing the development and testing of an assessment instrument or measure. Journal of Early Intervention, 33, 171–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Walker, D., & Buzhardt, J. (2010). The early communication indicator for infants and toddlers: Early head start growth norms from two states. Journal of Early Intervention, 32, 310–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Walker, D., Carta, J., & Higgins, S. (2006b). Developing a general outcome measure of growth in the cognitive abilities of children 1 to 4 years old: The early problem-solving indicator. School Psychology Review, 35, 535–551.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Ward, S., & Luze, G. J. (2003). The early communication indicator (ECI) for infants and toddlers: What it is, where it’s been, and where it needs to go. The Behavior Analyst Today, 3, 383–388. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0099995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuntz, S. (2001). Caregiver assessment of movement skills–Gross motor. Juniper Gardens Children’s Project, University of Kansas, Kansas City, KS.

  • Kwok, O. M., Underhill, A. T., Berry, J. W., Luo, W., Elliott, T. R., & Yoon, M. (2008). Analyzing longitudinal data with multilevel models: An example with individuals living with lower extremity intra-articular fractures. Rehabilitation Psychology, 53, 370–386. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012765.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Landry, S. H., Anthony, J. L., Swank, P. R., & Monseque-Bailey, P. (2009). Effectiveness of comprehensive professional development for teachers of at-risk preschoolers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luze, G., Linebarger, D., Greenwood, C., Carta, J., Walker, D., Leitschuh, C., et al. (2001). Developing a general outcome measure of growth in the expressive communication of infants and toddlers. School Psychology Review, 30, 383–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnell, S. R., Wackerle-Hollman, A. K., Roloff, T. A., & Rodriguez, M. (2015). Designing a measurement framework for response to intervention in early childhood. Journal of Early Intervention, 36, 263–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053815115578559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newborg, J. (2004). Battelle developmental inventory (2nd ed.). Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sparrow, S. S., Cicchetti, D. V., & Balla, D. A. (2005). Vineland adaptive behavior scales, second edition, survey forms manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Heyden, A. M. (2005). Intervention-driven assessment practices in early childhood/early intervention: Measuring what is possible rather than what is present. Journal of Early Intervention, 28, 28–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Der Heyden, A. M., Snyder, P. A., Broussard, C., & Ramsdell, K. (2008). Measuring response to early literacy intervention with preschoolers at risk. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 27, 232–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, D., Hart, B., Linebarger, D., & Parsley, K. (1998). Caregiver communication measure (CCM). Unpublished manuscript. Early Childhood Research Institute on Measuring Growth and Development. Juniper Gardens Children’s Project. Kansas City: University of Kansas.

  • Weschler, D. (1989). The Weschler preschool and primary scales of intelligence-revised. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, I. L., Steiner, V. G., & Pond, R. E. (1992). PLS-3: Preschool language scale-3. New York: Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was funded by a Grant from the Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education (R324A070248). We would like to thank Juniper Gardens Children’s Project for collaborating on this project and use of the IGDI website resources.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, 50011, USA

    Kere Hughes-Belding, Gayle J. Luze & Ji-Young Choi

Authors
  1. Kere Hughes-Belding
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gayle J. Luze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ji-Young Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kere Hughes-Belding.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in the current study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable research standards.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hughes-Belding, K., Luze, G.J. & Choi, JY. Convergent Validity of Infant/Toddler Developmental Progress Monitoring Tools. Child Youth Care Forum 48, 493–511 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09491-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-019-09491-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation