Developmental Assessment of Young Children Second Edition (DAYC-2) Summary Report

Similar documents
Reliability. Internal Reliability

Chapter 3. Psychometric Properties

Early Childhood Measurement and Evaluation Tool Review

1/30/2018. Adaptive Behavior Profiles in Autism Spectrum Disorders. Disclosures. Learning Objectives

Simplifying Reporting of Communication Development Outcomes for Infants and Toddlers with Hearing Loss

Running head: CPPS REVIEW 1

What Works Clearinghouse

Adaptive Behavior Profiles in Autism Spectrum Disorders

Other Developmental Screening Tools Choices for Practices and Providers

CLINICAL BOTTOM LINE Early Intervention for Children With Autism Implications for Occupational Therapy

Understanding CELF-5 Reliability & Validity to Improve Diagnostic Decisions

Magellan Healthcare ABA Treatment Plan/Concurrent Review

Mullen Scales of Early Learning: AGS Edition

Child Development Inventories. Jacelyn Vital- McPherson & Antonio McMillian. Houston Baptist University

10/18/2016. Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales, Third Edition 1. Meet Dr. Saulnier. Bio. Celine A. Saulnier, PhD Vineland-3 Author

No part of this page may be reproduced without written permission from the publisher. (

Interviewer Ratings of Caregiver Respondent and Home Environment LONGSCAN 1991

Rating purpose (choose one): (Entry) Periodic # Exit

Variable Measurement, Norms & Differences

The Predictive Validity of the Test of Infant Motor Performance on School Age Motor Developmental Delay

Supplementary Online Content

NIH Toolbox. Scoring and Interpretation Guide. September 18, 2012

Family-centered early intervention for families and children who are deaf or hard of hearing

Score Report. Test Administered WMS IV (3/16/2009) Age at Testing 24 years 0 months Retest? No

All Graduate Theses and Dissertations

Language Comprehension Predicts Later Cognitive Ability and Symptom Severity in Toddlers with ASD

Theory of Mind Inventory (ToMI)

Longitudinal Study of Executive Function and Low Birth Weight

3-86 Psychological Tests and Evaluation Procedures ^ General Ability Measures

Georgina Salas. Topics EDCI Intro to Research Dr. A.J. Herrera

Examining the Psychometric Properties of The McQuaig Occupational Test

5. Diagnostic Criteria

Child Health Month Review Statistics

Executive Function in Infants and Toddlers born Low Birth Weight and Preterm

APPENDIX A TASK DEVELOPMENT AND NORMATIVE DATA

Disclosure statement

This is Rachel who came to her 18 month well-visit at age 20 months instead. Fortunately the PEDS:DM has a continuous set of forms so if children

Reliability and Validity of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory Generic Core Scales, Multidimensional Fatigue Scale, and Cancer Module

ACDI. An Inventory of Scientific Findings. (ACDI, ACDI-Corrections Version and ACDI-Corrections Version II) Provided by:

Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) Report

Data Management & Scoring Manual

Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of the. Questionnaire for Situational Information: Item Analyses. Final Report

Quality of Life of Persons with Tourette Syndrome Webinar

Research Questions and Survey Development

Extraversion. The Extraversion factor reliability is 0.90 and the trait scale reliabilities range from 0.70 to 0.81.

ALABAMA SELF-ASSESSMENT INDEX PILOT PROGRAM SUMMARY REPORT

Construct Validity of the Chinese Version of the Psycho-Educational Profile-3rd Edition (CPEP-3)

Book review. Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS). By C.K. Conners, D. Erhardt, M.A. Sparrow. New York: Multihealth Systems, Inc.

Neonatal behavioral assessment scale (NBAS)

Estimates of the Reliability and Criterion Validity of the Adolescent SASSI-A2

Department of Professional Counseling University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Oshkosh, WI Counseling Practicum Performance Evaluation

Chapter 7 BAYLEY SCALES OF INFANT DEVELOPMENT

ADMS Sampling Technique and Survey Studies

The complete Insight Technical Manual includes a comprehensive section on validity. INSIGHT Inventory 99.72% % % Mean

Language in the Home Environment of Children with Hearing Loss Compared to Hearing Controls at 6-7 Years of Age

Saville Consulting Wave Professional Styles Handbook

Family Assessment Device (FAD)

Test review. Comprehensive Trail Making Test (CTMT) By Cecil R. Reynolds. Austin, Texas: PRO-ED, Inc., Test description

Global Perspective Inventory (GPI) - Pilot Report

Empowering Families and Children with Autism through STEPS: Screening, Teaching, Evaluating, and Parenting for Success!

Title: Prediction of Communication Risk Before 12 months with the ISCBS: Group Outcomes at 3 Years

What is the Role of the Hearing Specialist in Early Steps? Karen Anderson, PhD Coordinator of Early Intervention Services for Hearing and Vision

Chapter Fairness. Test Theory and Fairness

Review of Various Instruments Used with an Adolescent Population. Michael J. Lambert

What is Autism? -Those with the most severe disability need a lot of help with their daily lives whereas those that are least affected may not.

DUI Arrests, BAC at the Time of Arrest and Offender Assessment Test Results for Alcohol Problems

Chapter 2--Norms and Basic Statistics for Testing

The HeartQol questionnaire. Reliability, validity and responsiveness?

How Applicable Are Ages and Stages Questionnaires for Use With Turkish Children?

Early Start Denver Model

From: What s the problem? Pathway to Empowerment. Objectives 12/8/2015

Elderly Norms for the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised*

Consolidated Project Information Project 4.a.ii Substance Abuse Prevention and Identification Initiative

Randomized Comparison of Parent-Teacher Consultation for Students with Autism

September 13 Minodora Grigorescu Mothercraft College

The Whole Child Approach of the Social Security Administration:

Creation and Use of the Pervasive Developmental Disorder Behavior Inventory (PDDBI) Parent Form

The Assessment in Advanced Dementia (PAINAD) Tool developer: Warden V., Hurley, A.C., Volicer, L. Country of origin: USA

The Vine Assessment System by LifeCubby

Social Determinants and Consequences of Children s Non-Cognitive Skills: An Exploratory Analysis. Amy Hsin Yu Xie

NYC AUTISM CHARTER SCHOOL School Year Application Instructions 1

Thriving in College: The Role of Spirituality. Laurie A. Schreiner, Ph.D. Azusa Pacific University

VIEW: An Assessment of Problem Solving Style

SAMPLE. Behavior Parent Short Assessment Report. By C. Keith Conners, Ph.D.

Chapter 2 Norms and Basic Statistics for Testing MULTIPLE CHOICE

European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR) A Registered Branch of the ESC

Autism. Laura Schreibman HDP1 11/29/07 MAIN DIAGNOSTIC FEATURES OF AUTISTIC DISORDER. Deficits in social attachment and behavior

Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities Designing an outcome study to monitor the progress of students with autism spectrum disorders.

Using Pivotal Response Training with Peers in Special Education to Facilitate Play in Two Children with Autism

Background on the issue Previous study with adolescents and adults: Current NIH R03 study examining ADI-R for Spanish speaking Latinos

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY, DATA COLLECTION AND DATA ANALYSIS

Evaluations. Learn the Signs. Act Early. The Importance of Developmental Screening. Conflict of Interest Statement.

THE LONG TERM PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF DAILY SEDATIVE INTERRUPTION IN CRITICALLY ILL PATIENTS

On the purpose of testing:

TExES Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing (181) Test at a Glance

ADES QUICK SCORE SCHOOL VERION PROFILE SAMPLE

Evaluation and Assessment: 2PSY Summer, 2017

PRACTICUM STUDENT SELF EVALUATION OF ADULT PRACTICUM COMPETENCIES Counseling Psychology Program at the University of Oregon.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES

Transcription:

Developmental Assessment of Young Children Second Edition (DAYC-2) Summary Report Section 1. Identifying Information Name: Marcos Sanders Gender: M Date of Testing: 05-10-2011 Date of Birth: 09-15-2009 Age: 19 months Examiner's Name: Temp User Examiner's Title: Parent/Guardian: School/Daycare: Respondent's Name: Catherine Sanders Relationship to Child: Mother Length of Time Respondent Has Known Child: 1 year Section 2. Description of the DAYC-2 The Developmental Assessment of Young Children-Second Edition (DAYC-2) is an individually administered, norm-referenced measure of early childhood development in the following domains: cognition, communication, social-emotional development, physical development, and adaptive behavior for children from birth through age 5 years 11 months. Cognitive Domain (COG): This domain measures conceptual skills. These include skills that measure memory, purposive planning, decision making, and discrimination. Communication Domain (COM): This domain measures skills related to sharing ideas, information, and feelings with others, both verbally and nonverbally. It is divided into two subdomains: Receptive Language and Expressive Language. Social-Emotional Domain (SE): This domain measures social awareness, social relationships, and social competence. These skills enable children to engage in meaningful social interactions with parents, caregivers, peers, and others in their environment. Physical Development Domain (PD): This domain measures motor development. The domain is divided into two subdomains: Gross Motor and Fine Motor. Adaptive Behavior Domain (AB): This domain measures independent, self-help functioning. Skills include toileting, feeding, dressing, and personal responsibility. The normative score for the composite of all five domains is called the General Development Index (GDI). The index corresponds to the sum of the standard scores of all five domains. The GDI is the most reliable score on the test and provides an overall level of development. The DAYC-2 was normed on a sample of 1,832 children residing in 20 states. Testing was conducted from the fall of 2009 through the spring of 2011. The normative sample is representative of the nation as a whole regarding geographic region, gender, race, Hispanic status, family income, and educational attainment of parents. The percentages for these demographic characteristics were compared with those reported in the Statistical Abstract of the United States (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2010). Reliability refers to the consistency with which a test measures a specific ability. Three types of correlation coefficients - coefficient alpha, test-retest, and scorer difference - are reported to measure these three sources of error. The coefficient alpha reliability ranged from.98 to.91. Test-retest reliability coefficients ranged from.91 to.70. Scorer difference coefficients were all.99. These findings strongly suggest that the DAYC-2 possesses little test error and that test users can have confidence in its results. Validity refers to the degree to which a test measures what it purports to measure, and the degree to which decisions made on the basis of test scores are appropriate. Three types of validity are reported. Content-description validity of the

DAYC-2 was demonstrated by showing that the abilities measured by the domains are consistent with current knowledge regarding developmental abilities. In addition, indices of item discrimination and difficulty are reported in the test manual. Finally, differential item functioning analysis procedures were used to provide evidence that the DAYC-2 is unbiased with respect to race, ethnicity, and gender. Criterion-prediction validity was examined by reporting significant correlations between the DAYC-2, the Battelle Developmental Inventory-Second Edition, and the Developmental Observation Checklist System-Second Edition. The magnitude of the correlations between the DAYC-2 and the criterion measures was very large. The DAYC-2's sensitivity, specificity, and false-positive rate were also reported. The analysis provided strong evidence of the DAYC-2's criterion-prediction validity. Construct-identification validity was examined by showing that performance on the DAYC-2 reflects developing abilities and that the DAYC-2 differentiates between individuals known to be average and those expected to be low average or below average. Further, the domain scores intercorrelate as expected. Section 3. Record of DAYC-2 Domain Scores Domain Raw Age %ile SEM Standard Descriptive Term Score Equivalent Rank Score in Months Cognitive (COG): 26 13 19 3 87 Below Average Communication (COM): 26 14 16 3 85 Below Average Social-Emotional (SE): 27 17 37 3 95 Average Physical Development (PD): 56 19 39 3 96 Average Adaptive Behavior (AB): 21 15 19 3 87 Below Average Section 4. Profile of DAYC-2 Domain Scores Std. Std. Score COG COM SE PD AB Score 150 150 145 145 140 140 135 135 130 130 125 125 120 120 115 115 110 110 105 105 100 100 95 95 * * 90 90 85 85 * * * 80 80 75 75 70 70 65 65 60 60 55 55 50 50 Section 5. Record of DAYC-2 Subdomain Scores Domain Raw Age %ile SEM Standard Descriptive Term Score Equivalent Rank Score in Months Receptive Language (RL): 14 14 21 5 88 Below Average Expressive Language (EL): 12 12 14 4 84 Below Average Gross Motor (GM): 38 19 5 3 98 Average Fine Motor (FM): 18 17 37 4 95 Average

Section 6. Comparison of DAYC-2 Domain Scores for Significant Differences This section is used to determine if the difference between two domain scores is large enough to be important. The first comparison will tell if the difference score is statistically significant; the second comparison will tell if the difference is large enough to be considered clinically useful. Domain Cognitive (COG) Communication (COM) Social-Emotional (SE) Physical Development (PD) Adaptive Behavior (AB) Comparisons Domains S Sig/C Sig Domains S Sig/C Sig Domains S Sig/C Sig COM vs. COG SE vs. COM S Sig PD vs. SE SE vs. COG PD vs. COM S Sig AB vs. SE PD vs. COG S Sig AB vs. COM AB vs. PD S Sig AB vs. COG S Sig. = Statistical significance C Sig = Clinical significance NA = t available Section 7. Comparison of DAYC-2 Subdomain Scores for Significant Differences This section is used to determine if the differences between scores on the Communication subdomains (Receptive Language, Expressive Language) or the Physical Development subdomains (Gross Motor, Fine Motor) are statistically significant or clinically useful. Subdomain Receptive Language (RL) Expressive Language (EL) Gross Motor (GM) Fine Motor (FM) Comparisons Subdomains RL vs. EL GM vs. FM S Sig/C Sig S Sig. = Statistical significance C Sig = Clinical significance NA = t available Section 8. Record of DAYC-2 GDI Score Sum of %ile Standard 95% SEM Descriptive Term Standard Rank Score Interval Scores General Development Index (GDI) 450 18 86 82 90 2 Below Average

Section 9. Information About Domain Performance Cognitive Domain Marcos's Cognitive Domain standard score of 87 represents Below Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Cognitive Domain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded conceptual developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained conceptual developmental levels that are expected for children their age. They are among the bottom 25% of children in the test's Communication Domain Marcos's Communication Domain standard score of 85 represents Below Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Communication Domain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded language developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained language Social-Emotional Domain Marcos's Social-Emotional Domain standard score of 95 represents Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Social-Emotional Domain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded social competence developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained social competence Physical Development Domain Marcos's Physical Development Domain standard score of 96 represents Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Physical Development Domain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded motor developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained motor Adaptive Behavior Domain Marcos's Adaptive Behavior Domain standard score of 87 represents Below Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Adaptive Behavior Domain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded adaptive behavior developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained adaptive behavior developmental levels that are expected for children their age. They are among the bottom 25% of children in the test's Section 10. Information About Subdomain Performance Receptive Language Subdomain Marcos's Receptive Language Subdomain standard score of 88 represents Below Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Receptive Language Subdomain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded receptive language developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained receptive language developmental levels that are expected for children their age. They are among the bottom 25% of children in the test's Expressive Language Subdomain Marcos's Expressive Language Subdomain standard score of 84 represents Below Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Expressive Language Subdomain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have

attained or exceeded expressive language developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained expressive language developmental levels that are expected for children their age. They are among the bottom 25% of children in the test's Gross Motor Subdomain Marcos's Gross Motor Subdomain standard score of 98 represents Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Gross Motor Subdomain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded gross motor developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained gross motor Fine Motor Subdomain Marcos's Fine Motor Subdomain standard score of 95 represents Average performance. Average to high standard scores for the Fine Motor Subdomain (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded fine motor developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained fine motor developmental levels that are expected for children their age. They are among the bottom 25% of children in the test's Section 11. Information About the GDI Marcos's GDI of 86 represents Below Average performance. The General Development Index (GDI) is the composite of all five Domains. Average to high standard scores for the index (i.e., 90 and above) are made by children who have attained or exceeded overall developmental levels that are expected for their age. They are among the top 75% of children included in the test's Low standard scores (i.e., below 90) are made by children who have not attained overall developmental levels that are expected for children their age. They are among the bottom 25% of children in the test's