Best Practices in Play Assessment and Intervention

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Best Practices in School Psychology V serve eligibility purposes but do not provide information about how to develop or monitor appropriate interventions, they are not ecologically valid and do not assess the child in the natural context, and they are a potentially unmotivating and inappropriate means of gathering valid information about a young child (Kelly- Vance & Ryalls, 2005). Further, many practitioners have expressed misgivings about the use of tests to determine young children’s current level of performance (Barnett, Macmann, & Carey, 1992) and would prefer to use alternative strategies such as play assessment (Bagnato & Neisworth, 1994). The origins of play assessment and intervention stem from psychoanalytic work with children at the turn of the twentieth century. Therapists used information from children’s play to determine their mental health needs and then used the play context during therapy. This practice continues in many different therapeutic approaches. More recently and for the reasons discussed above, school psychologists working in early childhood began using play assessment as an observational strategy in the 1980s (as discussed in Athanasiou, 2007). Linder (1990) brought even more attention to the procedures with the publication of her play assessment model and her subsequent play intervention model (Linder, 1993a, 1993b). Practitioners have been using play assessment and intervention, but the empirical support for its use has only recently emerged (e.g., Cherney, Kelly-Vance, Gill-Glover, Ruane, & Ryalls, 2003; Farmer-Dougan & Kaszuba, 1999; Kelly-Vance, Needelman, Troia, & Ryalls, 1999; Kelly-Vance & Ryalls, 2005; Kelly-Vance, Ryalls, & Gill-Glover, 2002; Myers, McBride, & Peterson, 1996). Fortunately, studies are confirming what practitioners have known intuitively, which is that this approach is a reliable and valid means of assessing young children (see below). Moreover, the assessment procedures can be used regularly to monitor the progress of children receiving interventions. Training and Equipment While the specific materials and procedures required for different versions of play assessment and intervention vary, all forms are similar enough that general guidelines concerning equipment and training can be provided. With regard to equipment, one of the advantages of play assessment and intervention is that no specialized materials, forms, or equipment are required. All types of play assessment and intervention involve children playing with toys or other play materials (e.g., crayons and paper). While some forms of play assessment do require a particular set of play objects (e.g., Fewell as cited in Athanasiou, 2007), others can be conducted in any toy room or early childhood classroom (e.g., Kelly- Vance & Ryalls, 2005; Linder, 1993a; Ryalls et al., 2000) as long as the available toys are diverse enough to elicit a wide range of play behaviors, including complex pretend play, and are attractive to both boys and girls. Some specific considerations regarding toy choice will be discussed below. Although no specialized equipment is necessary to conduct play assessments or interventions, some training and experience is necessary; however, the nature of this training depends on the RTI tier in question. Certainly, knowledge about child development in general, and the developmental course of play in particular, is necessary at all three RTI tier levels. A thorough understanding of a tiered RTI system and the specific problem-solving approach used with children who have more intense needs is necessary in utilizing play assessment to guide the intervention process. With regard to the informal assessments that occur at Tier 1, the school psychologist needs to make sure the personnel and parents involved have a general understanding of how and when play changes with development. At Tier 2 or 3, most forms of play assessment can be considered observational coding systems, and thus some experience using such systems is beneficial. Familiarity with the specific coding system is obviously required, as is some training and experience identifying particular examples of success or failure or assigning specific codes to play behaviors (e.g., substitution). As with any observational coding system, such experience is necessary to ensure the reliability of the assessment across observers and across play sessions (Salvia, Ysseldyke, & Bolt, 2007). The nature and amount of training depends on the particular form of play assessment involved. With respect to the type of training required for actual intervention implementation, all interventions are grounded in the context of play and thus require no specialized education or training above and beyond the specific interventions themselves. BEST PRACTICES Types of Play Assessment Unlike other forms of early childhood assessment, relatively little activity has occurred in the development of play assessment techniques. Of those that exist, only three have been described in enough detail to use in 550 Chapter 33, Volume 2
practice. These three approaches are described in the following section. Play Assessment Scale The Play Assessment Scale (PAS) is designed to evaluate the developing skills of children from 2 to 36 months (Fewell as cited in Athanasiou, 2007). This 45-item scale is developmentally sequenced and is organized into eight age ranges and toy sets so that only a portion of the items are rated for each child. Children are first observed in spontaneous play followed by a facilitated play session, and their play behaviors are coded according to the scale so that a play age can be determined. The play age is composed only of those behaviors observed in spontaneous play. A basal/ceiling approach is used and a conversion chart allows the rater to convert the raw score to the child’s play age. Anyone familiar with the PAS can administer the items and complete the rating scale, but Fewell stresses that the individual rating the child must thoroughly understand the individual PAS items and the play behaviors that would justify that a child possesses the skill reflected in each item. Transdisciplinary Play-Based Assessment The most thoroughly described play assessment technique, Transdisciplinary Play-Based Assessment (TPBA), was developed by Linder (1990, 1993a). Her transdisciplinary approach captures the essence of collaboration in that early childhood service providers and parents work together to find out information about a child’s developmental levels and link it directly to interventions. The team approach is conducted in what she called an ‘‘arena’’ format where individuals from various disciplines observe the child in free play and document the play behaviors. The adults communicate their findings with one another throughout the observational period allowing for a shared perspective on the child’s skill level. General guidelines for conducting the data gathering sessions were published in her ground-breaking book (Linder, 1990). Prior to the play session, the professionals contact the child’s caregiver to find out their concerns and preliminary information on the child’s functioning. The structure of the session takes into account any information obtained from the parents. The observational team consists of a play facilitator who engages with the child, a parent facilitator who is responsible for discussing the process with the parent(s), Play Assessment and Intervention the evaluators, and a person to operate the video camera. A large play area such as a classroom is recommended for the session, but any setting with a variety of toys can be used. Initially, the child plays alone and no structure is imposed upon the activities. The play facilitator can participate but not initiate any of the play. Facilitation occurs in the second phase where the adult attempts to engage the child in activities that have not yet been observed and may be in the child’s repertoire. It is essentially a testing phase. Following the two phases involving adults, the child is then observed playing with another child and then interacting with a parent. A phase of motor play then occurs adhering to the same sequence as the initial play activities. The session ends with a snack, and feedback is provided to the parent(s). The entire session lasts between 60 and 90 minutes. Unique to the Linder model are the detailed coding guidelines. She provides developmental coding schemes for cognitive, social–emotional, communication and language, and sensorimotor development. The applicable ages vary, but, in general, the coding guidelines apply to young children up to 60–72 months of age. Each general category of development (e.g., cognition, communication, motor skills) is subdivided into more specific categories labeled subdomains. These coding guidelines are used to describe a child’s strengths and their area of intervention need. Specific suggestions for intervention are derived from the assessment results (Linder, 1993b). Play in Early Childhood Evaluation System The Play in Early Childhood Evaluation System (PIECES) is the most recently developed and extensively investigated approach to play assessment (Cherney et al., 2003; Kelly-Vance, Gill, Ruane, Cherney, & Ryalls, 1999; Kelly-Vance, Needleman, et al., 1999; Kelly- Vance & Ryalls, 2005; Kelly-Vance et al., 2002; Ryalls et al., 2000). The PIECES grew out of empirical work originally based on Linder’s TPBA cognitive development assessment guidelines. The PIECES approach is both similar to and dissimilar from Linder’s TPBA approach. With regard to assessment procedures, like TBPA, the PIECES assessment involves observation of a child engaged in free play. The PIECES is also similar to Linder’s TPBA in that the assessment can be conducted in any setting with any toy set as long as the toy set is large and varied enough to elicit a wide range of behaviors. Chapter 33, Volume 2 551
Page 1: 33 OVERVIEW Best Practices in Play
Page 5 and 6: This lack of research motivated us
Page 7 and 8: RTI’s conceptual three-tiered mod
Page 9 and 10: feeding the dog, and then petting t
Page 11 and 12: Linder, T. W. (1993b). Transdiscipl

Best Practices in Play Assessment and Intervention

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?