Best Practices in Play Assessment and Intervention

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Best Practices in School Psychology V the purposes of play assessment, it is important that all toys are visible and accessible to the child. In addition, similar toys (e.g., dolls and doll-related toys) should be grouped together to encourage thematic play. Finally, while the playroom should be neatly organized, it need not be pristine, and, in fact, a mild level of disarray may be helpful to encourage certain types of behaviors. Specifically, problem-solving behavior is often observed when children attempt to assemble puzzles and construct train tracks, so leaving them somewhat unassembled is recommended. Facilitated Versus Nonfacilitated Play Some play assessment approaches involve significant levels of facilitation and/or modeling, often requiring the reproduction of very specific play behaviors. We believe, however, best practice involves a nonfacilitated, free-play situation with minimal direction. Our rationale is twofold. First, eliminating facilitation from the format helps ensure a more standardized session, which removes facilitator bias and increases the likelihood of obtaining high levels of reliability across raters, children, and sessions. Second, there is empirical evidence that facilitation either has no effect or, conversely, has a negative impact and children’s ratings are actually lower after adult direction (King, et al., 2003). One exception to this guideline concerns questions about skills that may not have been demonstrated during the session or potentially emerging skills. It is appropriate to attempt to elicit behaviors described in certain supplemental subdomains, such as drawing and/or counting, that do not spontaneously occur for many children. Similarly, if there are questions about the upper limits of some emerging behaviors it is acceptable to attempt to elicit such behaviors, particularly when developing interventions. Instead of facilitating play in a traditional sense, parents and play team members may participate in child-directed play and verbal praise. In addition, adults should redirect children (e.g., ‘‘What else can you play with?’’) who continue to play with the same toy in the same manner for 5 minutes or longer. This is an attempt to vary the play behaviors during the session but not to encourage any specific type of play. Presence of Peers Another form of social interaction involves the presence of a peer in the play assessment process. This approach is appropriate for evaluating social interactions but may have limited utility when determining cognitive functioning. Mendez (2005) and Fredenberg (2004) analyzed the impact that same-age peers had on a child’s cognitive functioning and found that it did not improve the level of play. In fact, evidence suggests that different characteristics in peers elicit different types of play. Given that our goal is to standardize play assessment procedures, it would follow that peer interactions are not a necessary component of the session. Describing Children’s Play Children’s cognitive levels can be described by using the PIECES coding guidelines. Practitioners should familiarize themselves with the guidelines and use it to analyze a child’s skills and areas that may need intervention. The play behaviors are documented by videotape (or live play if videotape is not available). Specific examples of play should be noted as they apply to the core and supplemental subdomains. Then the behaviors are compared to the coding guidelines and the child’s highest level of play is noted for all subdomains. In addition, practitioners may also want to document the type of play that was seen most frequently in each subdomain. Finally, the child’s age equivalents from the PIECES subdomains are compared to his or her chronological age and discrepancies are noted. Best Practice in the Use of Play Assessment Data in an RTI Model Given the requirement of systematic, data-based practice of RTI, play assessment and intervention is a logical choice for school psychologists working in early childhood settings. Play assessment and intervention have several features that make it appealing in an RTI model of practice. The developmental sequence described in play assessment coding schemes allows practitioners to monitor progress in a logical and empirically validated manner, and data can be collected regularly and with minimal environmental modification. Play assessment is one piece of data that can be collected and integrated with other assessment approaches to gain a complete picture of the child’s level of performance. In contrast to standardized tests that can be difficult for parents to comprehend and find useful, the information obtained from a play assessment is easy for parents to understand. Providing interventions in the play context is also a logical format, and early childhood teachers and parents of young children are arguably more likely to demonstrate treatment adherence if they find the process credible. 554 Chapter 33, Volume 2
RTI’s conceptual three-tiered model can be applied to play assessment and intervention (see Table 2). The first tier parallels general education in the school-aged population. In early childhood, this tier applies best to families, child care centers, parent resource facilities, and community agencies. School district personnel and educational service units can disseminate general information about child development, how to observe children’s play to determine where they are functioning, how to promote cognitive development through appropriate play activities, and who to contact if a child is not meeting developmental milestones. The goal at this tier is for families and early childhood caretakers to have access to the information and implement simple, basic procedures of play assessment and intervention. Research indicates that mothers have a basic understanding of the order of play development but know less about specific developmental milestones in play than milestones in other domains such as language and motor development (Tamis-LeMonda, Chen, & Bornstein, 1998; Tamis-LeMonda, Shannon, & Spellmann, 2002). If a parent or childcare worker has concerns about a child’s development, contact can be made to the school district or educational service unit, and Tier 2 interventions will be considered. In Tier 2, a formal play assessment is conducted by a school psychologist, and the child’s strengths and areas of intervention need are determined. Based on this play assessment data, interventions are then developed collaboratively with the professional who conducted the play assessment and the individual(s) responsible for intervention implementation. Possible intervention providers include parents, preschool teachers, and child care providers. Given their knowledge of data-based decision-making and intervention development, school psychologists are an obvious choice for the role of consultant with these cases. This role includes interpreting assessment data, scripting the intervention, and monitoring the progress of the intervention. If a child is in a preschool or daycare center, small group interventions may be appropriate and the consultant could develop a protocol for several children with similar needs. Otherwise, individual interventions may be required. Incidentally, the frequent use of individual intervention at this level contrasts what generally occurs with school-aged children where small group interventions are most common at Tier 2. In both individual and small group interventions, a goal is determined and the child’s progress is regularly monitored by the service provider. At this tier, progress is determined by using the play assessment coding scheme and periodically evaluating the child’s rate of progress toward a goal. Because of potential for rapid change in early childhood, frequent monitoring is recommended. Tier 3 is a more intense version of Tier 2 and may require that a child spend a trial placement in an early intervention program. The intervention is more intensely implemented, progress monitoring data are collected more frequently, and a team of early childhood professionals should be included to consider whether the child is eligible for special education services. At both Tiers 2 and 3, a play assessment coding scheme provides a benchmark for where a child should be functioning and can help teams evaluate a child’s discrepancy from peers, rate of progress, and amount of support needed to ensure progress. If the child continues to be functioning significantly below his or her peer and is not progressing at a rate that would indicate he or she may catch up, early intervention services through special education should be considered and a full evaluation conducted. The child’s response to the play intervention should be a major consideration in the eligibility decision. Case Illustrations Table 2. Play Assessment and Intervention in a Three-Tiered RTI Model Play Assessment and Intervention As can be gleaned from the information above, play assessment and intervention can be effectively used in an RTI model at all three tiers. In this section we will present two case examples to illustrate more specifically how this process would unfold. The first case will exemplify the first tier and describe how information about play can help a parent better understand his or her child’s development and determine whether the child is progressing appropriately. The second case will address the second and third Approach and intervention Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Assessment approach Screening Monthly or bimonthly Intense frequency (weekly or more) Intervention approach General skills Small groups Small group or individual Service delivery approach Informational Consultation and/or direct services Consultation and intensive direct services Intervention agents Parents Parents, teachers, childcare providers Parents, teachers, childcare providers, and special education support staff Chapter 33, Volume 2 555
Page 1 and 2: 33 OVERVIEW Best Practices in Play
Page 3 and 4: practice. These three approaches ar
Page 5: This lack of research motivated us
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?