The assessment of young children in early childhood special education is a central area of educational practice. The results of child assessments often have significant implications for young children, their families, and the programs that serve them, including eligibility for special education services, instructional planning, and documentation of child outcomes. The array of early childhood assessment types and purposes can be challenging to disentangle at the practitioner and policy level. At this time, different types of assessment tools (e.g., norm-referenced and criterion-referenced) are being used to document the development and learning of children and little attention has been paid to the parallel information produced from different assessment types. The purpose of this study is to compare the assessment results from two types of developmental instruments commonly used (Assessment, Evaluation, and Programming System Second Edition [AEPS 2nd ed.] and Battelle Developmental Inventory II [BDI-2]) to determine their congruence in determining a child’s developmental status (e.g., “on track” or delayed). Results indicate substantive difference between the two measures highlighting the potential for mismeasurement and misinterpretation of child assessment data. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

This paper describes a model of professional development for Early Intervention based on an ongoing project taking place in a Midwestern state in the United States of America. The Project framework is presented as a model for high-quality professional development in Early Intervention by combining a) content including evidencebased practices and recommended practices from national professional organizations; b) university-community-family partnerships, an invaluable component without which the Project would not be possible; and c) tools for effective communication, collaboration, and coaching to support adult learning. As the Project is ongoing, research and program evaluation data are not reported in this paper. However, implications for young children and families, early intervention practitioners and stakeholders, and professional development in both the authors’ local context and the wider global context are discussed.

To ensure the fidelity of implementation of early intervention (EI) services in natural environments (NE), new types of partnerships are needed to systematically address this challenge. This paper describes one approach for effective professional development (PD) in EI to address the lack of systematic supports and PD for EI providers working with families in EI. The Early Intervention in Natural Environments Community of Practice (CoP) project was a six month study that endeavored to support previously trained EI providers in refining the use of their everyday practices. Given the potential of this approach for improving practices and child/family outcomes in the USA as well as in Europe through the development, implementation, and sustainability of a comprehensive system of ongoing PD, the NE CoP program evaluation plan and preliminary results are shared in their entirety.