Assessment of Students With Sensory Disabilities: Evidence-Based Practices

Abstract

Students with sensory disabilities comprise less than 2% of all children and youth with disabilities and only two tenths of 1% of the entire school-age population (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2012). The low prevalence of sensory disabilities combined with broad geographic disbursement results in a lack of knowledge about evidence-based practices, simply because education personnel lack experience with these students. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of evidence-based practices in the area of assessment for students with sensory disabilities. This article begins with a brief description of students who are deaf or hard of hearing, students who are visually impaired, and students who are deafblind. This is followed by a description of the methods used in our search for evidence-based practices on assessment across these disabilities. The evidence-based practices and levels of evidence are then presented for each group of students. Although some evidence-based practices discussed for one disability group likely apply to another, research may not have been conducted on its application to other groups of learners, so it cannot appear as an evidencebased practice.

Cognitive Assessment of Children Who Are Deafblind: Perspectives and Suggestions for Assessments

“…The assessor should understand that the use of formal cognitive tests to obtain psychometric data in a more standardized manner may not be appropriate, when assessing a child who is deafblind. “Standardized instruments require precise administration procedures that may not allow enough flexibility to accommodate the needs of children who are deafblind” ( Bruce et al, 2018 , p. 85). However, if standardized normative cognitive tests are used it should consider the communicative challenges, psychosocial issues, and support needs of the individual child.…”

“…An individualized assessment begins with understanding the sensory functions of a child who is deafblind. “Assessment of children who are deafblind should include functional vision and hearing evaluations to augment information from the audiology and ophthalmology reports” ( Bruce et al, 2018 , p. 86). Besides, the functional vision and hearing assessment must include assessment of brain related visual and hearing loss (i.e., CVI and APD) when suspected ( Nicholas et al, 2019 ).…”

“…They are diverse in their sensory impairments, cognitive capabilities, and vulnerabilities. Notably, children who are deafblind “differ by type and level of hearing and vision loss, age of onset of vision and hearing loss, physical and health issues, cognitive functioning, expressive and receptive communication forms, and educational histories” ( Bruce et al, 2018 , p. 80). Besides, factors related to the etiology of deafblindness and co-existing neurological conditions associated with or completely independent from the etiology (i.e., epileptic seizures, cranial nerve problems, motor impairments, brain malformations, and brain related processing disorders), jointly may influence cognitive performance.…”

“…A child who is deafblind “face greater demands compared to sighted and hearing children in understanding how to relate to the surrounding world” ( Bruce et al, 2018 , p. 85). Access to the environment is limited in a child who is deafblind, which results in fragmented experiences and reduced learning opportunities.…”

Exploring alternative assessments for signing deaf candidates

“…Deaf candidates are a small and heterogeneous group amongst all pupils taking public examinations. While in the USA there have been many studies about exam and assessment accommodations (Bruce, Luckner, & Ferrell, ; Cawthon & Leppo, ; Cawthon, ; Cawthon, ; Higgins et al, ), in other countries, there has been much less research. The purpose of this article is to compare public examination arrangements in the USA and the UK to explore access that deaf candidates have.…”