SPE 527 Webinar 2 Conducting Skills Assessments Agenda

  • Post category:Nursing
  • Reading time:8 mins read
  • Post author:

SPE 527 Webinar 2 Conducting Skills Assessments Agenda

Nursing homework help

1. 2. 3. What: what are skills assessments? Why: what is the purpose of skills assessments? How: how to conduct a skills assessment What are Skills Assessments

● ● ● Most are Criterion-Referenced Assessments ○ They compare a child’s performance to a pre-determined criteria, but not to other children ○ Most are developmentally sequenced so that they provide a reasonably clear picture of a child’s strengths and weaknesses ○ Examples: VBMAPP, AFLS, ABLLS Some could be Curriculum-Based Assessments ○ They measure a child’s progress on a specific curriculum, such as in academics ○ CBA and CRA are not mutually exclusive – many criterion-referenced assessments also include a curriculum on which a child’s progress is also measured Few Norm-Referenced Assessments are used for skills programming development, though they could ○ Standardized assessments that compare a child’s performance to that of a normative sample ○ Produce standardized scores that allow comparison to other children of the same age as well as to other standardized assessments ○ Example: Vineland Skills Assessments Specific to Building ABA Treatment Programs for Children with Autism Why: The Purpose of Skills Assessments ● ● ● ● ● Identify learner strengths Identify learner areas of need Identify baseline/present levels of performance against some criteria Determine socially significant goals and objectives Monitor progress How to Conduct Skills Assessments 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Intake – interview with caregivers about overall child development and needs, current repertoires, and developmental history Observation – observing the child to look at development is targeted areas, such as communication or play Structured Interview – asking caregivers questions from the assessment you are using, to get an initial understanding of the child’s abilities (note, you can also at this stage answer the questions yourself, if you know this learner well) Direct Assessment – sitting down with the child and probing specific skills that the observation or interview did not reveal; PEAK is a direct assessment Scoring – marking a score on a protocol or scoring grid to reveal strengths and weaknesses Identify Targets for Instruction – with the caregiver(s) or IEP team, determine which of the weaker areas are priorities for instruction Structured Interview/Personal Scoring vs. Direct Probes or Direct Assessment ● ● ● ● AFLS, ABLLS, and VBMAPP are all set up as “questions” that can be presented to caregivers, or you can reflect on yourself if you know the learner well. Answers to these questions lead to specific scoring criteria. If the answer to the question is too vague or the respondent doesn’t know the child’s ability in some area, then the skill should be individually probed. A probe means you sit down with the child and the necessary materials, and ask them to do the skill. You indicate on the scoring sheet whether they did it independently or not; in some cases you indicate the number of times they did something. A direct assessment, in the case of PEAK, involves following a script to assess specific target skills using commercially available materials For this Course: Skills Assessment Project STEPS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Decide and obtain the assessment you want to complete – you will really do one! Identify a “client” to assess and obtain necessary permissions. Read through the entire assessment to decide which two domains (skill or sub skill areas) you want to assess (and if appropriate, which level) – if doing PEAK, skip this step. Review how to give and score the assessment in advance; in the case of PEAK, you may wish to practice a few times first! Conduct the assessment. Score the assessment. Write the report (follow that rubric!!!!). Submit project (Module 4!). Skills Assessment Project – VBMAPP Scoring Scoring Grid Skills Assessment Project – AFLS GR 11 , g ss in Flo Scoring Grid Skills Assessment Project PEAK Rubric ASR 2 Webinar 2

  Excellent Good Fair Poor
Main Posting 45 (45%) – 50 (50%)

Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.

 

Supported by at least three current, credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

40 (40%) – 44 (44%)

Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.

 

Supported by at least three credible sources.

 

Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.

35 (35%) – 39 (39%)

Responds to some of the discussion question(s).

 

One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.

 

Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Post is cited with two credible sources.

 

Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Contains some APA formatting errors.

0 (0%) – 34 (34%)

Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.

 

Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.

 

Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.

 

Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.

 

Contains only one or no credible sources.

 

Not written clearly or concisely.

 

Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.

 

Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.

Main Post: Timeliness 10 (10%) – 10 (10%)

Posts main post by day 3.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not post by day 3.

First Response 17 (17%) – 18 (18%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

15 (15%) – 16 (16%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

13 (13%) – 14 (14%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 12 (12%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Second Response 16 (16%) – 17 (17%)

Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.

 

Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.

 

Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

14 (14%) – 15 (15%)

Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.

 

Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.

 

Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.

 

Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.

 

Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.

12 (12%) – 13 (13%)

Response is on topic and may have some depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.

 

Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.

0 (0%) – 11 (11%)

Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.

 

Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.

 

Responses to faculty questions are missing.

 

No credible sources are cited.

Participation 5 (5%) – 5 (5%)

Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.

0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%) 0 (0%) – 0 (0%)

Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.

Total Points: 100