Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development- Third Edition (Bayley-III) Author: Nancy Bayley (2005) Type: Descriminative

Purpose: * Designed to identify young children with developmental delay and to provide information for intervention planning (Bayley, 2006) * Measure cognitive, language, motor, social-emotional, and adaptive development of children between the ages of 1 month and 42 months * Provide developmental risk indicators that may detect atypical behaviors that warrant further evaluation (but does not provide a diagnosis) Development: * Based on developmental research and theory that identifies behaviors typifying normal development in young children * The third edition was designed to improve the quality and utility of the previous editions * Five phases of development in which goals for revision were identified and literature reviewed, pilot and mini pilot studies were completed to refine item order, look at content, relevance of the items, adequacy of the floors and ceilings, evidence for validity was obtained, and standardization was completed. * Designed to meet federal and state guidelines for early assessment Demographics: * Designed for children between the ages of 1 month and 42 months, all races, and all ethnicities * Normative information is based on a national standardization sample representative of the U.S. population for infants 1 month to 42 months of age and stratified based on data from the October 2000 U.S. Bureau of the Census * Normative sample 1700 children with an equal number of male and female participants and stratified along parent education level, race/ethnicity, and geographic region. Components: * Comprised of five distinct scales that yield scores for five developmental domains: cognitive (91 items), language (expressive 48 items and receptive 49 items) motor (fine motor 66 items and gross motor 72 items), social-emotional (questionnaire completed by the caregiver adapted from the Greenspan Social Emotional Growth Chart: A Screening Questionaire for Infants and Young Children developed by Stanley Greenspan, MD), adaptive behaviour (questionnaire completed by the caregiver based on the item and skill areas of the parent/primary caregiver form of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment SystemSecond Edition).

T. Kolobe, 2010

A testing kit and rolling transport bag is provided to transport the testing materials.

Administration: * Examiners using the Bayley-III should have training and experience in the administration of comprehensive developmental assessments, be able to build rapport with infants and toddlers, have the ability to follow standardized administration procedures, score and interpret results, and understand psychometric statistics (Bayley, 2006). * Examples of qualified administrators include psychologists, psychiatrists, speech and language therapists, occupational and physical therapists, developmental pediatricians, and pediatric nurse practitioners. Albers and Grieve (2008) note examiners should have graduate training or professional experience that enables them to remain consistent with the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. * Parents are encouraged to stay with the child but not assist with item adminstration * Can be administered by a multidisciplinary team as part of an arena evaluation * Administration time for infants 12 months and younger is about 50 minutes and up to 90 minutes for children 13 months and older * Training video and courses are available Scoring/Interpretation: * The administration manual provides directions for administration of the items and scoring criteria for each item. * The starting point is designated by the childs age (adjusted for prematurity if necessary). * The motor, language, and cognitive scales basal levels are determined by receiving credit for three consecutive items and the ceiling levels are determined when no credit is received for five consecutive items. * Items are scored as 1 (credit) or 0 (no credit) * Four types of norm-referenced scores can be obtained: scaled scores, composite scores (language scale, motor scale and adaptive behavior scale), percentile ranks and growth scores. Confidence intervals are provided for the five subtests and developmental age equivalents are available for the cognitive, receptive and expressive communication, fine and gross motor subtests. Growth scores can be used to plat the childs growth over time based on the subtest total raw score. Standardization: * The standardization sample included children born at 36 to 42 weeks gestation without significant medical complications and were not currently diagnosed or receiving treatment (including medicine) for mental, physical, or behavioral disabilities. * Exclusion criteria: children receiving Early Childhood Intervention services, a diagnosis of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, chromosomal abnormality, congenital infections, disorder to prenatal exposure to toxic substances, disorders T. Kolobe, 2010

* *

reflecting disturbance of the development of the nervous system, genetic or congenital disorder, mental retardation, inborn errors of metabolism, intravetricular hemorrhage, respiratory disorder, severe attachment disorder, severe sensory impairment, low birth weight, prematurity and children currently admitted to a hospital, mental or psychiatric facility (Bayley, 2006). In order to accurately represent the population of infants and toddlers a representative proportion of children (9.8%of the overall sample) with diagnoses including Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, pervasive developmental disorder, premature birth, language impairment, and at risk for developmental delay were added to the sample Specific instructions and methods for scoring and administration of the items are provided. Not recommended for children with severe physical or sensory impairments

Reliability: * Evidence for internal consistency was obtained using split-half method with the the normative sample and the average reliability coefficients for the subtests were calculated using Fischers z transformation: cognitive .91, receptive communication .87, expressive communication .91, fine motor .86, gross motor .91, language composite .93 motor composite .92 * Evidence of internal consistency reliability for special groups establishes the instrument can be used across several diagnoses. It was determined using a sample of 668 children with nine different diagnoses and the average reliability coefficients for the five subtests ranged from .94 to .98. * Evidence for internal consistency for the social emotional scale was determined from the internal consistency of the Greenspan Social-Emotional Growth Chart using the Fishers z transformation. The coefficients range from .83 to .94 for the social- emotional items and .76 to .91 for the sensory processing items * Evidence for internal consistency for the adaptive behavior scale is determined from the internal consistency of the Adaptive Behavior Assessment SystemSecond Edition (ABAS-II) and coefficients range from .86 to .98 * Test-retest reliability was determined in a study of 197 children placed into four age groups 2-4 mo (n=50) 9-13 mo (n=50) 19-26 mo (n=49) and 33-42 mo (n=47) and correlations ranged from .67 to.94. Average stability coefficients were .80 or greater across all ages (Albers & Grieve, 2008). Validity: * Construct validity established in a series of studies that found all intersubtest correlations statistically significant and correlations between the scales was in the low to moderate range (Bayley, 2006). For example coginitive items correlated higher with the cognitive scale than the motor scale. Spittle and others (2008), note construct validity is present in the increase in scores with age. children with Down syndrome, PDD, cerebral palsy and high risk for developmental delay performed significantly lower than the control children T. Kolobe, 2010

in the normative sample (greater than 1 standard deviation below the mean) *Concurrent validity Correlation between the language composite of the Bayley-III and the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-Second Edition (BSID-II) mental Index: r=.47 Correlation between the motor composite of the Bayley-III and motor index of BSID-II: r=.60 Correlation between the cognitive composite of the Baley-III and the BSID-II mental index: r=.60 Correlation between the Bayley-III social-emotional composite and the BSID rating scale: r=.38. Albers and Grieve (2008) note the authors attribute the low correlation to the new format and items included in the Bayley-III. Correlations between the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of IntelligenceThird Edition, verbal, performance and full scales and the Bayley-III cognitive scale: r=.72-.79 Correlation between the Preschool Language Scale-Fourth edition subscales and the Bayley-III: r=.51-.71 Correlation between the Peabody Developmental Motor Skills- Second Edition (PDMS-2) motor subtests and quotients and the Baley-III motor scales: r=.55-.59 Correlation between the ABAS-II and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior ScaleInterview Edition domain scores and composite score: r= .58-.70 Strengths: * Normative sample is representative of the U.S. population in 2000. * About 10% of the normative sample is made up of children with clearly defined diagnoses * Strong internal consistency * Moderate to high correlation scores for validity with tests such as PDMS-2, ABAS-II, BSID-II in areas that measure similar domains * Allows for parental input * Describes accommodations and adaptations that can be implemented for children with physical or sensory disabilities and provides guidelines on whether the accommodations and adaptations null the standardization and if the norm referenced scores are still valid in situations when accommodations or adaptations are used * The five scales correspond to the Individuals with Disabilities Act guidelines for early childhood Weaknesses: * Bayley-III can not be used to obtain a norm-referenced score for a severely physically or sensory impaired child (may underestimate the childs ability as administration in the standardized manner may place the child at a disadvantage) * Children and families in who were not proficient in the English language were not included in the normative sample * Inter-rater reliability has not been established T. Kolobe, 2010

* *

* *

No evidence to support predictive validity or how intervention in improved with the use of the Bayley-III Spittle and colleagues (2008) note the Bayley-III reports no statistical difference in the scores of term infants and those born pre-term on the gross motor scale which may limit its ability to detect minimal motor problems in pre-term infants Not all items needed for test administration are included in the kit Administration and scoring can be time consuming

Recommendations * Use to discriminate motor development in children between 1 and 42 months old as normal or atypical. * Appropriate for arena evaluation setting if possible to allow a multidisciplinary approach. * Do not use as a measure of intelligence or to predict academic achievement. Ordering Information PsychCorp www.PsychCorp.com 1.800.211.8378

References Albers, C. and Grieve, A. (2007). Test review: Bayley, N. (2006). Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment. 25 (2), 180-190. Bayley, N. (2005). Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development-Third Edition: Administration Manual. San Antonio, TX. Harcourt Assessment. Spittle, A., Doyle, L., Boyd, R. (2008). A systematic review of the clinimetric properties of neuromotor assessments for preterm infants during the first year of life. Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology, 50, 254-266.

T. Kolobe, 2010