FILAMER CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

Accredited Level IV – ACSCU-ACI
Roxas City, Capiz

Chapter 3

Developmental vs Disability Perspective in Assessment

Authentic assessment involves two often complimentary perspectives in gathering

and analyzing data. The developmental and disability perspectives is assessment allow the
assessor to holistically view the child both from sociocultural and physiological lens.
Balancing these two perspectives will result in a more accurate profiling of the strengths,
potentials, and priority needs of a child with disability. A thorough understanding of the
principles of “normal” and atypical child development, along with knowledge of the clinical
profile of specific disabilities particularly prognosticating factors, can result in a credibly
authentic assessment.

 Changing Paradigms of Disability: The Sociocultural and Physiological Views

 Understanding “Normal” and Atypical Child Development
 The Whole Child Perspective as a Function of Development and Disability

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After reading this chapter, you are expected to:

1. debate on the changing paradigms of disability from a deficit perspective to a

strength-based perspective, based on the right-based approach and a
growing emphasis on individuality;
2. explain the principles of “normal” development and compare this with atypical
child development; and
3. analyze how the developmental and disability perspectives in the assessment
of the whole child can contribute to the credibility of the assessment process.
KEY TERMS
Physiological View of Disability Sociocultural View of Disability
UN-CRPD Person-First Language
Deaf Culture Batas Pambansa 344
Neuromaturational Theory Developmental Delay
Experiential Learning Whole Child Perspective
Atypical Development International Classification of
Functioning (ICF)
Changing Paradigms of Disability: The Sociocultural and Physiological Views

Disability has traditionally been viewed from a deficits perspective. Assessment

serves to determine how far a child’s abilities are from norm-referenced expectations. When
a child is referred for special education, the child’s disability often becomes the focus of
intervention, rather than looking beyond the limitations imposed by the disability. Labels and
diagnosis define the child. This is physiological view of disability. The child is seen as
“impaired” and lacking; thus, he/she needs to be “fixed”. In order for him/her to function and
adapt, his/her abilities have to approximate the norm. Otherwise, he/she would always be
gauged as deficient. As a result, interventions are geared toward developing skills in the
individual child across different domains of development and functioning. Recommendations
for intervention are more remedial in nature since the expected outcome of assessment
would be a listing of problem areas the need to be worked on in the child with special needs.
For instance, a child with dyslexia would most likely have difficulties with auditory
processing, phonemic awareness, and reading comprehension. The clinical profile of
Dyslexia would be consistent with such language and cognitive deficits. Nonetheless, this
does not paint a complete picture of a child that would be customized for his/her unique
interests, attitude, personality, specific learning requirements, and family resources.

Stereotypes of behavior and functioning are passed on from one context to another,
as children with special needs are discriminated upon by virtue of the labels imposed upon
them. There is a value in identifying gaps in learning and development. There should,
however be a balance in perspective both needs and strengths are emphasized during the
assessment process.

Often, attitudinal barriers brought about by indiscriminate labeling prevent the full
integration of children with special needs into the mainstream of society. School
administrators may outright refuse school admission to a child with special needs, denying
him/her the right to qualify for an entrance test. This however, violates the child’s basic rights
to education. Education is a fundamental human right.

The United Nations Conventions of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities or the
UNN-CRPD (www. ncda.gov.ph) guarantees that “State Parties shall take all necessary
measures to ensure the full enjoyment by children with disabilities of all human rights and
fundamental freedoms on an equal basis with other children.” Furthermore, Section 12 of
Republic Act No.7277, otherwise known of Magna Carta for Persons with Disabilities
(NCDA,2008, stipulates that “It shall be unlawful for any learning institution to a deny a
person with disability admission to any course it offers by reason of handicap or disability.
The State shall take into consideration the special requirements of persons with disabilities
in the formulations of educational policies and programs.”
 There is still a huge gap between what the law stipulates and the exercise of these
laws designed to protect the rights of children with special needs to access quality
education. In reality, less than five percent of Filipino children with special needs have
access to education (DepEd,2005). They remain twice marginalized, both by poverty and
disability. On a global scale, millions of primary school-aged children do not attend school,
90% of them coming from low to lower middle-income countries (UNESCO,2003). The
physiological view perpetuates the segregation of persons with disabilities (PWD’s) as that
the sector of society that deviates significantly from the norm, lacking the capacity to adapt
due to biological deficiencies. Unless their sensory or cognitive faculties are complete,
PWDs would have to struggle to meet the expectations of normalcy. Applied to education,
the physiological view assumes that children belonging to the same disability category have
identical learning profiles, thus, necessitating placement in disability-specific classes. The
child’s educational program revolves around remediating deficits, essentially aiming to “fix”
the child in order to approximate normal development functioning.

Physiological View
“Fix” the Child: Deficits
Perspective; Remediation Model

Sociocultural View

“Fix” the System/Environment; Rights-Based,

Inclusive Approach; Strengths-Based

Figure 3.1. Paradigm Shift: Physiological to Sociocultural View

Over the years, politically correct terminologies have evolved to reflect the changing
paradigm of disability. From viewing disability through a physiological lens that emphasizes
deficits in the child, there is a shift to sociocultural perspective, which recognizes the child as
a function of his/her environment. The child is regarded as a whole person, de-emphasizing
his/her disability. He/She is first and foremost, a child. His/Her disability, though it is
necessary for educational purposes to consider it and its accompanying special learning
requirements, is only one aspect of who he/she is. Politically correct terminology dictates
that the child is mentioned first, instead of referring to the child according to his/her disability.
The child’s disability does not define him/her. To give an example, instead of calling the child
as Down Syndrome (or worse, mongoloid as children with this condition have been
previously called), he/she is referred to as a “child with Down Syndrome.” The same applies
to most other developmental conditions and sensory impairments (see Table 3.1).
 Table 3.1. Politically Correct Terminology: Person-First Language

Past Person-First Language

Autistic Child with Autism
Mentally Retarded Child with Intellectual Disability
Mongoloid Child with Down Syndrome
Learning Disabled Child with Learning Disability
AD/HD Child with AD/HD
Blind Child with Visual Impairment or Blind
Deaf-Mute/Deaf and Deaf
Dumb
Lame/Crippled Child with Orthopedic Handicap
Cerebral Palsy Child with Cerebral Palsy

For children with sensory disabilities such as blindness and deafness, there is no
consensus with regard to what is considered as politically correct. Many blind individuals do
not mind being referred to as “blind” or “with visual impairment” since there are varying
degrees of blindness that are related to the accommodations needed for them to function in
a “seeing world.” Through the years, this has not been an issue within the blind community.
Blindness is one of the oldest disability categories and being blind has generally been
acceptable even among the blind.

On the other hand, the deaf community continues to struggle with a common identity,
as a philosophical issues remain to surface alongside deeply rooted language issues. Some
argue that deafness is not a disability. The deaf speak a different language, that is, sign
language. There is a deaf culture that is distinct from the rest of the hearing world, but is
largely unrecognized. Many do not like to be referred to as “hearing impaired,” commutating
a lack of functional ability; a deficit in hearing that is overemphasized. They prefer to simply
called “deaf.” There is a sense of pride in being deaf and being part of this unique culture
that may be difficult to penetrate for those who can hear and speak. In the deaf world, it is
the hearing who are disabled unless they can proficiently sign and communicate through
their hands.

The World Bank (2014) defines disability as “the result of the interaction between
people with different levels of functioning and an environment that does not take these
differences into account.” Consistent with the sociocultural view, disability as perceived as a
result of physical, social, and learning barriers inherent in a system that excludes children
who do not fit into typical measures of normalcy. Marginalization secondary to a disability is
promoted by practices that do not consider individual differences.

A perfect example would be physical barriers such as installing stairs over ramps in
educational institutions. There are countless examples of students with physical limitations
who have been deprived of an education because of handicapping, structural facilities in
both public and private schools. Although capable of learning alongside peers and maybe
even excelling academically, many students who are wheelchair-bound are forced to drop
out of school because of the daily grueling ascent to the third floor classroom. Without an
able companion, he/she will not be able to independently go to his/her class. Given that
he/she is developmentally at par in all domains except for his/her physical limitations, he/she
would have succeeded as a student, given that the physical environment had been inclusive
and barrier-free.

Batas Pambansa 344, otherwise known as the Accessibility Act (www.ncda.gov.ph),

stipulates that “Educational institutions…shall install and incorporate in such building,
establishment, institution or public utility, such as architectural facilities or structural facilities
or structural features as shall reasonably enhance the mobility of disabled persons such as
sidewalks, ramps, railings, and the like.” The law provides protection for children who are
orthopedically handicapped and who are entitled to their basic right to education. The
physiological view perceives the child as unable to walk, but sociocultural view sees the
environment that needs “fixing”, not the child.

Authentic assessment relies on the recognition of strengths in the individual child.

This would require a paradigm shift from mindset of lack, to one of potential. Considering
that the child has disability, how can his/her current abilities be optimized and what are other
possible avenues for developing talent and creativity? A strengths-based, inclusive, and
right-based approach to assessment challenges the resourcefulness of the assessor while
setting a positive direction program planning. Designing a curriculum from strengths-based
approach encourages student progress and from a parental perspective, highlights the value
of the student. (Layyton & Lock,2008).

Understanding “Normal” and Atypical Child Development

Child development is complicated. An interplay of unique genetic and environmental

factors that influence a child’s early experiences are responsible for the developmental
outcome of every child. There are numerous theories on the child development that must be
considered authentically assess a child with special needs. Table 3.2 summarizes selected
major theories of child development, their major proponents, and basic principles.

Table 3.2. Selected Major Theories of Child Development

Developmental Major Basic Principles

Theory Proponent/s
Behavioral Bandura, Pavlov, Behavior shaping is an outcome of
Skinner observational learning, environmental stimulus,
response, and consequences.
 Cognitive Montessori, Development of thinking and active learning
Piaget, Vygotsky progress in stages of increasing complexity.
Ecological Brofenbrenner The child’s environment strongly influences
development, emphasizing the family unit as a
major factor in learning.
Neuromaturational Bobath, Bayley, Child development is directly related to brain
Gessel maturation and readiness to learn while
following a set sequence.

An understanding of these developmental theories is necessary from the time the

assessment procedure is being specifically designed for a child with special needs, to the
analysis of assessment data. The National Association for the Education of Young Children
(NAEYC) has enumerated the 12 Principles of Child Development and Learning
(www.naeyc.org) that can serve as a guide in further understanding “normal” and atypical
child development.

1. All areas of development and learning are important.

In an interdisciplinary team, professionals may tend to be biased toward developing
skills that are within their area of expertise. The physical therapist may prioritize gross-motor
skills and mobility; the Occupational Therapist may regard behavior, handwriting, and daily
living skills as being outmost importance; the Speech-language Pathologist may prioritize
communication above all the other skills; and the SPED teacher may emphasize academic
competencies in literacy and mathematics as priority areas. Learning in all developmental
domains, however, is important in the holistic development of the child. There may be some
identified priority areas according to the family’s expectations at set periods of development
(e.g., during the early intervention years, learning to walk may be the family’s priority for a
child with Global Developmental Delay), but all other developmental domains should be
considered in planning for both home and school interventions.

2. Learning and development follow sequences.

The neuromaturational theory of development emphasizes the progression of learned
skills according to set sequences, related to the growing complexity of the child’s central
nervous system. Development proceeds from simple to complex (babbling to meaningful
one-word utterances); gross to fine (grasping the baby bottle to picking up objects using
isolated thumb-index finger movement); head to foot or cephalocaudal progression
(developing head and trunk control before leg control and stability); and proximodistal
progression (attaining core muscle strength and balance in sitting before being able to use
the hands for reaching and manipulation). Following the normal sequence of development is
important particularly for training motor skills in children with poor muscle tone or hypotonia,
such as in children with Down Syndrome (Haley, 1986).

3. Development and learning proceed at varying rates.

There may be norm-referenced developmental milestones that specify particular
ages when developmental skills have to be attained, but these usually span a range of
several months when variations are still considered acceptable. There are individual
differences in children rate of learning due to biological and environmental factors that
influence the learning of these skills. An example would be gender differences wherein most
boys learn how to walk earlier than girls, while most girls talk earlies than boys. A lack of
opportunity to practice skills will most likely cause a delay in the achievement of
developmental milestones. For instance, a child who is over dependent on a nanny can miss
the opportunity to learn how to feed by himself/herself and dress by himself/herself, as
appropriate for his/her age. According to the Division of the Early Childhood (DEC) Position
Statement on the classification of Developmental Delay, this “does not refer to a condition in
which a child is slightly or momentarily lagging in development… It is an indication that the
process of development is significantly affected and that without special intervention, it is
likely that educational performance at school age will be affected” (Simpson & Warmer,
2010, p.212). Not all developmental delays are therefore eligible for special education,
considering that their individual variations in development.

4. Development and learning result from an interaction of maturation and

experience.
Both biological and environmental factors play a role in the development of a child
with special needs (Gargiulo & Kilgo, 2014). Early intervention bridges the gap between what
the child is inherently capable of becoming, given his/her particular disability and the
experiences that would be enable him/her to optimize his/her potentials to the fullest. There
is a parenting phenomenon wherein parents over-schedule their children and bombard them
with all possible interventions, setting their hopes on accelerating development with the
frequency of structured learning opportunities. The human brain, however, in spite of its
plasticity and responsiveness to stimuli, has its own pace of building synapses and
developing accordingly. The brain’s capacity to learn varies with age, genetic differences,
function, and stimulation. For learning to take place, both neutral maturation and experiential
factors are valuable predictors of development.

5. Early experiences have profound effects on development and learning

A substantial amount of research has proven the effectiveness of early intervention

for children with special needs (Bruder, 2010). The period from zero to seven years old has
been considered as the critical period of development, otherwise known as “ the window of
opportunity”, when the brain acts like a sponge in its capacity to absorb large amounts of
information. Maria Montessori, the developmental theorist who has contributed greatly to
early childhood special education, highlights these sensitive periods of development when
childhood experiences are crucial to learning. According to Gargiulo and Kilgo (2014), early
intervention has the following significant benefits; (a) it prevents or minimizes the effects of a
handicapping condition upon a child’s growth and development; (b) it maximizes
opportunities to engage in the normal activities of early childhood; and (c) it supports and
empowers the families in accomplishing their goals. The impact of early childhood
experiences cannot be undermined. For children with special needs, these experiences
increase their chances of being mainstreamed into schools where they can learn with
typically developing peers and wherein their intelligence and creativity can be honed to the
fullest.

6. Development proceeds toward greater complexity, self-regulation, and symbolic

or representational capacities.
 Children learn by actively constructing knowledge. Jean Piaget explained cognitive
development as a progression in stages of increasing complexity: 0-2 years old,
Sensorimotor stage; 2-7 years old, Preoperational Stage; 7-11 years old, Concrete
Operational Stage; 12 years old to adulthood, Formal Operations Stage. Even for children
with AD/HD, Symptoms of hyperactivity and impulsivity begin to taper as they learn to
regulate their emotions with behavioural support mechanisms (www.webmd.com). In terms
of learning appropriate behaviours, intrinsic motivation replaces external reinforcements
(such as tangible rewards) for establishing good behaviors. On the other hand, in learning
academic concepts like in the study of mathematics, the use of concrete objects to count
and make sets is later on replaced by numerical representations that lay the foundation for
solving mathematical operations. The same is true with language development when
vocabulary is initially built with actual reference to or pictures of familiar people and common
objects. These are eventually expanded using word associations embedded in literary
material targeting reading comprehension.

7. Children develop best when they have secure relationships.

The study of Tomasello et al. (2010) has proven that providing family- centered care
to children with disabilities is an essential component of high-quality early intervention
services. Families are considered as the experts in their children’s education and supportive
interventions. Bronfenbrenner, in his ecological theory of child development, stresses the
role and influence of the family in facilitating learning. The emotional well-being of the child,
grounded in having secure attachments to significant others, is of primary importance in
ensuring that he/she would learn to the best of his/her ability.

8. Development and learning occur in and are influenced by multiple social and
cultural contexts.

The sociocultural framework of Vygotsky (1981) illustrates how societal and cultural
influences impact the development of a child. The child cannot be seen apart from the family
and the community he/she belongs to. According to McAfee and Leong (2011), the context
of the child can either be hindering or supporting development and learning. Some of the
possible contextual factors would be the placement and arrangement of furniture and
equipment in a learning environment, the choice of instructional materials, the amount of
environmental distractions, and on the pace and quality of learning of a child with special
needs. In the same manner, these contextual variables are important to consider when
conducting an authentic assessment that is usually done in the child’s natural setting.

9. Children learn in a variety of ways.

There is no one way to learn, and the phrase “one size fits all” does not apply to
teaching and learning. Research has proven that children learn differently; thus, there is a
need to use a variety of strategies to cater to the diversity of learning needs. The concept of
Learning Styles and Gardner’s Theory of Multiple of Intelligences (1993) both present ways
by which individual learning strengths are recognized. Naturalistic data obtained through an
authentic assessment relies heavily on recognizing uniqueness of talent (linguistic,
mathematical-logical, visual-spatial, musical, bodily-physical, interpersonal, intrapersonal,
and naturalistic) and preferred sensory modalities (visual, auditory, tactile, and kinaesthetic)
as possible avenues for optimizing developmental potential (Layton & Lock, 2008).

10. Play is an important vehicle for developing self-regulation and promoting

language, cognition, and social competence.

The primary preoccupation of children is play. Child development theorist generally

support play as a valuable means of understanding how children think and learn. When
assessing children with special needs using play-based assessment, a simple play activity
can elicit performance across several developmental domains. For example, ball throwing
and catching can measure gross-motor skills (ability to throw and catch a ball as a
developmental milestone), attention span (without which the child cannot catch the ball),
receptive language (ability to follow the commands “throw” and “catch” and practice turn-
taking as a pre-requisite to communication), self-regulation (ability to wait and keep still),
and the capacity to engage in associative play with peers (indicative of social competence,
language, and cognition). Play can engage children much more than any other activity
intended to measure learning and development.

11. Development and learning advance when children are challenged.

Learning only takes place when children go beyond their comfort zones and attempt
to perform a new task. Repetitively performing a learned skill is not actually learning, but
simply practicing to do task. Transferring this learning, however, to practical situations and
novel contexts can qualify as real learning. For instance, children with Autism who are by
nature, comfortable with structure, are extremely challenged when faced with new
environments. They may know how to cross a street during simulation activities when they
are trained to walk when they see a visual cue (a green stoplight sign) and stop walking
when they see another visual cue (a red stoplight sign). Authentic assessment would require
observing the child generalize this learned skill to a naturalistic context wherein he/she
would have to cross the pedestrian lane in a real intersection, following cues from an actual
stoplight.

12. Children’s experiences shape their motivation and approaches to learning.

Experiential learning, as explained by David Kolb (www.psychology.about.com), is

“the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience.” Kolb
classified learners into “watchers” (reflective observation” and “doers” (active
experimentation). Whether children have actually witnessed or participated in an experience,
such experience would influence their desire to learn more and how they would engage in
the learning process. A child who has had a positive experience during an assessment may
be expected to be a cooperative during succeeding assessments. On the other hand, if the
experience with a prior assessment has been a traumatic one, it can have an effect on how
much relevant data is gathered a useful evidence for arriving at a strengths-based
assessment.
 A thorough understanding of “normal” child development is necessary to gauge
whether a development is “atypical” or can still be explained by the complexities of child
development that account for individual differences among children. There are, however
instances when development grossly deviates from the norm and these disparities should be
understood in the light of existing disability categories. In such instances, a disability
perspective can provide useful information with regard to establishing prognosis and
recommending evidence-based interventions as an outcome of authentic assessment.

The Whole Child Perspective as a Function of Development and Disability

The child with special needs is first and foremost a child. He/she may be developing
in a way that differs from most other children his/her age, but he/she is definitely a unique
individual who can be appreciated most when his/her strengths are recognized. The Whole
Child Perspective emphasizes the developmental potential of the child, while acknowledging
inherent limitations as a result of an underlying disability.

In chapter 2, the purposes of assessment have been outlined depending on the

child’s phase of development and learning (early intervention, K-12 years, and transition
phase to adulthood). One of these purposes is special education eligibility. In the United
States of America, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, provide for the
classification entitles students to benefit from free special education and related services.
This is the main reason why such disability categories exist. They are, however, not meant
to stereotype students and promote unnecessary labelling beyond fulfilling the purpose of
classification for special education eligibility.

Based on the 2000 census, there are 942,098 Filipinos with disabilities, comprising
1.23% population (Philippine Coalition on the UN-CRPD, 2013). This is way below the
universal estimate of disability equivalent to 10-13% of any population and is an under
representation of the actual national statistics. The census classified persons with disabilities
persons with disabilities using the following impairment categories: (1) visual; (2) hearing; (3)
speech; (4) mobility; (5) intellectual; (6) Psychosocial; (7) extensive; and (8) various low-
incidence impairments.

On the other hand, Republic Act 7277 or the Magna Carta for Persons with
Disabilities (NCDA 2008), acknowledges the special educational needs of persons with the
following disabilities: (visual impairment; (2) hearing impairment; (3) orthopedic handicaps;
(4) mental retardation (now referred to as intellectual disability); (5) behaviour problems
including Autism; (6) learning disabilities; and (7) multiple handicaps. The gifted and talented
special education circles where in the disparity in funding for the education of students with
disabilities as opposed to the gifted and talented, is being questioned. Incoing et al. (2007)
included speech and language disorders or communication disorders in the categories of
exceptionalities recognized by the Special Education Division of the Philippine Department
that the categorization of disability used by the Philippine government is still not aligned with
the current framework of understanding disability needs from a global perspective.
 The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) is the
global standard used to measure health and disability as recommended by the World Health
Organization since 2001 (WHO,2014). Unlike traditional classifications of disability, the ICF
includes a list of environmental factors that can contribute to a person’s disability. This
modern view of disability looks beyond the medical or biological conceptualization of
dysfunction, and takes into account other contextual factors that can have an impact an
impact on the functioning of the individual. In other words, it is consistent with the
sociocultural view of disability that acknowledges the complex, dynamic interactions of the
person given his/her tasks, and environmental factors which can hinder his/her participation
in specific activities or tasks, and environmental factors which can hinder his/her functioning.
The ICF is unifying framework for classifying the consequences of a health condition.
Adapted from Effgen (2013), figure 3.2 illustrates the interactions between the components
of ICF using the example of a preschool-aged child with Spastic Diplegia Cerebral Palsy.

HEALTH CONDITION
(Spastic Diplegia Cerebral Palsy)

BODY FUNCTIONS AND PARTICIPATION

ACTIVITIES
STRUCTURES (Restrictions in
(Limitations in Walking on
(Limited Mobility of Joins Participation in Preschool
Different Surfaces)
in Lower Half Body) Education)

ENVIRONMENTAL
PERSONAL FACTORS
FACTORS
(Healthy Lifestyle and Age-
(Immediate and Extended
Appropriate Behavior
Family Very Supportive)
Figure 3.2. Sample ICF Components in a Preschool-Aged Child with Cerebral Palsy.

The ICF focuses on determining how children with health conditions can still live
productively and participate maximally in their chosen activities given their individual
circumstances related to both environmental and personal factors. Development and
disability should be viewed as a limiting factor when the assessment environment fails to
differentiate procedures, structures, and tools to accommodate for the diversity student
needs.

Knowledge of the limitations imposed by a specific disability can be useful in planning

necessary accommodations and modifications. Assessment should be designed with the
purpose of accessing learning and discovering potential in the child with special needs.
Table 3.3 summarizes expected delays in development of atypical development in children
(ages0-7) belonging to different disability categories, the purpose of which is to serve as a
guide in planning and administering differentiated assessment, as will be discussed in
Chapter 4. These expected delays, however, do not apply to all since many factors
contribute to individual differences. Some disabilities co-exist such as Autism and intellectual
disability, or AD/HD and specific learning disability. These complicate differentiation and
would require further specialization in assessment.
Table 3.3. Relationship between Developmental Delay/ Atypical Development and Disability
(for children ages 0-7 years old)

Disability Categories GM FM CDG RL EL SE/PS SH

Blind √ √ √ √ X X √
Deaf X X √ √ √ X X
Orthopedically Handicapped √ X X X X X √
Cerebral Palsy √ √ √ √ √ √ √
Intellectual Disability √ √ √ √ √ X √
Autism X √ √ √ √ √ X
AD/HS X X √ X X √ X
Communication Disorders X X X √ √ X X
Specific Learning Disability X √ √ √ X √ X

Legend: √ - Expected Developmental Delay or Atypical Development

X – Normal/ Typical Development

GM - Gross Motor EL - Expressive Language

FM - Fine Motor SE/PS - Socio-

emotional/Psychosocial

COG - Cognitive SH - Self-Help

RL - Receptive Language
 Development is interrelated. A delay in one domain usually affects development in
another domain. For instance, in children who are blind, since they lack vision that accounts
for much of learning during the early years, they tend to exhibit some delays, as well in
developing motor and language skills. Even if they are physically capable of moving about,
children who are blind are limited in their ability to explore their environment during the
sensorimotor years, consistent with Piaget’s theory of cognitive development. This affects
learning coursed through sense of sight. They become apprehensive in exploring by
crawling or walking; thus, limiting learning basic concepts that sighted children
spontaneously learn (e.g., common objects, food, places, familiar people). Without early
intervention, a visual impairment can have an adverse effect on cognitive, language and
social development (D’Allura, 2002).

On the other hand, deaf children exhibit delays in cognitive development primarily
related to literacy skills development. Since phonemic awareness is necessary for children to
learn how to read, not being able to demonstrate this pre-requisite skill causes delays in
being able to access reading material. Children with a specific learning disability such as
Dyslexia, likewise lack phonemic awareness. Aside from this, they also encounter difficulties
with processing information from their other senses (problems with visual-motor processing
and eye-hand coordination) causing handwritten issues. These may all contribute to lowering
he child’s self-esteem, as commonly observed in children with learning disabilities
(www.dyslexia-research.com).

Around 25% of children with AD/HD have a co-morbid learning disability

(www.dyslexia-reading-well.com). Inattention and impulsivity, engaged in mental processes
necessary for learning, and complete academic requirements in order to succeed in school.
In spite of having average to above-average intelligence, the child with AD/HD still fails due
to test-taking difficulties and accompanying behavioral issues.

Children with intellectual disability, on the other hand would exhibit delays in all
domains of development, thus, being referred to as having Global Developmental Delay.
This is true for children with Down Syndrome; all of whom have intellectual disability of
varying severity. Sub-average functioning is evident throughout the developmental years. An
intellectual disability can co-exist with Autism and Cerebral Palsy. Half of children belonging
to the population of children in Autism spectrum would have an intellectual disability with an
IQ below 50 (www.intellectualdisability.info/diagnosis/autistic-spectrum-disorders). Once
Autism co-exists with intellectual disability, all domains of development are affected, with
more significant delays in socio-emotional and communication skills as compared to those
with average to above-average intelligence.

Cerebral Palsy is defined as neuromuscular disorder caused by a non-progressive

lesion to the immature brain (Effgen, 2013). All children with Cerebral Palsy would
demonstrate delays in both gross-and fine-motor skills due to abnormalities in tone, either
being spastic (hypertonic) or flaccid (hypotonic), some also having tone that fluctuates
between these two extremes. This affects their mobility significantly and their capacity to
perform self-help skills such as feeding, dressing, toileting, and transferring from their
wheelchair to the bed and vice versa, independently. Depending on the extent of damage to
the developing brain, manifestation of Cerebral Palsy can range from mild (hemiplegic,
ambulatory, normal intelligence) to severe (quadriplegic, wheelchair-bound, profound
intellectual disability, deaf-blind).
 Development and disability ate therefore two perspectives that have to be balanced
in order to understand the child holistically and arrive at the assumptions that are fair to the
child with special needs. The whole child perspective will pave the way for a more accurate
assessment of abilities, strengths, and needs in the individual child whose potential to learn
is dependent on an understanding of what he/she is truly capable of becoming.

SUMMARY

Shifting paradigms from a physiological, deficits perspective to a sociocultural,

strengths-based perspective allows for a thorough understanding of the child with special
needs. Due respect is given to his/her individuality and his/her potential to become optimally
functional and productive. Personal, environmental, and contextual factors that may either
support of limit learning and development and aptly considered. The International
Classification of Functioning (ICF) provides a framework for understanding disability
supportive of the sociocultural framework. Atypical development can be caused by an
existing disability. Delays may be inherent due to biological factors, or may be due to a lack
of practice opportunity for development to be facilitated. All domains of development are also
interrelated. The whole child perspective one that balances both developmental principles
and knowledge of disabilities with their accompanying difficulties in learning skills and
attaining developmental milestones, ensures that assessment would be more authentic.

CASE STUDY

As a group, analyze the possible causes of delay/atypical development in a three-

year-old child manifesting the following concerns:

 Inconsistent response to name-calling

 Disruptive behavior- frequent tantrums
 Lacks social skills during play- grabs toys, occasional pushing in the playground
 Limited verbalizations (one-word utterances)

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

In small groups, discuss how the shifting paradigm of disability and the while child
perspective have influenced the following:

 Labeling and stereotyping of children into disability categories

 Recognizing the right of children with disabilities
 Provision of accommodations and differentiation of assessment
 Optimizing the potential for productivity of children with special needs
Prepared by: Bethanie Base
Lhenie Belle Limpoco

BSNED 2-A