-
204 INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC VOL. 42, NO. 4, MARCH 2007
(PP. 204–211)
From EarlyIntervention to
Early ChildhoodPrograms:
Timeline for Early SuccessfulTransitions (TEST)
JOYCE A. BRANDES, CHRISTINE K. ORMSBEE,
AND KATHRYN A. HARING
More than one million transitions between earlyintervention
services and early childhood programsare facilitated annually for
youngsters with specialneeds. To be successful, these transitions
requireplanning and ongoing communication between allparties. This
article substantiates the need for atimeline/checklist and provides
a model of sequen-tial steps from onset to completion of the
transitionprocess. The Timeline for Early Successful Transi-tion
(TEST) facilitates an effective and well-plannedtransition that
supports the child, family, and ser-vice personnel.
E verybody goes through transitional events inlife. Milestones,
such as your first steps, yourfirst words, birthdays, and
anniversaries, markthis process from infancy into adulthood.
Re-lated to education, transitional events such asgrade levels
achieved, diplomas earned, and employmentattained serve as markers
and are assumed to be naturaltransitions in that they are
predictable.
By the time a child identified with a developmentaldelay reaches
age 6, he or she most likely will have expe-rienced at least two
transitions relevant to education.These may include entering and
exiting an early interven-tion (EI) program, early childhood (EC)
program, and, inmany states, an elementary program. These moves
trans-late into at least 1.5 million early childhood school-related
transitions each year in the United States (Coun-cil for
Exceptional Children, 2001). For these transitionsto be effective
and go relatively smoothly, appropriateplanning and communication
is necessary (Shonkoff &Phillips, 2000; Yeboah, 2002).
The movement from infant/toddler (ages 0–2) topreschool (ages
3–5) services requires a change in whereservices take place, how
families are involved, and the ed-ucational and supportive
expectations of service providers(Fox, Dunlap, & Cushing,
2002). A timeline delineatingwho will be involved and when helps
ensure a seamlesstransition between meaningful educational
opportunitiesand services for a child with special needs. This
articlewill describe the instrument, Timeline for Early
Successful
-
VOL. 42, NO. 4, MARCH 2007 205
Transition (TEST), which is built around the two majorcomponents
of smooth and successful transitions: plan-ning and
communication.
Planning
Program continuity through developmentally appropri-ate
curricula can only be accomplished through adequateplanning
(Rosenkoetter, Hains, & Fowler, 1994). The In-dividuals with
Disabilities Education Act Amendments of1997 (IDEA ’97), and Title
34, Parts 300 and 303 of theCode of Federal Regulations (CFR)
mandate that the In-dividualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) include
stepsthat facilitate transition of a young child with
disabilitiesto appropriate EC programs and services. IDEA ’97
fur-ther directs the EI agency to notify the local educationagency
at least 90 days prior to the child’s third birthdayto schedule a
conference that brings together representa-tives of the sending and
receiving agencies with the child’sfamily members to plan a
meaningful transition withminimal disruption to the family. Keeping
families in-volved in their children’s education is of primary
impor-tance (Lucyshyn, Dunlap, & Albin, 2002; Shonkoff
&Phillips, 2000; Webster-Stratton, 1998) and must be
ac-commodated. To ensure continuity of appropriate sup-port and
services, a minimum of 6 to 12 months issuggested for planning for
and placement of a child in hisor her new environment.
Preparation of Child
The change in location of services, service providers,
andprograms is disruptive and a source of increased stress forboth
the young child and the family (Rosenkoetter et al.,1994; Shonkoff
& Phillips, 2000). This strain can be morepronounced when the
child, the sending agency, and thechild’s family are not adequately
prepared for thosechanges (Bruder & Chandler, 1996). An
important part ofpreparing the child is the development and
generaliza-tion of transition skills and behaviors that link the
sendingprogram to the receiving program. These may include (a)
social behavior and self-care skills, (b) motivation
andproblem-solving skills, (c) pre-academic or academic sup-port
skills and task-related behavior, and (d) communica-tion
skills.
Systematic Approach
Additional preparation for the change in personnel andlocation
of services should follow a sequential transitionthat involves the
following:
1. A representative of the sending agency arranges avisit and
accompanies the parents or guardians in observing potential
programs.
2. Parents or guardians and their child visit potentialprogram
sites when these are not in session.
3. Parents or guardians and their child visit potentialprograms
seen as viable placement options for ashort time while classes are
in session.
This systematic approach allows the parents orguardians and
their child to observe and consider pro-gram options, interact with
prospective service providers,and become familiar with the new
environment gradu-ally. It also provides information parents and
guardianscan use to help their child acquire the prerequisite
skillspreviously mentioned. Representatives of the sending
andpossible receiving agencies are actively involved at thisstage,
assuring families and the child of a more produc-tive experience
(Fox et al., 2002).
Rapport
Through this process, educators in the prospective agen-cies
have opportunities to establish rapport with the par-ents or
guardians in informal environments while sharingthe expectations of
the placements and programs. Asidefrom directly stating these
standards at the time of thevisit, the teachers can also provide
the parents or guardianswith (a) class and school newsletters, (b)
their names andthose of other professionals with whom the child may
beworking, and (c) school telephone numbers (Fox et al.,2002).
Establishing positive communication with the par-ents and guardians
helps ease the potential awkwardnessof formal assessment, placement
meetings, and workingwith so many strangers. Careful consideration
and a gen-erous amount of time, attention, and support have
beenshown to be effective in supporting parents and guardiansso
that their child’s needs can be met (Harrower, Fox, Dun-lap, &
Kincaid, 2000; Timm, 1993).
Communication
When children transition from an EI program withIFSPs to EC
programs with Individualized EducationPlans (IEP), families are
concerned about understandingwhat will happen with the children
(Rosenkoetter et al.,1994). IFSPs address both children and their
families aspriorities for early intervention services. In many
statesthis includes a home-based early intervention model.The
objective is not only to work with the children butalso to offer
support and education to the parents andguardians during the home
visits (IDEA, 1997). Regularhome-based contact and consultation
with a trained pro-fessional supports family members and provides
regularopportunities for communication about the needs, con-cerns,
and desires of the families for their children (Baileyet al.,
1998). Families fear losing this important compo-nent when their
children transition from an EI program
-
206 INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC
to an EC program. In particular, they fear that
decisionsregarding placement, programs, and curriculum will bemade
without their input or agreement (Bailey et al.,1998; Harrower et
al., 2000). This concern is fed becausethe focus of IEPs is that
the child’s program is providedby EC personnel away from the family
environment, asopposed to the EI program where the child’s needs
areaddressed through the strengths and needs of the family.
Support
In the transition to preschool, most families are learningnew
vocabulary and procedures relevant to their child’ssituation. In
this process, it is important to be sensitive toparents’ need for
information that is fully and clearly pre-sented (Fox et al., 2002;
Lovett & Haring, 2002). Profes-sionals must field parents’ or
guardians’ questions andcheck frequently for accurate
understanding. They mustalso plan for follow-up visits, phone
calls, notes, and ac-companying parents and guardians to meetings.
Strongsupport must come from both sending and receivingagencies as
they work collaboratively to ensure continu-ity of services and
support to both the family and the child(Harrower et al., 2000).
Finally, parents and guardiansmust be regarded as equal partners on
the decision-mak-ing team (Bruder & Chandler, 1996).
Family Involvement
According to Harrower et al. (2000), families should
par-ticipate in developing a clear plan to facilitate their
child’stransition from early intervention to preschool
services.Such a plan needs to systematically
• incorporate ways to orient the child and family to
thereceiving site,
• outline methods for supporting the child and familyin building
competence and confidence (Harrower et al., 2000; Rosenkoetter et
al., 1994), and
• provide practical recommendations on how to sup-port the
child’s special needs (Lovett & Haring,2002).
In addition to the communication and support facil-itated
through a clearly written transition plan, the rolesand
responsibilities of all participants (i.e., sending andreceiving
agencies, family members, and community agen-cies) must be defined
and understood by all parties in-volved in the process. These basic
guidelines ensure thetransition is relatively seamless and that the
child and fam-ily members experience a supportive and positive
changein service delivery.
TEST Instrument
When parents and guardians were interviewed regardingtheir
satisfaction with their child’s transition, a large ma-jority
stated that they prefer a checklist to help with thetransition
process and to guide visits to the receiving en-vironments
(Chandler, 2001). When checklists/timelinesare followed, all
parties are systematically informed, in-volved, and prepared for
events such as school districtassessments, IEP meetings, and the
transportation sched-ule (Hanline & Knowlton, 1988). A plan
that outlines atimeline with expectations helps guarantee
cooperation,communication, and continuity in a child’s program
(Foxet al., 2002). The TEST systematically supports moni-toring and
completion of assessments, meetings, planning,and scheduling of
transportation and other related ser-vices by prescribing a timely
and sequential approach fora child, his family, and members of the
team. Each mem-ber on the transition team maintains a copy of the
TESTto facilitate communication among the team members.
TEST Contact Information
In the following section we look at the major compo-nents of
TEST and explain their purposes and use.
First Through Third Sections. The first element of theTEST is
the child’s name and the date of his or her 3rdbirthday featured
prominently at the top of each page ofthe Contact Information and
Sequence form (see Figure1 and Figure 2). This component serves as
a prompt thatthe transition from EI services to EC services must
becompleted by the child’s third birthday. The second sec-tion on
the TEST Contact Information form is used toidentify contact
information regarding the child’s parentsor guardians. The third
section serves as a brief meetinglog that notes the date when the
transition process wasinitiated, the date when the process was
completed, andall meetings held between those two dates. These
datescould easily represent a span of 12 months.
-
Timeline for Early Successful Transition for John Smith 3rd
Birthday November 18, 2006
Family InformationJoe & Ann Smith 1234 Anywhere Street
jas@tech.edu 321-7887 322-0399
Anywhere, US 74123
Parents/Guardians Street and/or P.O. Box E-mail Primary Phone
Number Other Phone NumberTown, State & Zip Code
MeetingsNovember 27, 2005 _______________
Date of Initiation of Transition Process Date of Completion of
Transition Process
11-27-05 (3:30 p.m.) 2-4-06 (7:30 a.m.) ______________
______________ ______________ ______________1st Meeting 2nd Meeting
3rd Meeting 4th Meeting 5th Meeting 6th MeetingDate/Time Date/Time
Date/Time Date/Time Date/Time Date/Time
AgenciesSooner Start 3840 Sooner Start Street sstart@sss.com
895-5015 895-3558
Norman, OK 77073
Early Intervention Street and/or P.O. Box E-mail Primary Phone
Other Phone(EI) Agency Town, State & Zip Code
Kendall Preschool 1426 Norman Avenue kps@nps.edu 916-3244
916-0468Norman, OK 77073
Early Childhood (EC) Street and/or P.O. Box E-mail Primary Phone
Other PhoneAgency/Preschool Town, State & Zip Code
Oklahoma County 1409 Health Avenue ochd@hdp.org 979-3614
979-4669Health Department Norman, OK 77074
Community Agency (CA) Street and/or P.O. Box E-mail Primary
Phone Other PhoneTown, State & Zip Code
Dr. Rand 7204 Jones Boulevard jsr@ca.com 950-0830
972-1118Norman, OK 77070
Psychologist and/or Street and/or P.O. Box E-mail Primary Phone
Other PhonePsychometrist Town, State & Zip Code
Agency PersonnelMs. Gorman Speech Pathologist rgg@sc.edu
895-0411 191-8904Early Intervention (EI) Position E-mail Primary
Phone Other PhoneResource Person
Mr. Kay OT lvk@nps.edu 892-1022 892-1023EI Related Service
Position E-mail Primary Phone Other PhoneResource Person
Mrs. Brink PT dab@nps.edu 922-0331 947-1018EI Related Service
Position E-mail Primary Phone Other PhoneResource Person
Mrs. Curran Teacher gcc@nps.edu 916-0730 916-1018Early Childhood
(EC) Position E-mail Primary Phone Other PhoneResource Person
Mrs. Guney Speech Pathologist jbg@nps.edu 976-0515 976-9119EC
Related Service Position E-mail Primary Phone Other PhoneResource
Person
Ms. Engel OT jse@nps.edu 908-0630 947-0206EC Related Service
Position E-mail Primary Phone Other PhoneResource Person
Ms. Brennan PT amb@nps.edu 912-0401 944-1219EC Related Service
Position E-mail Primary Phone Other PhoneResource Person
Mr. Wall Counselor jbw@rwb.org 979-0510 204-0714
Figure 1. TEST contact information.
-
208 INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC
Timeline for Early Successful Transition for John Smith 3rd
Birthday November 18, 2006
Activities Child’s age Activity Participant Note
accomplished
24–30 IFSP Initial Transition Planning Meeting Sending agencya
_____________months ! IFSP reviewed and updated including Family
Date
transition plan! General timeline and transition plan
developed ! Possible outcomes of transition ______________
discussed Initials of person! Community resources discussed/
determining this has
explored been accomplished ! Assessments scheduled (if
needed)
24–33 Visits Sending agencya _____________months ! LEA
preschools Family Date
! Community programs Receiving agency
Community agencies
______________Activities Initials of person ! EI assessment
administered determining this has! Assessment report generated been
accomplished! Information gathered from family! Transition plan
re-evaluation! Eligibility/transition meeting scheduled
30–33 Eligibility/transition meeting Sending agencya
_____________months ! IFSP reviewed Family Date
! Assessment results analyzed Receiving agency! Eligibility
determined Community agencies ______________! Possible placement
options discussed Initials of person ! Transition plan and timeline
finalized determining this has! IEP meeting scheduled been
accomplishedVisit to potential programs
33–36 Placement/IEP meeting Receiving agencya
_____________months ! Identification of program(s) or Family
Date
combination of programs Sending agency! IEP completed Community
agencies ______________
Initials of person determining this hasbeen accomplished
By 3rd IEP in effect Receiving agencya _____________birthday
Enrollment in LEA—possible documents Family Date
! Birth certificate Community agencies! Social Security card
______________! Immunization and health records Initials of person
! Records from former programs determining this has! Medicaid
number and card copy been accomplished! Proof of residence
Figure 2. TEST sequence. Note. Participant = the minimum number
of people/agency representatives included (additional indi-viduals
may be invited per the request/approval of the family); IFSP =
Individualized Family Support Plan; Sending agency =
earlyintervention (EI) agency; LEA = local education agency;
Receiving agency = early childhood program, such as LEA preschool
pro-gram; IEP = Individualized Education Program.aPrimary party
responsible for coordination and facilitation.
-
VOL. 42, NO. 4, MARCH 2007 209
Fourth Through Fifth Sections. The fourth section is com-prised
of contact information of agencies involved withthe child’s
transition: (a) EI agency (i.e., Sooner Start); (b) EC
agency/preschool (i.e., Kendall Preschool); (c) com-munity agency
(CA; i.e., Oklahoma County Health De-partment); and (d) a
psychologist and/or psychometrist.
The fifth section serves to identify team membersby their names.
The first part is intended for membersfrom the EI agency, and the
second part is for membersof the EC team—resource person and
related servicespersonnel. The third part is intended for the name
of theappropriate CA resource person. A psychologist may belisted
in any of the sections depending on the role of thatperson in the
transition process and beyond. Because theteam members listed are
usually part of the process frominception to completion, it is
expected that the names willremain relatively constant.
Identification of team membersand their contact information is an
important first step inestablishing and facilitating communication
while gener-ating and implementing an effective transition
plan.
TEST Sequence
The scaffolding represented in this timeline is a
proposedsequence of events designed to ensure a seamless
tran-sition for the child and his or her family. Though
par-titioned in the TEST instrument, there is an expecteddegree of
overlap in the child’s age at the time of service.It is important
to maintain a degree of flexibility in activ-ity planning to
benefit from optimum times for each fam-ily and their child. That
is, there may be a situationoccurring in a family, such as a
medical crisis, that im-pacts the family emotionally and
physically, thus hinder-ing their availability.
The Activity column lists the actions required dur-ing a given
time, such as 24 to 30 months. The third col-umn, Participants,
recognizes the minimum number ofindividuals from the potential
groups involved at a givenstage, with the leader being identified
by an asterisk. Ad-ditional personnel may be added at the
discretion of theteam at any stage of the process. Specific
identification ofthe lead participant facilitates clear
communication byidentifying who is responsible for planning,
coordinat-ing, or facilitating a sequence of activities at any
stage inthe process. Possible leaders include the Sending
Agency,which refers to the representative of the EI agency;
Fam-ily, which includes anyone in the child’s family or anyonewho
has demonstrated a vested interest in the well-beingof the child
and been invited by the family to be part of theteam (e.g., friend
or family advocate); Receiving Agency,which is identified as the
representative of the EC pro-gram in a local education agency; and
Community Agen-cies, which may include a representative of the
HealthDepartment, court advocate, and so forth. Though
facil-itators in the transition process often are responsible
forsetting meetings and have been identified as sending and
receiving agencies, it must be noted that any member ofthe team
can request a meeting.
A space for notes is provided in the next column toensure that
decisions and topics that need to be revisitedare included on the
planning instrument itself. This alsohelps reduce the possibility
of issues being overlooked orforgotten.
The final column provides a place for each person tomark the
form when tasks and activities have been ac-complished. This helps
keep track of the sequence of activities addressed and the need to
continue with theprocess in a sequential and timely manner.
Finally, ithelps all members of the transition team monitor
wherethey have been, where they are going, and when the tran-sition
is targeted for completion. This is important interms of staying
focused and experiencing a sense of ac-complishment as each
milestone is met (Moxley, 1998).
Twenty-Four to Thirty Months. Between the child’s 24thand 30th
months, the EI agency arranges a meeting forall members of the
child’s team—members of the child’sfamily and any other person
identified as needing to beincluded in this stage of the process.
As illustrated inFigure 2, the purpose of the meeting is to review
and up-date the IFSP and to develop a component that addressesthe
child’s transition from his or her current EI programto an EC
program. The transition timeline is revisitedfrequently throughout
the process to assure its appropri-ateness. Additional topics to be
addressed include deter-mination of a general timeline and possible
outcomes ofthe transition, exploration of community resources,
andscheduling of evaluations and assessments. At the firstmeeting,
the TEST instrument is distributed to all mem-bers of the team and
serves as a guide for monitoringcommunication and implementation of
an effective tran-sition plan. As additional members join the team,
theTEST instrument is provided, along with pertinent in-formation
gathered up to that point.
Twenty-Four to Thirty-Three Months. Activities that takeplace
between the child’s 24th and 33rd months involvevisits by family
members and appropriate team membersto potential EC programs of the
local education agency.These visits are coordinated and facilitated
through theEI provider. If appropriate, the EI provider also
arrangesfor and assists the family in exploring other potential
pro-grams and placement options that may play a role in thechild’s
education and transition plan. These may includeprograms such as
Head Start and community agencies.
In addition to visits and observations, necessary eval-uations
and assessments are conducted. The EI providerensures that the
family receives accurate information re-garding the purpose of the
evaluation and its role in thetransition process. Assessment of a
young child can betime consuming and difficult to conduct, so it is
suggestedthat assessments be started relatively early. By
allowing
-
210 INTERVENTION IN SCHOOL AND CLINIC
ample time for conducting the evaluation of the child,the stress
experienced by the child and his or her family,as well as the
sending and receiving agencies, is reduced.An early start also
allows for an unhurried analysis of theresults. Consequently, each
team member has an oppor-tunity to make recommendations based on
results thatwere acquired in an appropriate, unhurried, and
timelymanner. Following the completion of the assessmentsand
evaluations, an eligibility/transition meeting is sched-uled to
occur between the child’s 30th and 33rd month.
Thirty to Thirty-Three Months. With the EI agency stillserving
as lead coordinator, members of the family, localeducation agency,
and identified community agencieshold an eligibility/transition
meeting. The purpose ofthis meeting is to (a) review the current
IFSP, (b) reviewthe results of the evaluations, and (c) determine
eligibil-ity. If the child does not qualify for special education,
thecase is closed and the team is disbanded.
If the child qualifies for special services, placementoptions
that ensure maintenance of acquired skills andthe introduction of
new skills are considered. The ECrepresentative facilitates
additional visits to potential pro-grams for the families, if
warranted. In addition, the ECrepresentative schedules an
IEP/placement meeting, inwhich all members of the team participate,
to occur be-fore the child’s 3rd birthday. It is important to note
thatthough some teams develop the IEP at the eligibilitymeeting,
this practice is not recommended. For manyfamilies, the impact of
their child qualifying for specialeducation services is daunting.
They may be more effec-tive team members and advocates for their
child if theyare given time to assimilate the information
presentedand decisions rendered. A few weeks can be helpful toallow
family members time to determine priorities theywant considered by
the team when the IEP is developed.
Thirty-Three to Thirty-Six Months. Although federal lawmandates
that the IEP is due by the child’s 3rd birthday,it is best practice
to complete this step a few weeks aheadof time. This advance
preparation allows for addressingany unforeseen obstacles and for
ensuring that every-thing is in place by the time the child starts
his or her newplacement.
At the placement/IEP meeting, the EC programsdetermined to be
most appropriate are identified and anIEP is generated that
addresses goals and short-term ob-jectives for the child’s
educational program and relatedservices. At this meeting, families
are often encouragedto enroll their child. Documentation that may
need to beprovided at enrollment can include the child’s birth
cer-tificate, social security card, immunization and healthrecords,
records from former/current programs, Medic-aid number and card
copy (if applicable), and proof ofresidence.
Conclusion
Moving between settings, people, and situations happensto all of
us on a regular basis. For individuals with dis-abilities,
development of effective skills for these transi-tions is of
critical importance. To experience successfultransitions early,
these individuals and their families mustreceive guidance and
support from qualified, knowledge-able individuals using effective
communication andtimely planning. This responsibility can be
overwhelm-ing to even the most experienced educator.
An instrument such as the Timeline for Early Success-ful
Transition addresses the tasks of coordination, com-munication, and
planning and makes the process easierand more positive and
successful. TEST provides guide-lines for early identification and
systematic involvementof all parties needed in the planning and
implementationof a successful transition. This approach ensures a
seam-less process and that the best interest of the child andfamily
have been served and incorporated into an effec-tive transition
plan.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Joyce A. Brandes, PhD, is an assistant professor of special
ed-ucation at the University of Oklahoma. Her current
researchinterests include early childhood, autism, preparation of
preser-vice special educators, and literacy. Christine K. Ormsbee,
PhD,is a professor of special education at Oklahoma State
Univer-sity. Her current research interests include preassessment,
au-tism, and effective instruction for children with
exceptionalities.Kathryn A. Haring, PhD, is a professor of special
education atthe University of Oklahoma. Her current research
interests in-clude early childhood special education, family
systems theory,and literacy. Address: Joyce A. Brandes, University
of Oklahoma,Educational Psychology, 820 Van Vleet Oval, # 302,
Norman,OK 73019-2041; e-mail: jbrandes@ou.edu
REFERENCES
Bailey, D. B., McWilliam, R. A., Darkes, L. A., Hebbler, K.,
Sim-eonsson, R. J., Spiker, D., et al. (1998). Family outcomes in
early in-tervention: A framework for program evaluation and
efficacyresearch. Exceptional Children, 64, 313–328.
Bruder, M. B., & Chandler, L. K. (1996). Transition. In S.
L. Odom &M. E. McLean (Eds.), Early intervention/early
childhood special educa-tion: Recommended practices (pp. 287–307).
Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Chandler, R. (2001). Early childhood transition. Unpublished
manuscript.Council for Exceptional Children. (2001). Today, 8, 3.
Fox, L., Dunlap, G., & Cushing, L. (2002). Early intervention,
positive
behavior support, and transition to school. Journal of Emotional
andBehavioral Disorders, 10(3), 149–158.
Hanline, M. F., & Knowlton, A. (1988). A collaborative model
for pro-viding support to parents during their child’s transition
from infantintervention to preschool special education public
school programs.Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 12(2),
116–125.
Harrower, J. K., Fox, L., Dunlap, G., & Kincaid, D. (2000).
Functional
-
VOL. 42, NO. 4, MARCH 2007 211
assessment and comprehensive early intervention. Exceptionality,
8,189–204.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1990,
20U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1990) (amended 1997).
Lovett, D. L., & Haring, K. A. (2003). Family perceptions of
transitionsin early intervention. Education and Training in
Developmental Disa-bilities, 38(4), 370–377.
Lucyshyn, J., Dunlap, G., & Albin, R. W. (Eds.). (2002).
Families, fam-ily life, and positive behavior support: Addressing
the challenge of problembehaviors in family contexts. Baltimore:
Brookes.
Moxley, R. A. (1998). Treatment-only designs and student
self-record-ing as strategies for public school teachers. Education
& Treatment ofChildren, 21, 37–61.
Rosenkoetter, S. E., Hains, A. H., & Fowler, S. A. (1994).
Bridging early
services for children with special needs and their families: A
practical guidefor transition planning. Baltimore: Brookes.
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From
neurons to neigh-borhoods: The science of early childhood
development. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
Timm, M. A. (1993). The Regional Intervention Program:
Familytreatment by family members. Behavioral Disorders, 19,
34–43.
Webster-Stratton, C. (1998). Preventing conduct problems in
HeadStart children: Strengthening parenting competencies. Journal
ofConsulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 715–730.
Yeboah, D. A. (2002). Enhancing transition from early childhood
phaseto primary education: Evidence for the research literature.
Journalof International Research & Development, 22(1),
51–69.
Call for Manuscripts
TECSE publishes 5 types of manuscripts:
• reports of original research • literature reviews • conceptual
statements • position papers • program descriptions
The journal is published quarterly: three topi-cal issues and
one nontopical issue. Topical is-
sues address an identified problem, trend, or sub-ject of
concern and importance to early inter-vention. TECSE accepts
articles for review on acontinual basis through its online
submissionsite; therefore, authors do not have to make orsubmit
multiple copies.
Complete author guidelines may be obtained from the online
submission site:https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/proed/tecse
Go to the gray Resources box and select the Instructions &
Forms link.
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education