Abstract
Jodi, an early childhood special educator, is meeting with Maria and her son, 26-month-old Marcus, at their early intervention (EI) home visit. Marcus was recently found eligible for services due to a delay in his communication development, and Jodi was part of the initial evaluation and Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) team. She is looking forward to continuing to build her relationship with the family. When Jodi arrives, Maria greets her at the door by saying,
I’m so glad you’re here. I can’t wait to get started with therapy. Just this morning, Marcus was having a tantrum before breakfast. I think he wanted something to drink, but he just kept pointing at the fridge and crying. I asked him what he wanted over and over, but all he did was cry. Then he grabbed his cup and threw it at me! I will just get out of your way while you work with him. Maybe you can get him to calm down and say something. I just don’t think I can help him . . . I just don’t know how.
It has been well documented that children’s development is enhanced within the context of supportive parent–child relationships (Mortensen & Mastergeorge, 2014). Research also indicates that any daily activity of a child holds the potential for multiple learning opportunities if parents and other caregivers are supported in their capacity to recognize and respond to those opportunities (Dunst et al., 2001; Raab & Dunst, 2006). Thus, in Part C Early Intervention (EI) the development of a triadic relationship (Brown & Woods, 2016), where providers focus not only on the relationship between provider and child but also on the relationships between caregiver and child as well as caregiver and provider, is a priority. This approach broadens the definition of the recipient of services to the key individuals (i.e., family, caregivers) in a particular child’s life (Rush et al., 2003) and will be central focus for Jodi, the provider introduced in the scenario above, as she works to build a partnership with Maria. Given the importance of supportive parent–child relationships to promoting positive child development, such a focus creates rich opportunities for providers to partner with parents in pursuit of positive child and family outcomes. When providers and caregivers engage in ongoing partnership, including around assessment related to child and family outcomes, the effectiveness of service delivery can be enhanced.
The field of Part C EI has increasingly promoted and embraced a coaching model of service delivery as a conduit to increase caregivers’ capacity to effectively embed strategies into daily routines (Kemp & Turnbull, 2014). Coaching helps enhance child development by focusing on the caregiver, not the service provider, as the agent of intervention (Mahoney, 2009). Coaching is seen as a relationship-based process (Rush & Shelden, 2011) conducted within a collaborative and supportive environment (Dunst & Trivette, 2009; Friedman et al., 2012). To cultivate such an environment, coaching must not be hierarchical or judgmental and service providers should aim to engage parents and other caregivers in “reciprocal and bidirectional” interactions (An et al., 2019, p. 4). Furthermore, the diverse perspectives and experiences of all families can and should be honored and built upon allowing services to be tailored and responsive to each unique family and situation regardless of differences across culture, ethnicity, ability or linguistic differences, family structure, or other characteristics of families.
“When providers and caregivers engage in ongoing partnership, including around assessment related to child and family outcomes, the effectiveness of service delivery can be enhanced.”
There are several definitions of coaching in the literature across various fields. In EI, coaching has been defined as follows: an adult learning strategy in which the coach promotes the learner’s (coachee’s) ability to reflect on his or her actions as a means to determine the effectiveness of an action or practice and develop a plan for refinement and use of the action in immediate and future situations (Rush & Shelden, 2011, p. 8).
This general definition will be used throughout this article. While EI service providers use a range of coaching strategies to support families (e.g., caregiver practice with feedback, problem solving, joint interaction, conversation and information sharing, observation; Friedman et al., 2012), we focus on one, joint planning.
Joint planning is a reciprocal process of collecting and gathering information about the child’s skills as well as family routines and strategies. It serves to help build and enact the partnership between a provider and caregiver and embodies the planning, or action planning, referred to in the definition of coaching described above (Rush & Shelden, 2011). An et al. (2019) stress that evaluation of interventions or coaching should be “conducted, discussed, and reflected upon by both service providers and parents” (p. 4). Given the focus on collaboratively gathering information about specific strategies and their effectiveness over time, the joint planning process represents a particularly rich context for partnering around assessment. While research in the field has examined the nature and outcomes of coaching related to caregiver-implemented interventions, definitions and descriptions of specific coaching strategies and processes, such as joint planning, remain limited (Lorio et al., 2020). This article seeks to provide such description of joint planning in practice and highlight its particular utility for gathering ongoing assessment data. Indeed, the joint planning process can be strategically leveraged to partner with families in efforts to contribute to comprehensive assessment practices in EI.
“the joint planning process can be strategically leveraged to partner with families in efforts to contribute to comprehensive assessment practices in EI.”
Joint Planning in Part C EI
Joint planning has been defined as an agreement between a coach and a coachee on strategies or actions that will be practiced or used between coaching visits (Rush & Shelden, 2005). In EI, coaching sessions are marked by conversation and information sharing defined by Friedman et al. (2012) as a multipurpose, bidirectional conversational strategy used throughout the session, with a primary focus on establishing and maintaining the relationship between caregiver and EI provider. The caregiver and provider share information, make comments, ask and respond to questions about the early intervention program in general, and question or comment relevant to the child’s and family’s outcomes. (p. 67)
During joint planning, providers and caregivers collaborate to identify priorities, goals, and create an action plan to address those goals (McCollum & Yates, 1994; Rush & Shelden, 2005).
Joint planning can be documented as a component of comprehensive progress monitoring and assessment processes as well as provide an opportunity for ongoing sharing and reflection. Often, providers do this during EI sessions in what is commonly referred to as a joint plan, which represents a summary of what transpired in the session as well as an action plan for next steps. Many providers leave a copy with the family and also keep a copy for their own records. Providers can utilize these plans to prepare for subsequent visits and as a means to document ongoing service delivery. Families and caregivers can also utilize the plans as guides for carrying out agreed upon strategies between EI sessions and to observe the progress that their child is making toward identified goals. In circumstances when the provider and family do not speak the same language, special consideration must be given to joint planning and to documentation of the joint plan. Partnerships with interpreters can help to bridge the language gap both in verbal communication and in written documentation during the joint planning process. Likewise, other challenges and family preferences for documentation can be addressed through discussions that occur within the context of family-centered collaboration. Joint planning and its related documentation can be a rich context for and source of assessment data if providers and families strategically approach both process and documentation with an assessment mind-set. One way to facilitate such an approach is through application of the 2014 Division for Early Childhood of the Council for Exceptional Children (DEC) Recommended Practices (RPs).
Application of DEC Recommended Assessment Practices in Joint Planning
The revised DEC RPs (Division for Early Childhood [DEC], 2014) delineate 11 assessment practices that provide guidance for work across the early childhood landscape, many of which can be applied during joint planning with families. In this article, we focus specifically on two such practices. First, DEC RP Assessment 2 (A2) calls for “practitioners [to] work as a team with the family and other professionals to gather assessment information” (DEC, 2014, p. 8). Second, DEC RP Assessment 9 (A9) guides “practitioners [to] implement systematic ongoing assessment to identify learning targets, plan activities, and monitor the child’s progress to revise instruction as needed” (DEC, 2014, p. 8). During joint planning, families and practitioners share information about strengths and areas of concern learned through formal and informal assessment processes both during and outside of sessions (A2). They also discuss identification and use of appropriate strategies and interventions as well as how such strategies and interventions may be embedded into routines that occur in a child’s natural environment (A9). This commonly results in documentation of their plan for doing so between visits, often referred to as a joint plan.
The joint plan is derived from a focus on families’ priorities and a common set of goals (An et al., 2019; Rush & Shelden, 2005). This process promotes assessment as the shared goals and resulting plan guide “active and bidirectional observations” (An et al., 2019, p. 3). Joint planning reflects enactment of DEC RP A2 as it involves reflection and sharing of feedback through active engagement of all parties (An et al., 2019; Rush & Shelden, 2011). The information gathered and documented can be used in understanding changes not only in a child’s development but also in caregiver capacity to engage in responsive interactions that promote child development. Over time, this documentation can provide support for systematic, ongoing assessment, representing enactment of DEC RP A9, and inform measures of child progress, caregiver capacity, and in turn overall effectiveness of intervention. We revisit the scenario with Jodi, Maria, and Marcus to illustrate how these assessment practices can be intentionally and strategically applied during joint planning. First, we show how joint planning supports practitioners and caregivers to work as a team in gathering assessment information (DEC RP A2). Second, we demonstrate how joint planning documentation can contribute to ongoing assessment practices when strategically used over time (DEC RP A9).
Joint Planning: Partnering in Gathering Assessment Information (A2)
Jodi pauses before replying then shares,
It sounds like it’s hard for Marcus to use words in that situation. I know we talked a lot about your concerns about his communication when we completed the evaluation and developed your IFSP. I will certainly provide support to Marcus and your family, but my hope is that we can work together and share what we both know in order to develop ideas. In order for us to help Marcus, it’s important for us to talk about what he’s interested in and what he is already able to do. We can then use these things to help brainstorm new ways to help Marcus communicate. Sometimes during our time together, you will be teaching me things about Marcus and your family, and sometimes I’ll be showing you things to try. We can practice strategies together as we go along and you can choose strategies that you want to try between home visits. We will then revisit those each time we meet together to see if they are helping us get to where we want to be.
At the onset of this home visit, Jodi has introduced Maria to the concept of intervention as a capacity-building process (Dunst et al., 2014; Wilson, 2006) promoted through a reciprocal coaching relationship. She has set the stage (Friedman & Woods, 2015; Romano & Woods, 2018) for bidirectional sharing of information that begins with Maria’s insight into Marcus’ interests and strengths to assess current skills and plan for strategies that will elicit communication and decrease unwanted behaviors. In so doing, Jodi has also supported the notion of embedding assessment practices throughout EI processes. In particular, she has indicated that she will specifically be partnering with Maria and asking her to share information about Marcus’ skills in daily activities, routines, and environments (DEC RP A2). Jodi proceeds by leading Maria through the process of problem-solving the concern at hand, giving Marcus a more effective and functional way to communicate his needs. As the EI session progresses in the scenario below, Jodi partners with Maria as they continue to gather information about Marcus’ skills within home routines (DEC RP A2) as well as around her capacity to promote his early language development.
Jodi continues by asking, “Tell me more about how Marcus communicates with you now.” Maria shares that he will bring her things or he points to what he wants. Jodi comments that she has observed Marcus holding his cup out to his mother during the visit. Maria adds, “Yes, he wants a drink. I guess that
“Providers must attend to the unique circumstances and characteristics of each family and caregiver when partnering in joint planning and associated documentation.”
As the visit drew to a close, both Jodi and Maria come to an agreement about strategies to use to encourage Marcus to communicate, and a joint plan emerges. They come to the shared conclusion that giving Marcus a choice and having him point to make his choice could be a building block for later verbal communication. An outcome of their conversation is a written joint plan that documents Marcus’ current development and skills as well as their decision to try implementing a communication strategy in Marcus’ daily routines. As can be seen in Figure 1, the provider, Jodi, applies DEC RP A2 (DEC, 2014) in the documentation of the EI session. Jodi captures parent report and observational data related to the child’s communication development (A2) and records the results of their joint planning, an action plan for implementing strategies and discussing them at the next session (A9). Providers must attend to the unique circumstances and characteristics of each family and caregiver when partnering in joint planning and associated documentation. As always, a marker of quality family-centered care is responsiveness and respect for each family’s preferences and characteristics. As noted earlier, collaboration with interpreters, or others, can help support engagement of all parties when language differences are present. Parents and caregivers can also be supported to write their own documentation. Documentation could be completed in other formats as well such as video or audio recordings.
“the reflective and reciprocal nature of joint planning provides a framework for collaborating with caregivers in monitoring progress and measuring effectiveness of EI overall”
Example of an initial joint plan
Ongoing Use of Joint Planning Documentation to Contribute to Assessment Practices (A9)
As the collaborative process between the family and provider unfolds through ongoing EI services, analysis of joint planning documentation across EI sessions can provide a context for practitioners to enact DEC RP A9 as they “implement systematic ongoing assessment to identify learning targets, plan activities, and monitor the child’s progress to revise instruction [services] as needed” (DEC, 2014, p. 8). Indeed, the reflective and reciprocal nature of joint planning provides a framework for collaborating with caregivers in monitoring progress and measuring effectiveness of EI overall (DEC RP A9). An et al. (2019) suggest that partnering with parents and other caregivers for the purpose of assessment is critical as caregiver behaviors are shaped by the environment created from the coaching process. As a field, “we understand that our professional expertise is reflected in our approaches to problem solving [with parents] rather than in implementation of techniques” (Rush & Shelden, 2011, p. ix).
By applying coaching strategies, especially joint planning, with a mind-set focused on partnership and assessment, the provider can implement effective relationship-building and problem-solving with families. Given the ongoing assessment information related to child and family outcomes that can potentially be gathered through the joint planning process, it is prudent to intentionally investigate it and its related documentation as a rich source of such assessment data. By intentionally focusing on documenting developmental information, coaching processes, and caregiver feedback regarding their use of agreed upon strategies, early interventionists can create data to support systematic ongoing assessment, identification of learning targets, planning and revision of activities, and progress monitoring (DEC RP A9). Caregivers and providers reflect on the utility and effectiveness of various strategies and interventions and ultimately make data-based decisions as they proceed in their partnership. We again revisit the vignette to illustrate.
“Documentation of the joint planning process can be tailored to meet the needs of a program and each unique family and can act as a record of progress, both for caregiver and for child.”
Maria and Jodi meet for a follow-up EI session during a time that Marcus typically eats his afternoon snack. Jodi begins by verbally reviewing their previous joint plan where they decided to address the communication concern by offering Marcus choices and encouraging pointing as a strategy to communicate his choice. She asks, “so tell me how things went for you and Marcus since we last met.” Maria smiles and says, “Good so far. Giving him a choice and encouraging him to point has worked for drinks. Now I’m not sure what to do about snack since we have so many different things that he likes.” Jodi and Maria then spend time discussing this issue, what they currently see Marcus doing, and other assessment information. They jointly decide to narrow his choices to two per snack time. They practice the choice making during the visit and agree that their plan works for this situation as well. Maria notes, “Now that we’re doing this, I’m noticing that he doesn’t get so mad at snack time.” Jodi proceeds by inquiring about other routines within their day that this strategy may be effective. She then records the ideas generated from their discussion and creates a new joint plan that both highlights the efficacy of the strategy from the previous plan and builds upon it to include new practices to try going forward.
Maria and Jodi have now created a subsequent joint plan (see Figure 2) for implementing new ideas and monitoring progress toward Marcus’ goals. In this joint plan, Jodi captures additional information on their interactions during the session (DEC RP A2), the child’s development, and Maria’s description of her attempts to use the agreed upon strategy from the last visit (DEC RP A9). The use of the joint plan enables Jodi to reference and build upon Maria’s feedback from previous visits, as well as incorporate Marcus’ identified strengths and interests, to implement a communication plan that could be embedded naturally during everyday learning opportunities. Furthermore, this illustrates how joint planning can be used to inform assessment efforts over time by documenting child development, the use of coaching strategies by a provider, and implementation of strategies and interventions by caregivers. Documentation of the joint planning process can be tailored to meet the needs of a program and each unique family and can act as a record of progress, both for caregiver and for child.
Example of subsequent joint plan
Over the course of EI services, multiple joint planning sessions transpire and produce documentation. This documentation can provide a rich source of assessment data and thereby contribute to ongoing progress monitoring as well as formative and summative assessment measures when used in conjunction with other assessment practices and sources (DEC RP A9). Therefore, the analysis of joint planning documentation can be used when assessing the effectiveness of intervention related to child and family outcomes. As illustrated in the second joint plan example (see Figure 2), information regarding the child’s skills and development as well as caregiver application of strategies can be strategically captured. The utility and effectiveness of agreed upon strategies and intervention can also be documented. This in turn can help inform understanding of changes in caregiver capacity.
Conclusion
Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) calls for services that not only enhance the development of infants and toddlers with disabilities but also the capacity of families to meet their child’s needs within natural environments (IDEA, 2004). By intentionally and systematically applying the DEC RPs (DEC, 2014) around assessment during joint planning, providers can partner with caregivers to collect information which can be used in conjunction with other information to assess child progress and support families in implementing evidence-based practices (Brown & Woods, 2015; Dunst & Trivette, 2009; Wright & Kaiser, 2017).
In this article, we have specifically highlighted how two of the DEC RPs (DEC, 2014) on assessment can be embedded into joint planning. Use of joint planning and documented joint plans can help ensure that caregivers are actively participating in the planning, implementation, and assessment of new knowledge and skills. In the vignettes and sample joint planning documents (Figures 1 and 2), we can see how a provider can strategically capture assessment data on coaching strategies used, child development, and caregiver use of agreed upon strategies. The joint planning process provides a natural and salient context for assessment data to be collected and analyzed overtime. Shelden and Rush (2013) stress that through joint planning and reflection, discussions ensue that involve gathering feedback from caregivers regarding the effectiveness of the overall coaching process (i.e., program effectiveness). Therefore, the joint planning process is worthy of continued examination to identify ways to leverage the information gathered for the purpose of assessment of child, family, and program outcomes as well as to ensure overall quality and effectiveness of services.
“Use of joint planning and documented joint plans can help ensure that caregivers are actively participating in the planning, implementation, and assessment of new knowledge and skills.”
