Gathering high-quality information is one key to understanding the needs of children and families and analyzing the effectiveness of the services and supports provided. Yet any measurement system to gather the information, although seemingly objective and unbiased upon first inspection, actually represents the outcome of a complex process with many influential factors. Indeed, all measurement systems, particularly the choice of specific measures, are embedded well within value systems and philosophies. A number of articles in this issue of IYC make this point quite clear. One article, which focuses on the role of family outcomes in early intervention, carefully considers and describes a process for documenting effects on families and proposes a possible instrument for that purpose. Another article in this issue discusses the development of a new model for measuring the progress of young children's early language and literacy in response to early intervention at both the individual and group levels. In a third article, the literacy-related activities occurring in families of children with special healthcare needs were documented and the authors were able to identify obstacles that can be addressed in the future. In a fourth study, investigators examined the important issue of the use of specific practices by service coordinators for a large sample of participants involved in Part C early intervention programs. Through various measurement processes, valuable information was obtained with respect to those factors associated with different service coordinator practices.

Three other articles bring important issues to the attention of IYC readers. First, the early appearance of interest in social aspects of the world for children with Down syndrome is examined along with implications for designing early interventions tailored for this group of children. Second, IYC presents an update of the various hearing screening practices in early childhood settings. With new technologies and a well-designed system, very early detection and the ability to minimize language delays can be achieved. Finally, models of practice continue to undergo scrutiny and change as a result of new data, new frameworks, and shifting values. This is certainly the case for models of practice in occupational therapy and is thoughtfully discussed with case illustrations in another article.

Michael J. Guralnick, PhD

Editor, Infants & Young Children