Minnesota Child Development Inventory: A Normative Study

AbstractNew norms for the Minnesota Child Development Inventory (MCDI) are presented. The present study focussed on children ranging in age from 1 to 4 years, considered by many to be the most crucial period for conducting developmental screening. The final sample (N = 1,322) was three times larger than the original MCDI sample for the same ages (1-4 yrs), and represented a broader range of demographics. No relationship was found between medical history and SES, and MCDI scores. As an alternative to the percentage cut-off method of determining developmental status, the larger sample allowed the calculation of means and standard deviations for each age. T-scores may be derived from this information. The new normative sample was found to fit the theoretical normal curve remarkably well. Illustrative case reviews consistently demonstrated that the use of the SD versus percentage cut-off method yielded different developmental profiles. The new norms represent a substantially larger, more demographically diverse sample, from which a more standardized psychometric description of performance may improve use of the MCDI in developmental assessment.An assumption underlying routine developmental screening is that with early identification of developmental delay or deficit, appropriate stimulation or remediation may be initiated after a thorough assessment. Early intervention may circumvent or at least reduce the severity of later neurodevelopmental and learning problems (Ramey & Trohanis, 1982; Smith, 1978). Unfortunately, infants and preschoolers are often difficult to assess reliably, especially in a short visit (Honzik, 1984; Ulrey & Rogers, 1982). To facilitate routine developmental screening, it would be desirable to have an instrument that is clinically valid, time and cost effective, and easily administered.A questionnaire obtaining parents' observations of their child's development may potentially serve this purpose. Clearly written parental questionnaires have been shown to be reliable and valid indicators of children's current behaviour (Eisert, Spector, Shankaran, Faigenbaum, & Szego, 1980; Frankenburg, Van Doornick, Liddell, & Dick, 1976; Knobloch, Stevens, Malone, & Risenberg, 1979). Parental questionnaires have several advantages. First, parental observations are based on an extended period of time and may provide the clinician with a more representative developmental profile of the child, particularly for children who are uncooperative during examination (Honzik, 1984; Ulrey & Rogers, 1982). Second, completing the questionnaire prior to the clinic visit may optimize the clinician-patient visit by alerting the clinician to potential areas of difficulty; these areas can then be evaluated in more depth during the office visit and/or referral to appropriate professionals can be made. Third, by focussing parents' attention on age-appropriate behaviour(s), and encouraging observation of the child's activities, a questionnaire may even serve an educational role. Fourth, parents appreciate the opportunity to participate in the assessment of their child (Boll & Alpern, 1975).One parental questionnaire that appears to have promise as an early developmental assessment instrument is the Minnesota Child Development Inventory (MCDI; Ireton & Thwing, 1974). It samples a relatively broad range of developmental milestones for children aged 6 months to 6 years and consists of 320 simple, randomly ordered behaviour statements, requiring only an 8th grade reading level (Sturner, Funk, Thomas, & Green, 1982). The parent indicates which statements apply or have applied to the child. Examples of items are "Sits without support", "Uses the words 'fast' and 'slow' correctly", and "Ties shoe laces." Eight scales are derived: General Development (GD), Fine Motor (FM), Gross Motor (GM), Expressive Language (EL), Comprehension-Conceptual (CC), Situation-Comprehension (SC), Self-Help (SH), and Personal-Social (PS). …