(eBook PDF) Assessing Students with

Special Needs 8th Edition

Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/download/ebook-pdf-assessing-students-with-special-needs
-8th-edition/
 BRIEF CONTENTS

PART I PART IV
INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC SKILLS
EDUCATION ASSESSMENT
CHAPTER 1 Special Education Assessment 2 CHAPTER 11 Academic Achievement 292
CHAPTER 2 The Assessment Process 28 CHAPTER 12 Assessment of English
CHAPTER 3 Including Parents and Families Language Learners 326
in the Assessment Process 48 CHAPTER 13 Reading 348
CHAPTER 14 Mathematics 388
PART II CHAPTER 15 Written and Oral Language 418
SKILLS FOR SPECIAL EDUCATORS
CHAPTER 4 Selection of Assessment Tools PART V
to Promote Fair Assessment 66 IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER 5 Standardized Tests 94 CHAPTER 16 Early Childhood Assessment 472
CHAPTER 6 Classroom Assessment 122 CHAPTER 17 Assessment for Transition
Education and Planning 500
PART III
ASSESSMENT FOR SPECIAL Glossary 524
EDUCATION ELIGIBILITY References 529
Name Index 571
CHAPTER 7 Intellectual Performance 160
Subject Index 579
CHAPTER 8 Adaptive Behavior 186
CHAPTER 9 Learning Disabilities 204
CHAPTER 10 Classroom Behavior
and Behavioral Disorders 246

vii

A01_MCLA5704_08_SE_FM.indd 7 26/05/17 2:12 PM

 CONTENTS

PART I Communicating Effectively with Parents

INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL and Families 58
EDUCATION ASSESSMENT Interviewing and Conferencing with
Parents and Families 60
CHAPTER 1 Special Education Assessment 2 Assessment in Action:
What Is Assessment? 3 A Family’s Point of View 64
Assessment Past and Present 4 Summary 65
Purposes of Assessment 8
Types of Assessment Procedures 9
504 PLANS, IEPs, and Students with PART II
Special Needs 11 SKILLS FOR SPECIAL EDUCATORS
Collaboration and the Team Approach
in Special Education Assessment 13 CHAPTER 4 S election of Assessment Tools
A Framework for Special Education to Promote Fair Assessment 66
Assessment 18 Criteria for the Selection of Assessment
Assessment in Action: Tools 70
Meet Sandy 25 Evaluating Measurement Types 75
Summary 26 Reliability and Validity 80
Test Scores and Other Assessment Results 83
CHAPTER 2 The Assessment Process 28 Promoting Nonbiased Assessment 88
Assessment in Action: Assessment in Action:
William and the Challenges Akis 93
of Second Grade 29 Summary 93
Types of Decisions 29
Steps in the Assessment Process 32
CHAPTER 5 Standardized Tests 94
Identification and Referral 33
Preparation for Testing 96
Determination of Eligibility 34
Test Administration 100
Program Planning 37
Observation of Test Behavior 106
Program Implementation and Monitoring 41
Multicultural Considerations 45 Scoring the Test 108
Assessment in Action: Interpreting Test Results 111
William 46 Technology in Assessment 115
Summary 46 Modification of Testing Procedures 117
Avoiding Bias in Testing 118
CHAPTER 3 Including Parents and Families Assessment in Action: Mrs. Duffy
in the Assessment Process 48 Mrs. Duffy Reports Test Results 119
Parent–Professional Partnerships Summary 120
in Assessment 50
Developing Parent–Professional Partnerships CHAPTER 6 Classroom Assessment 122
in the Assessment Process 53 Types of Classroom Assessments 124
Assessment of Children from Diverse Analyzing Student Work 126
Cultural and Linguistic Backgrounds Task Analysis 131
and Partnering with Their Families 55 Informal Inventories 133

viii

A01_MCLA5704_08_SE_FM.indd 8 26/05/17 2:12 PM

 CONTENTS ix

Classroom Tests and Quizzes 135 CHAPTER 9 Learning Disabilities 204

Criterion-Referenced Tests 137 Considerations in the Assessment
Diagnostic Probes and Diagnostic Teaching 139 of Learning Disabilities 206
Curriculum-Based Measurement 142 Sources of Information About Specific
Checklists and Rating Scales 144 Learning Abilities 212
Questionnaires and Interviews 145 Screening for Sensory Impairments 214
Portfolio Assessment 147 Screening for Learning Disabilities 218
Managing Classroom Data 149 Discrepancy Analysis for Identification
Grading and Report Cards 150 of Learning Disabilities 219
Interpreting Classroom Assessment The Response-to-Intervention Approach to
Results 153 Identification of Learning Disabilities 221
Avoiding Bias in Classroom Assessment 156 Measures of Perceptual-Motor Skills and
Assessment in Action (Two Applications) 156 Other Specific Learning Disabilities 223
Summary 157 Test Batteries for Specific Ability
Assessment 230
Assessment of Learning Strategies 237
PART III Answering the Assessment Questions 240
ASSESSMENT FOR SPECIAL Assessment in Action:
EDUCATION ELIGIBILITY Joyce 242
Summary 243
CHAPTER 7 Intellectual Performance 160
Considerations in Assessment of Learning CHAPTER 10 C  lassroom Behavior
Aptitude 161 and Behavioral Disorders 246
Theories of Intelligence 164 Considerations in Assessment of
Sources of Information About Learning Classroom Behavior 248
Aptitude 167 Sources of Information About Classroom
Group Tests of Intellectual Performance 168 Behavior 251
Individual Tests of Intellectual Behavior Rating Scales and Checklists 254
Performance 169 Direct Observation 261
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Functional Behavioral Assessment 271
Children–Fifth Edition 169 Attention Deficits and Hyperactivity 274
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests of Cognitive Self-Concept and Peer Acceptance 277
Abilities 174 School Attitudes and Interests 282
Other Individual Measures of Intellectual The Learning Environment 283
Performance 177 Answering the Assessment Questions 287
Approaches to Nonbiased Assessment Assessment in Action:
of Intellectual Performance 180 Joyce 289
Assessment in Action: Summary 290
Joyce 183
Summary 184
PART IV
ASSESSMENT OF ACADEMIC SKILLS
CHAPTER 8 Adaptive Behavior 186
Adaptive Behavior Measures 190 CHAPTER 11 Academic Achievement 292
AAMR Adaptive Behavior Scale–School Considerations in Assessment of Academic
(2nd ed.) 190 Achievement 294
Other Measures of Adaptive Behavior 193 Sources of Information About School
Answering the Assessment Questions 197 Performance 297
Avoiding Test Bias 199 Group Tests of Academic Achievement 299
Assessment in Action: Test Accommodations for Students
Sam 201 with Special Needs 300
Summary 202 Individual Tests of Academic Achievement 302

A01_MCLA5704_08_SE_FM.indd 9 26/05/17 2:12 PM

 x CONTENTS

Peabody Individual Achievement Other Informal Assessment Procedures 404

Test–Revised/Normative Update 302 Within the Context of the Classroom 410
Woodcock-Johnson IV Tests Answering the Assessment Questions 412
of Achievement 310 Assessment in Action:
Wechsler Individual Achievement David 415
Test–Second Edition 314 Summary 417
Other Individual Measures of Academic
Achievement 317 CHAPTER 15 Written and Oral Language 418
Curriculum-Based Measurement Strategies 320 Considerations in Assessment of Written
Answering the Assessment Questions 321 Language 419
Assessment in Action: Strategies for Assessing Spelling 425
Nathaniel 324
Strategies for Assessing Handwriting 430
Summary 325
Strategies for Assessing Composition 434
Within the Context of the Classroom 443
CHAPTER 12 Assessment of English
Answering the Assessment Questions 446
Language Learners 326
Considerations in Assessment of Oral
Assessing Students Who Speak Dialects
Language 449
of U.S. English 328
Assessing Students Who Are English- Comprehensive Measures of Oral
Language Learners 331 Language 455
Within the Context of the Classroom 340 Strategies for Assessing Articulation 459
Answering the Assessment Questions 343 Strategies for Assessing Morphology
Assessment in Action: and Syntax 460
Joseph 346 Strategies for Assessing Semantics
Summary 347 and Pragmatics 462
Answering the Assessment Questions 466
CHAPTER 13 Reading 348 Assessment in Action:
Considerations in Assessment of Reading 349 Sal 468
Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests— Summary 470
Third Edition 353
Gray Oral Reading Tests (5th ed.) 358
Test of Reading Comprehension (3rd ed.) 360 PART V
Measures of Phonemic Awareness and IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS
Phonological Processing 362
Reading Fluency Measures 364 CHAPTER 16 Early Childhood Assessment 472
Informal Reading Inventories 365 Considerations in Assessment
Other Informal Strategies 367 of Young Children 474
Within the Context of the Classroom 377 Screening 481
Answering the Assessment Questions 381 Ecological Assessment, Family Interviews
Assessment in Action: and Rating Scales, Observation,
Tyler 384 and Play-Based Assessment 485
Summary 386 Curriculum-Based and Criterion-
Referenced Assessment 489
CHAPTER 14 Mathematics 388 Norm-Referenced and Dynamic
Considerations in Assessment Assessment 492
of Mathematics 389 School Readiness 493
Keymath-3 Diagnostic Assessment 393 Program Plans, Goals, and Objectives 495
Other Formal Measures 396 Assessment in Action:
Curriculum-Based Measures: Monitoring Timmy, a Child with Possible Delays 497
Basic Skills Progress 404 Summary 498

A01_MCLA5704_08_SE_FM.indd 10 26/05/17 2:12 PM

 CHAPTER 17 Assessment for Transition Recommendations for Improving
Education and Planning 500 Transition Practices 521
Considerations in the Assessment Assessment in Action:
of Adolescents and Young Adults 501 Phillip, a Ninth Grader 522
Strategies and Approaches for Transition Summary 523
Assessment 505
Assessment Tools to Assist in Planning Glossary 524
for Future Employment and Adult Life 508 References 529
Providing Transition Services 514 Name Index 571
Assessment for College and Other Subject Index 579
Postsecondary Education Settings 517

Note: Every effort has been made to provide accurate and current Internet information in this book. However, the Internet and information
posted on it are constantly changing, so it is inevitable that some of the Internet addresses listed in this textbook will change.

A01_MCLA5704_08_SE_FM.indd 1 26/05/17 2:12 PM

 Monkey Business/Fotolia
1
Special Education
Assessment
LEARNING OUTCOMES
After reading this chapter, you will be able to:
• Define assessment
• Provide examples of how assessments in the present differ from assessments
in the past.
• List the three major purposes of assessment.
• Discuss proper assessment procedures (outlined by IDEA or another
organization).
• Compare and contrast the difference between IEPs and 504 plans for general
and special education assessment.
• Name members of the collaboration team involved in special education
assessment.
• Explain the major components and framework of special education
assessment.

M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 2 26/04/17 4:28 PM

 KEY TERMS
assessment formal assessment
individualized education program (IEP) standardized tests
individual transition plan (ITP) norm-referenced tests
individual family service plan (IFSP) informal assessment
prereferral strategies mild disabilities

A ssessment* is the process of gathering information for the purpose of making

a decision. Everyone engages in assessment. As human beings, we all gather
information, sift and weigh that information, and make decisions based on
our judgments and conclusions. When we wake up in the morning, we look outdoors
to assess the weather. When we meet friends, loved ones, or acquaintances, we study
their demeanor to assess their moods. Before we make a purchase, we weigh the mer-
its of various products. Before we enter the voting booth, we investigate the worthi-
ness of political candidates. And, as teachers, we assess our students.
Educational assessment is an integral part of the instructional process. Teachers
observe their students as they enter the classroom, take their seats, and begin (or do
not promptly begin) to work. Teachers ask questions and evaluate students’ answers.
They monitor students’ behavior in the classroom and in the other environments of
the school.
Sometimes assessment is more structured and systematic. Teachers give quizzes
and exams. They assign a written paper or project, and they evaluate the results.
Teachers also take part in the school-, district-, and/or statewide administration of
standardized tests to evaluate students’ progress in mastering the curriculum.
Although assessment is an important skill for all teachers, it is particularly
important for special educators—teachers who serve students with disabilities. Gen-
eral education is designed to serve typical learners; special education, in contrast, is
designed to meet the individual needs of students with school performance difficul-
ties. The instructional plans for students with disabilities must be highly individual-
ized, which means that special education teachers require precise information about
their students’ educational strengths and needs. Special education assessment is at the
core of this process.

WHAT IS ASSESSMENT?
Special education assessment is the assessment of students to determine strengths and
needs. In addition, it is used to determine student eligibility for services, strategies to
support students and families, and progress with respect to goals. It can be defined as
the systematic process of gathering educationally relevant information to make legal

*
Words appearing in boldface in the text are defined in the Glossary.

M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 3 26/04/17 4:28 PM

 4 PART I: INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT
and instructional decisions about the provision of
special services. There are many important aspects
to this definition. First, assessment is an ongoing
process, not a one-time event. Assessments take
place when students experience difficulty meeting
the demands of the general education curriculum
and are referred for consideration for special edu-
cation services. Once students are found eligible
for special education services, assessment contin-
ues in the special education classroom and other
school environments where the special education
teacher and others gather information related to
the everyday concerns of instruction.
Second, special education assessment is sys-
tematic. In the early stages of the assessment
proc­ess, an interdisciplinary team meets to plan
strategies for the collection of useful information.
Professionals—such as special educators, psycholo-
gists, and speech-language clinicians—work
together to ensure that sufficient information is
gathered to answer important questions. Classroom
assessment of students with disabilities is also sys-
tematic. Teachers regularly monitor students’ prog­
ress toward important instructional goals and,
when necessary, modify instructional strategies.
Third, special education assessment focuses
on the collection of educationally relevant infor-
mation. School performance is a major concern,
and teachers and other professionals evaluate stu-
dents’ progress in all pertinent areas of the school
curriculum. In addition to academic achievement,
professionals are interested in students’ language,
social, and behavioral skills. Students’ learning
abilities and strategies for learning are concerns,
as are the characteristics of the learning environ-
ments in which students are asked to participate.
All of these factors contribute to a better under-
standing of students’ strengths and weaknesses
and the types of support they may require to suc-
ceed in school.
Fourth, special education assessment is pur-
poseful. Information is collected in order to make
important decisions about schooling for students
with special needs. Those decisions concern
issues such as determining whether students
meet legal criteria for special education services,
selecting the most appropriate program and
placement for students, setting instructional
goals, choosing instructional methods and
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 4
materials, and monitoring student progress and
the effectiveness of instructional approaches.
Special education assessment extends beyond
the school years because infants, preschoolers, and
young adults with disabilities are served by special
education. In the preschool years, assessment
focuses on development in important skill areas
such as language, cognition, social-emotional
behavior, and sensory and motor skills. In young
adulthood, the concern is successful transition from
the world of school into the world of work, higher
education, careers, and other areas of adult life.
The term assessment is sometimes confused
with two other terms: testing and diagnosis. Tests
are one type of assessment technique, and, as such,
they are one of the many strategies used to gather
information about students with special needs.
Assessment is much broader; it is the entire data
collection process and the decisions that result
from that process. Testing is only one of the activ-
ities that takes place in assessment, just as the use
of textbooks or any other instructional tool is only
one small part of the teaching process.
Diagnosis is a term borrowed from the medi-
cal profession. In a medical context, the cause of a
condition is identified or diagnosed so that appro-
priate treatment can be offered. The diagnosis
typically results in a label such as “autism,” and
that label is linked to treatment. In contrast, edu-
cational assessment is not designed to establish
causes, assign labels to students, or determine
educational treatments based on labels. When
students are identified as having disabilities, that
designation is given only to document eligibility
for special services. Furthermore, special instruc-
tional programs are developed for individual stu-
dents based on their strengths and weaknesses in
school learning, not on labels for global syn-
dromes or conditions. In other words, special edu-
cators would conclude from an assessment that a
student has needs in the area of reading, rather
than labeling the student with dyslexia.
ASSESSMENT PAST AND PRESENT
Educational assessment practices for students with
disabilities have been shaped by a variety of disci-
plines, forces, and trends. Changes in education,
26/04/17 4:28 PM

psychology, and medicine, and in the beliefs that
society holds regarding the educational process
continue to influence how schools gather assess-
ment information to make decisions about the
students they serve.
While the measurement of personality and
other psychological factors was a topic of study in
the late 1800s, the work of Alfred Binet (1857–
1911) and others led to the major development of
assessment techniques in the early 1900s. Assess-
ments were created to meet a variety of needs,
including the screening of students in public
schools and the evaluation of military personnel
and potential employees. These early efforts
became the prototypes for many current group
and individual tests in psychology and education.
Controversy over the nature of intelligence
has affected the assessment practices used with
students with disabilities. One debate centers on
whether intelligence is one entity or whether it is
made up of a set of factors. Some tests attempt to
address a variety of factors that comprise intelli-
gence; these factors are then analyzed to identify
individual strengths and weaknesses within the
global set of abilities that make up intellectual
performance.
Another cause for discussion is the question
of whether intelligence is modifiable. Most pro-
fessionals consider intelligence a product of the
interaction between people and their environment
and, therefore, subject to change. Educational
assessment of students with disabilities now
incorporates procedures that analyze the environ-
ment as well as the person’s abilities.
The field of medicine has had a profound
effect on the development of educational assess-
ment procedures. Many of the pioneers in special
education were physicians who identified and
described children with various types of disabili-
ties and began the search for the causes and treat-
ments of those disabilities. Some of these searches
were successful, such as the development of vac-
cines to prevent diseases like polio. Others con-
tinue today in areas such as gene therapy and the
use of sophisticated medical technologies to study
the brain functioning of persons with dyslexia and
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders.
For many years, educators were hampered by
the use of a medical model in the assessment of
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 5
CHAPTER 1: Special Education Assessment  5
students with disabilities. Students were diag-
nosed with a condition (e.g., intellectual disabili-
ties or learning disabilities) and an educational
treatment was prescribed based upon knowledge
about that condition rather than the characteris-
tics of the individual student. In some cases, the
condition was assumed to be permanent; in others
(most notably, learning disabilities), educators
sought to cure the disability through educational
remediation. Considerable progress has been
made toward developing an assessment model
that is more relevant to educational concerns.
While identification of a specific disability is still
part of current practice, the focus in assessment is
the study of the individual student, his or her
strengths and weaknesses, and the ways in which
the instructional environment can be adapted to
address the student’s educational needs.
Other fields have also contributed to the
assessment practices in special education. Tests of
perception allow the study of how information is
processed through vision, hearing, and other
senses. Psychoeducational test batteries combine
the analysis of psychological and educational fac-
tors. Applications of behavioral psychology have
resulted in the use of several systems for behavio-
ral observations of students in their school envi-
ronments, including a special interest in the
curriculum and the instructional tasks with which
students interact. Other forms of informal assess-
ment, like interviewing, have been borrowed and
adapted from fields such as anthropology and
sociology.
With the end of World War II and the baby
boom in the 1950s, services for students with dis-
abilities grew tremendously, with a subsequent
growth in assessment procedures, particularly
tests. Tests designed for administration to indi-
vidual students were developed in all academic
areas—and in language, social skills, and voca-
tional skills—with the help of commercial pub-
lishers. In addition, special educators and other
professionals created informal procedures directly
related to classroom needs. Criterion-referenced
testing played a major role in linking assessment
and instructional programming.
Unfortunately, many misuses and abuses of
assessment procedures accompanied this growth.
Invalid and unreliable measures were used,
26/04/17 4:28 PM
 6 PART I: INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT
sometimes administered by untrained individu-
als. Some assessments were too narrow; some dis-
criminated on the basis of the student’s language,
cultural background, or gender. Results were used
inappropriately, with students erroneously labeled
with a disability. The rights of students with dis-
abilities and of their parents to due process under
law were violated (Birnbaum, 2006).
In 1975, the passage of PL 94-142, the Edu-
cation for All Handicapped Children Act, exerted
a strong, positive influence on the content and
procedures used in the assessment of students
with disabilities. The individualized education
program (IEP) required a statement of (1) the
child’s current level of educational performance;
(2) annual goals, including short-term objectives;
(3) specific special education and related services
to be provided; (4) the degree to which a child
was able to participate in the general curriculum;
(5) the dates for the beginning of services and the
anticipated length the services would be in effect;
and (6) appropriate objective criteria and evalua-
tion procedures and schedules for determining
how well the short-term objectives were being
attained (Murdick, Gartin, & Crabtree, 2002).
In 1990, through the Individuals with Disa-
bilities Education Act (IDEA), also known as PL
101-476, transition services were more clearly
defined so that services to children between the
ages of 18 and 21 could be further described and
applied. An individual transition plan (ITP) was
also required, with discussion involving school-
to-adult transition beginning by age 14 and no
later than age 16. In addition, the student’s IEP
was to contain a statement of the transition ser-
vices needed before the student left school.
In 1991, IDEA or PL 102-119 was reauthor-
ized in order to reauthorize Part H, the section
that deals with young children and funding for
their services. Federal funds were allocated to
help states educate infants, toddlers, preschoolers,
children, and youth with disabilities (Murdick
et al., 2002). Rather than require an IEP for chil-
dren between birth and 3 years of age, an indi-
vidual family service plan (IFSP) was required.
Professionals were to support the family and the
child in determining its needs and deciding how
those needs could best be met. The IFSP included
information about the child’s status, family
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 6
information, outcomes, early intervention services,
dates, duration of services, service coordinator(s),
and transition information (Murdick et al., 2002).
Breakpoint Practice 1.1
Click here to check your understanding of IEP, ITP
and IFSP.
The changes introduced in PL 94-142 are
maintained and extended throughout the years by
new versions such as PL 108-446, the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of
2004 (IDEA 2004). First and foremost, this law
guarantees that students with disabilities shall
receive a free, appropriate, public education in the
least restrictive educational environment. In the
area of assessment, the law mandates a set of due
process procedures to protect students and their
parents and detailed guidelines to correct past
problems. A team must adequately assess students
with disabilities, and an IEP must be developed.
In addition, state departments of education must
comply with federal requirements to receive fund-
ing for special education programming.
IDEA 2004 places special emphasis on assess-
ment of students’ involvement with and progress
in the general education curriculum. These areas
must be addressed in the development of IEPs as
well as how students will participate in state and
district assessments of school achievement. The
IEP team must also consider a range of special fac-
tors, including positive behavioral interventions
and supports for students with behavioral prob-
lems, the language needs of students who are not
proficient in English, and any requirements stu-
dents might have for assistive technology devices
and services.
Trends within the fields of education and spe-
cial education have also influenced the develop-
ment of assessment techniques and procedures. In
the early years of special education, assessment
focused solely on students and their deficits. That
approach gave way to increased emphasis on the
school curriculum and the specific instructional
tasks with which students were experiencing dif-
ficulty. At present, the approach is more balanced.
Both the student and the educational environ-
ment are of interest, particularly the ways in
which interactions occur between individuals and
26/04/17 4:28 PM

school demands. In addition, influences from
educational theories such as constructivism have
contributed to special educators’ perspectives on
assessment. In the constructivist view, students
construct their own knowledge by building on
the prior knowledge they bring with them to the
learning situation (Bell, 2010; Bransford, Brown,
& Cocking, 2000; Cegelka, 1995a).
One challenge that special education contin-
ues to face is the development of appropriate pro-
cedures to assess culturally and linguistically
diverse students who are suspected of having a
disability (Benson, 2003; Waitoller & Artiles,
2013). Unsolved problems in this area have con-
tributed to overrepresentation of some groups in
special education programs and underrepresenta-
tion of others (Artiles & Trent, 1994; Losen &
Orfield, 2002; Patton, 1998; Sullivan, 2011).
This issue is likely to persist as the population of
the United States becomes more diverse in the
next decades.
The movement to educate students with dis-
abilities in more inclusive settings has created a
greater need for both general and special educa-
tion teachers to have tools to assess these stu-
dents in multiple environments, including the
general education classroom. Educators of stu-
dents with disabilities are held accountable for
ongoing evaluation of learning. They need to
monitor student progress frequently, without the
necessity of administering standardized tests.
Such tests are too costly in terms of both time
and money, and their results do not translate
directly to classroom interventions. Instead, edu-
cators have turned to curriculum-based assess-
ments, that is, procedures and techniques that
evaluate student growth in relation to the cur-
rent classroom curriculum. Curriculum-based
approaches such as criterion-referenced assess-
ment, curriculum-based measurement, and port-
folio assessment produce results that assist in the
development of instructional goals, objectives,
and procedures.
Major educational reforms in the United
States are making profound changes in the assess-
ment and evaluation of all students, including
those with disabilities. By the mid-1990s, most
states had adopted sets of academic standards and
begun to link assessment of educational outcomes
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 7
CHAPTER 1: Special Education Assessment  7
to these standards (American Federation of Teach-
ers, 1996; Olson, 2006). In this evaluation model,
results of standards-based assessments are used as
the basis for judging student performance, decid-
ing whether schools and teachers are functioning
appropriately, and even forcing fundamental
changes in teaching methods and the structure of
schools.
The standards movement became even more
prominent with passage of President George W.
Bush’s education initiative, “No Child Left
Behind.” According to Bush (2001), this initia-
tive has four major goals:
• Increase Accountability for Student Performance:
States, districts, and schools that improve
achievement will be rewarded. Failure will be
sanctioned. Parents will know how well their
child is learning, and that schools will be
held accountable for their effectiveness with
annual state reading and math assessments in
grades 3–8.
• Focus on What Works: Federal dollars will be
spent on effective, research-based programs
and practices. Funds will be targeted to
improve schools and enhance teacher quality.
• Reduce Bureaucracy and Increase Flexibility: Addi-
tional flexibility will be provided to states and
school districts, and flexible funding will be
increased at the local level.
• Empower Parents: Parents will have more infor-
mation about the quality of their child’s school.
Students in persistently low-performing schools
will be given choice.
As states, districts, and schools face increas-
ing pressure to provide comparative data about
the scholastic abilities of American students, the
issues surrounding inclusion of students with
disabilities in high-stakes testing become a
major concern. Federal special education laws
require that students with disabilities participate
in state and local assessments of academic
achievement alongside their general education
peers. Although it is important to ensure that
students with disabilities are not excluded, at
the same time, appropriate test accommodation
and modifications as well as alternative measures
must be provided to guarantee valid and reliable
evaluation.
26/04/17 4:28 PM
 8 PART I: INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT
In summary, special educational assessment
today can be described in the following ways:
• Special education assessment, like special edu-
cation instruction, is individualized. It is tai-
lored to the needs of each student with
disabilities.
• Assessment data are used to make decisions
about the eligibility of students for special
education services and about the types of ser-
vices that are provided. Thus, decisions are
both legal and instructional.
• Assessment focuses on educationally relevant
information so that an appropriate IEP can be
developed, implemented, and monitored.
• Assessment also focuses on the student’s
involvement with and progress in the general
education curriculum.
• The student is not the only subject of assess-
ment. The learning environment is also evalu-
ated as well as the student’s interactions with
classroom tasks.
• A variety of procedures are used in assessment.
Assessment is not limited to the administra-
tion of standardized tests.
• Assessment is characterized by a team approach.
Parents and both special and general educators
are important members of that team.
• Professionals strive for nonbiased assessment of
all students, particularly those from culturally
and linguistically diverse groups.
• Assessment does not stop when instruction
starts. Instructional programs are continuously
monitored and evaluated.
PURPOSES OF ASSESSMENT
Special education assessment has several purposes
because it plays a role in each phase of program-
ming for students with disabilities. From the first
indication of a learning problem, special educa-
tion teachers and others gather information to aid
in decision making. In general, this information
is used to document eligibility for special educa-
tion services and/or adaptations of the general
education curriculum and to plan and monitor
the effectiveness of an IEP. The main purposes of
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 8
assessment are directly related to the steps in the
special education assessment process: identifica-
tion and referral, determination of eligibility, pro-
gram planning, and program implementation and
evaluation. These steps are described briefly in
the paragraphs that follow. A more detailed dis-
cussion can be found in Chapter 2.
Identification and Referral
Identification of students who may have disabili-
ties is the first purpose of assessment. Two identi-
fication procedures are used: screening and
prereferral strategies. Screening is a large-scale
data collection activity used to quickly identify
those students out of the entire school population
who may be in need of further study. For example,
most schools administer vision and hearing
screening tests at regular intervals throughout the
grades. When potential problems are detected,
students are referred for a more in-depth
evaluation.
Prereferral strategies, in contrast, are aimed
at solving the school performance problems of
individual students. Prereferral interventions
begin when a general education teacher consults
with others at the school site about a student
experiencing difficulty in school. Information is
gathered about the student’s performance in areas
of concern and about the instructional environ-
ment. In most cases, the prereferral team will
develop a set of adaptations and modifications in
an attempt to meet the student’s academic and
behavioral needs. These interventions are imple-
mented, and data are collected to determine their
effectiveness. If the results suggest a persistent
learning problem, the student may be referred for
consideration for special education services.
Determination of Eligibility
Second, special education assessment is performed
to determine whether a student meets eligibility
criteria for special education services. Eligibility
is based on two interrelated criteria: the student
must have a school performance problem, and
that problem must be related to a disability. Each
state develops its own eligibility requirements
based upon federal laws, and individual districts
26/04/17 4:28 PM
 CHAPTER 1: Special Education Assessment  9

may set additional guidelines for assessment. Eli- measurement of performance in skill areas of
gibility assessment is much more thorough than interest. At this stage in the process, assessment
assessment for screening or prereferral. Also, it is and instruction blend together, with assessment
individualized; the assessment team determines data providing the information needed to guide
what types of information it needs to gather for instructional modifications.
each individual student. Then, students are
assessed to determine their present levels of per-
formance in areas related to the suspected disabil-
ity. Typically, this involves investigation of the
student’s school skills, intellectual performance,
hearing and vision, social and behavioral status,
and language abilities. Information is also col-
lected about the student’s school history, current
classroom performance, and the characteristics
of the learning environment. Special attention is
paid to the student’s progress in the general edu-
cation curriculum and the types of support needed
to maximize the student’s probability of success
in the general education classroom.
ENHANCEDetext
Video Example 1.1
Program Planning
Classroom lessons are guided by the student’s progress
Third, educational assessment data are used to plan in the educational program. Watch this video to see how
the IEP. After the student’s educational needs are sorting, counting and graphing are taught and monitored
identified and prioritized, annual goals are devel- in the classroom.
oped. The IEP team decides what types of special
education and related services the student will
The final purpose of special education assess-
receive and what kinds of supplementary aids and
ment is program evaluation. Federal special edu-
services will be needed to maintain the student
cation laws require that the IEP of all students
within the general education classroom, if at all
with disabilities be reviewed periodically. School
possible. The IEP indicates who will accomplish
staff and parents examine the progress of the stu-
the goals and objectives, the settings in which
dent and the results of the program and decide
services will take place, and the amount of time ser-
if special education services should be continued
vices will require. The plan also outlines how the
as is, modified, or discontinued. In addition, the
student’s progress will be monitored and how par-
student’s eligibility for special education services
ents will be informed about their child’s progress.
is typically reviewed every 3 years. These types of
program evaluation are designed to ensure that
Program Implementation and Evaluation students with disabilities receive appropriate
The fourth reason for assessment is to monitor the interventions and that those interventions con-
student’s progress in the educational program. tinue only as long as they are required.
Information is gathered by teachers (and others,
as appropriate) about the effects of instruction and
other types of interventions. This type of assess- TYPES OF ASSESSMENT
ment is usually performed at frequent intervals,
PROCEDURES
perhaps weekly or even daily. A variety of proce-
dures are used, although the most common are Many types of assessment procedures are availa-
informal techniques such as observation of stu- ble, and they vary along several dimensions,
dent behavior, review of student work, and direct including the amount of professional expertise

M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 9 26/04/17 4:28 PM

 10 PART I: INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT
required for their use. In general, special educa-
tion assessment techniques can be divided into
two major types: formal and informal strategies.
Both are employed in all phases of assessment,
although formal strategies are often considered
more useful for gathering information for eligibil-
ity decisions and informal strategies are more use-
ful for classroom instructional decisions.
Formal assessment strategies are structured
assessment procedures with specific guidelines
for administration, scoring, and interpretation of
results. The most common example, standardized
tests, sometimes referred to as norm-referenced
tests, are designed to compare the performance of
one individual to that of a normative group. Thus,
their use is limited to students who are very simi-
lar to the group used in developing the test.
Norm-referenced tests may be designed for
group or individual administration and are avail-
able for most academic subjects, intellectual per-
formance, and other areas of learning. Directions
for administration, scoring, and interpretation of
these measures are usually very explicit. As a
result, professionals require training before they
can be considered skilled in the use of a specific
test. Test results are expressed in quantitative
scores such as standard scores and percentile
ranks, and as Chapter 5 explains, the test manual
provides information about factors such as the
development of the test, the standardization sam-
ple, and quality of the test as a measurement tool.
Results of norm-referenced tests are used in a
number of ways, including documentation of
eligibility for special education and identification
of general strengths and weaknesses in school
learning.
Tests can be designed for administration to a
group of individuals or to one person. Group pro-
cedures often penalize students with disabilities
because they may require students to read, follow
directions independently, and work under timed
conditions. Because students with disabilities
often lack these skills, results of group tests tend
to underestimate their abilities. However, group
tests are the norm in general education because
they are more efficient and require much less time
to administer. When students with disabilities
participate in such assessments, accommodations
are often necessary.
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 10
Tests that are individually administered are
preferred in special education. The professional
administering the test (usually called the exam-
iner or tester) establishes rapport with the student
and makes sure he or she understands the direc-
tions for the test tasks. Skills are measured sepa-
rately, so that it is possible to separate out a
student’s performance in reading from his or her
skills or knowledge in other areas such as mathe-
matics, science, or social studies. In many cases,
students respond orally, so that poor writing skills
are not penalized when writing is not the object
of assessment. In addition, professionals can care-
fully observe students as they interact with test
tasks to gain further insight into their strengths,
weaknesses, and general work behaviors.
The Assessment Tool Table of Contents at the
start of this book lists each of the individual and
group tests (and other published measures) dis-
cussed in depth in this text. Informal assessment
strategies are also included in the Index. Inclusion
of a test or strategy should not be considered an
endorsement; some of the measures that we have
described, though popular, do not meet recom-
mended standards for technical adequacy. Test
descriptions throughout this book include infor-
mation about technical adequacy as well as the
training required by examiners. In some cases,
administration is limited to members of certain
professional groups. For example, most states
restrict the use of individual aptitude measures to
licensed school psychologists.
Informal assessment procedures are used in
educational assessments to determine current levels
of performance, document student progress, and
direct changes in the instructional program. A dis-
tinction is often made between the formal measures
just described and these less formal techniques.
Informal procedures are usually less struc-
tured or are structured differently from standard-
ized tests. Rather than administering a formal
test, a teacher might observe a student with
behavior problems, give the class a test on the
spelling words studied that week, or assign math-
ematics homework. Like most informal measures,
these are designed by the teacher rather than by a
commercial publisher. Also, their purpose is to
gather information directly related to instruction.
There is an element of subjectivity in the design
26/04/17 4:28 PM

of informal measures as well as in their adminis-
tration, scoring (if they are scored), and inter-
pretation. In fact, interpretation is often quite
difficult because of a lack of guidelines.
Although informal procedures lack the kinds
of scores yielded by standardized tests, their results
are relevant to instruction because they can be
expressed in instructional terms. Informal assess-
ment tools vary in how directly they measure stu-
dent performance and instructional conditions.
Some involve the student directly, whereas others
rely on informants such as teachers and parents.
Observation, curriculum-based assessments, and
other informal procedures are discussed in detail in
Chapter 6, the chapter on classroom assessment.
Because informal assessment strategies have a
clear connection to the curriculum, the potential
usefulness of the results they produce is high.
However, it is important to point out that just
because an assessment technique is informal does
not mean that it is appropriate for all students
with disabilities. Informal measures may contain
barriers like those in group, formal tests. For
example, a classroom quiz might be timed or a
math assignment might require reading and writ-
ing skills. As is the case with formal measures,
accommodations are often necessary.
ENHANCEDetext
Video Example 1.2
Breakpoint Practice 1.2
Click here to check your understanding of formal
and informal assessment.
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 11
CHAPTER 1: Special Education Assessment  11
504 PLANS, IEPS, AND STUDENTS
WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
Special educational assessment involves students
with disabilities. As defined by federal law, these
disabilities include:
intellectual disability, a hearing impairment
(including deafness), a speech or language impair-
ment, a visual impairment (including blindness),
a serious emotional disturbance (hereinafter
referred to in this part as “emotional distur-
bance”), an orthopedic impairment, autism, trau-
matic brain injury, other health impairment; a
specific learning disability, deaf-blindness, or
multiple disabilities who, by reason thereof, needs
special education and related services. (IDEA
2004 Final Regulations, §300.8(a)(l))
Students qualifying for services are entitled to
receive a free and appropriate education from spe-
cial educators and other professionals.
IDEA 2004, like its 1997 predecessor,
expands the definition of “child with a disability”
to include young children ages 3 through 9 who
are “experiencing developmental delays . . . and
who, by reason thereof, need special education
and related services” (IDEA 2004, Part A, Section
602(3)(B)). This allows young children to receive
special services without the need to label them as
having a specific disability. The law requires that
delays be documented in one or more of these
areas: physical, cognitive, communication, social
or emotional, or adaptive development.
Another group of students benefiting from
federal protections are those identified as having
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD).
This disorder involves issues with attention and
behaviors of impulsivity and overactivity. A stu-
dent with ADHD could be distractible, often
moving around. A student with attention-deficit
disorder (ADD) has issues of attention without
impulsivity and overactivity. The student with
ADD appears inattentive. The U.S. Department
of Education ruled in 1991 that students with
ADHD are eligible for services under Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The regula-
tions for IDEA 2004 include both ADHD and
ADD in the list of conditions covered under the
“other health impairment” disability category.
According to the federal definition, other health
26/05/17 2:26 PM
 12 PART I: INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT

impairment “means having limited strength, Breakpoint Practice 1.3

vitality or alertness, including a heightened alertness
to environmental stimuli, that results in limited
alertness with respect to the educational environ-
ment” (IDEA 2004 Final Regulations, §300.8(c)(9),
emphasis added). This limitation may be due to
a variety of health problems, including both
attention-deficit disorder and attention-deficit/
hyperactivity disorder. It is important that stu-
dents with ADHD or ADD who need a 504 plan
are provided this plan. This is different from an
IEP because a 504 plan is not special education,
whereas an IEP is. When a student qualifies for a
504 plan, accommodations are made in the class-
room. This plan is required under civil rights law.
The student does not meet a special education
classification but requires accommodations.
Click here to check your understanding of 504 plans.
This book focuses on educational assessment
of students with mild disabilities. Mild disabili-
ties include intellectual disabilities, emotional
disturbance, speech-language impairments, and
learning disabilities. Because their disabilities are
mild, these students are often members of general
education classrooms and receive special educa-
tion services on a part-time basis. As Table 1–1
indicates, federal laws recognize the need for spe-
cial education services for students with disabili-
ties in the aforementioned areas. Students with
specific learning disabilities comprise the largest
group of all students with disabilities, followed

TABLE 1–1
Mild Disabilities
Intellectual Disability
Emotional Disturbance
Specific Learning Disabilities
Source: Building the Legacy US Department of Education.
Significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning, existing concurrently
with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmental
period, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance. (IDEA 2004
Final Regulations, §300.8(c)(6))
A condition exhibiting one or more of the following characteristics over a long
period of time, to a marked degree, that adversely affect a child’s educational
performance:
(A) An inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or
health factors.
(B) An inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships
with peers and teachers.
(C) Inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances.
(D) A general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression.
(E) A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal
or school problems.
Emotional disturbance includes schizophrenia. The term does not apply to
children who are socially maladjusted, unless it is determined that they have
an emotional disturbance (IDEA 2004 Final Regulations, §300.8(c)(4))
A disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in
understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself
in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do
mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities,
brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. . . .
Specific learning disability does not include learning problems that are
primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental
retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or
economic disadvantage. (IDEA 2004 Final Regulations, §300.8(c)(10))

M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 12 26/04/17 4:28 PM


by students with speech-language impairments,
students with autism, and students with intellec-
tual disabilities (National Center for Educational
Statistics, 2015).
From an educational perspective, students
with mild disabilities share many common psy-
chological, academic, and social-behavioral prob-
lems that require assessment. Students with
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder also share
these characteristics. The educational assessment
strategies described in this book apply to these
types of students. Many of the procedures are also
useful for students with other types of disabilities;
however, educational assessment for students with
severe disabilities and those with sensory and
physical disabilities requires special considera-
tions beyond the scope of this text.
This book is primarily concerned with school-
aged students with classroom-related learning
problems. However, procedures for the assessment
of preschool children and their families are
described in Chapter 16 and those for the assess-
ment of adolescents and young adults in transi-
tion programs in Chapter 17.
COLLABORATION AND THE TEAM
APPROACH IN SPECIAL EDUCATION
ASSESSMENT
Important educational decisions about students
with disabilities are made by teams rather than by
a single individual. The team approach brings
together individuals from different perspectives
who contribute their expertise to the decision-
making process. The team may be composed of
the student’s parents and professionals represent-
ing general education, special education, psychol-
ogy, speech and language disorders, medicine, and
other areas as needed. Each team member gathers
data about the student and interprets them from
his or her perspective, sharing the data with
others on the team. The team then analyzes all
contributions, including those of the student’s
parents, in an attempt to make the most appro-
priate decision.
The team approach is not new to special edu-
cation, although it has gained impetus in recent
M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 13
CHAPTER 1: Special Education Assessment  13
years. Federal laws such as the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act and its amendments
explicitly require that teams rather than individu-
als make the following decisions:
1. Evaluation of the eligibility of students for
special education and related services;
2. Formulation of IEPs;
3. Evaluation and modification of IEPs; and
4. Periodic review of the need for special educa-
tion and related services.
The membership of educational decision-
making teams varies. Different purposes require
different numbers of team members and the rep-
resentation of different disciplines. For example,
the team that assesses a student for eligibility for
special services is likely to have more members
than the team responsible for formulating the IEP
for the same student. The needs of the student
also influence team membership. A student with
several severe disabilities is likely to require a
larger team representing more disciplines than a
student with a mild disability.
Federal laws require that team decisions take
into consideration several areas of student func-
tioning, if those areas are pertinent to the educa-
tional needs of a specific student. Table 1–2 lists
several possible areas of concern and the team
members who are the primary sources of informa-
tion for each area. Although certain team mem-
bers take major responsibility for assessment in
certain areas, any team member may provide
additional information.
This book is written from the perspective of
one member of the team, the special educator.
Although many of the assessment procedures
described here can be used by other professionals,
the special educator is the team member who
focuses on the needs of students with disabilities.
Having the dual responsibilities of assessment
and instruction, the special educator is in a unique
position to maintain an educational focus in the
special education assessment process.
School Personnel
General and special education teachers who are
involved directly with the student on a day-to-
day basis are necessary team members. Teachers
26/04/17 4:28 PM
 14 PART I: INTRODUCTION TO SPECIAL EDUCATION ASSESSMENT

TABLE 1–2
Primary Sources of Information about Student Functioning
TEAM MEMBER TYPE OF INFORMATION
Social and
Emotional General School Communicative Motor Transition
Health Status Ability Performance Status Skills Factors
Educators * * * *
Parents * * * * *
Students * * *
Psychologists * * *
Speech-Language *
Pathologists
Medical Personnel * *
Counselors and Social *
Workers
Transition Specialists *
Motor Skills Specialists * *

are able to provide information on all aspects of
student development, especially academic perfor-
mance and social and emotional status.
General education teachers contribute valua-
ble information about students’ social skills in
dealing with their peers. They are also the major
source of information about the instructional
programs and procedures used in their classroom
and have firsthand knowledge about the stu-
dent’s response to those programs and proce-
dures. Their assessment procedures often consist
of group-administered achievement tests, infor-
mal tests and inventories, classroom observations,
and portfolios. Consequently, they can describe
how well the student with a disability is pro-
gressing in the general education curriculum
compared to others in the classroom. These types
of information are particularly useful in deter-
mining the kinds of adaptations and accommo-
dations the student will need to succeed in the
regular classroom environment.
Special educators offer a somewhat different
perspective. Their assessment procedures are gen-
erally more individualized; they gather formal
and informal data not only about academic skills
but also about performance in areas such as
language and behavior. This information, when
added to that of general educators, helps the team
to make decisions about the types of services
needed by students with disabilities.
Special education teachers are often members
of school-based teams that collaborate with and
provide consultation to classroom teachers. In this
role, special educators may perform classroom
observations and work with the team to develop
possible strategies to address learning and behav-
ioral problems in the general education environ-
ment. When students are referred for consideration
for special education services, special educators
play a major role in the assessment process, serv-
ing as important members of the team, with
responsibility for gathering information about the
student’s current levels of performance in a num-
ber of areas.
School administrators on educational decision-
making teams may include building principals,
directors of special education, or other supervi-
sory personnel. Building principals or vice princi-
pals are often included to enlist their cooperation
in the education of students with disabilities at
the school site and to encourage their support of
special education and inclusion programs. Special
education administrators and other supervisory
personnel are able to share their knowledge of the

M01_MCLA5704_08_SE_C01.indd 14 26/04/17 4:28 PM

Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
gave to Mr. Morgan. The expert persisted in his determination, but
consented to see Mr. Morgan again the next day. On our way back I
said to Mr. Morgan: “It seems to me that this man does not see the
point of the application because he won’t see it; he doesn’t want to
see it.” Mr. Morgan made the rather enigmatical reply: “It seems very
plain to me.”
The next day Mr. Morgan made the point to the expert that he
could not afford to take such a position as that—he could not sustain
it. He then consented to make the application, but added what he
had already said to me, that he had no idea it would be granted, and
if it was, it would be good for nothing. It will hardly be credited that he
was over two months in preparing this application, getting it into a
form in which he was sure it could not be allowed. When it was
finally shown to me I could not understand it. It contained two
references, the pertinence of which I could not see; he assured me,
however, that it was the very best that could be done, although he
said he had very little hopes that it would be allowed. Sure enough,
in a few days the rejection was received from Washington and a
meeting was called to hear his report. He used very strong language
in making this report, saying: “This rejection is final and the case is
hopeless,” and walking over to where I was sitting, he shook a paper
in my face with an air as if I had been a detected felon and he held in
his hand the proof of my rascality, saying: “This is a paper I received
from Washington this morning that settles your hash, sir.” When he
sat down the silence might have been felt. Every one shrank from
what appeared to them the inevitable and final step, the adoption of
a resolution to the effect: “Whereas Mr. Porter has failed to keep his
agreement with us, the whole matter be now dismissed from our
further consideration.”
I did not allow them much time for reflection, but rose and made a
little speech as follows: “Mr. Chairman, I have but a single word to
say. I have taken this case out of the expert’s hands; I expect to go
to Washington to-morrow morning and return in the afternoon, and
when I come back I shall bring this reissue with me.” No one said a
word, but I knew what was in every man’s mind: “What a fool, when
our great Philadelphian authority has spoken, to imagine that he can
do anything to change the result!” However, there was no disposition
to cut me off by any precipitate action, and the meeting adjourned
subject to the call of the chair, every one feeling that it was a mere
waste of time.
The next morning I was received by Mr. Fowler, the accomplished
chief examiner in the class of steam-engines, with his usual extreme
courtesy. He told me that he felt very sorry at finding himself obliged
to reject my application, but the very precedents cited in the
application itself left him no alternative. “However,” he added, “if you
have anything new to present I shall be most happy to receive it.” In
reply I handed to him the specification which had already done duty
so ineffectively with the expert and in which I had not changed a
syllable. He read it through with fixed attention, and the instant he
finished he exclaimed: “Why, Mr. Porter, it is perfectly obvious that
you are entitled to this reissue, and the cases cited in the application
have nothing to do with it; but why was not this presented to me in
the first place?” I told him I had prepared it for that purpose and
placed it in the hands of the expert, who, after reading it, returned it
to me, saying it would be of no use to him. Mr. Fowler instantly asked
me if I had prepared any claims. I told him I had, because I could not
get any one to prepare them for me; but it was a new business to
me, and I had asked the advice of the expert about them, who, after
reading them, returned them to me without any suggestion, merely
remarking: “If you get these allowed you will be doing very well.” The
moment Mr. Fowler glanced at them he exclaimed: “Oh, Mr. Porter,
we cannot allow any such claims as these; they are functional
claims, which the Patent Office never allows.” Then, evidently seeing
my helpless condition in the hands of a traitor, he instantly added: “I
shall be occupied this morning, but if you will call at three o’clock I
will have two claims prepared for you which will be allowed.” So the
expert had let me go to Washington with claims that he knew could
not be allowed, and sure that my errand would be fruitless. But he
did not imagine that the examiner would see through his treachery
and thwart it. At three o’clock our interview was brief; as I entered
Mr. Fowler’s room he handed me a paper, saying: “These have been
allowed; you will receive the reissue in the course of three or four
days, and it will appear in next week’s Gazette. Good afternoon.”
 I suppose that I never looked on a countenance expressing more
amazement than did that of Mr. Merrick when next morning I handed
him the copy of the claims and told him my brief story. He said he
could hardly believe his senses. Taking the paper, he started for Mr.
Townsend’s office, and in the course of an hour all the parties in
interest had been apprised of my easy triumph. The reissue arrived
as promised, was placed in the expert’s hands, and a meeting was
called to receive his report. I thought my troubles were all over; the
case was an absolutely simple one, there was no pretense that the
invention was not new, and he must report in its favor, no matter how
reluctant he might be to do so. What was my amazement and fury
when he quietly stated to the meeting that he had no report to make;
that the case involved very serious questions which would require
much time for their consideration; that the granting of the patent was
nothing—it was the business of the Patent Office to grant patents,
not to refuse them, but whether or not they would be sustained by
the courts was entirely another matter, about which in this case he
had very grave doubts.
I now did what I never did before or since, and what no good
business man, who is accustomed to accomplish his purposes, ever
allows himself to do: I, who always prided myself on being destitute
of such a thing, lost my temper. And not only my temper, but, like
Tam O’Shanter, I lost my reason altogether. Already driven frantic by
the frightful condition of affairs at the works, which had been
protracted over three months by this man’s machinations, and which
he threatened to continue indefinitely while he should endeavor to
find some means to accomplish his purpose of wrecking my
business, without an instant for reflection I shouted, regardless of all
proprieties: “You rascal! What was the Patent Office doing a week
ago when you reported to these gentlemen that this reissue had
been refused, that the decision was final and the case was hopeless;
what were they doing then, I would like to know? Were they granting
patents or refusing them? The fact is, you are either a traitor or know
nothing about your business, and you may hang on either horn of the
dilemma you like,” and I sat down, having in these few seconds done
myself and my case more harm than anybody else could have done
in a lifetime. I did not reflect that I could not have the sympathy of my
audience; they knew nothing of the state of affairs at the works—this
they had been kept in ignorance of,—nor of the consistent course of
treachery which this man had been following. All they could see was
that I had used outrageous language, for which they could not
imagine any justification, toward an eminent patent lawyer who
enjoyed their confidence, and they naturally supposed that was my
usual way of doing business. The chairman coldly informed me that
the lawyer was their patent adviser and nothing whatever could be
done until his report on the reissue should be received. I had entered
the room expecting to receive the congratulations of every one on
the bold coup by which I had saved my business. I left it unnoticed
by any one. The reader will not be much surprised to learn that it
was months before we heard from him again—months more of
frantic helplessness.
About the first of August I called at the expert’s office and was
informed that he had gone on his vacation and would be absent
about six weeks, and the case could not be taken up until his return.
In my desperation I called upon Mr. Townsend and made to him a
clean breast of our helpless condition, and offered to pledge all our
stock as security for a loan of the money necessary to buy a few of
the most indispensable tools. He replied to me: “Suppose the report
of the expert shall be adverse and the enterprise be abandoned,
what do you think your security will be worth?”
I succeeded in saving one order from the wreck in rather a
singular manner. This was an order from Mr. Lewis, of Cincinnati, the
projector of the cottonseed-oil business, for an 18×30-inch engine to
drive the machinery of their first oil-mill at Houston, Texas. I had built
in Newark an engine of the same size for Senator Jones of Nevada,
to drive an ice-making plant which he was establishing in the city of
New Orleans. Word came to me sometime that spring that this
enterprise had proved a failure, the work had been abandoned, and
the engine, their only asset of value, was for sale. I instantly bought it
and sent a man down to transport it to Houston and erect it there. Mr.
Lewis wrote me from Cincinnati an indignant letter at my sending him
a second-hand engine. I replied to him, stating first it was my only
possible way of filling his order at all, as I did not know when we
should be able to build an engine in our new works, and, second,
that it was a new engine, having been run only a few weeks, long
enough to show its excellent condition and not so long as engines
are often run in public exhibitions, from which they are always sold
as new. Mr. Lewis gracefully accepted my explanation, and the
engine was in readiness for them to grind the coming cottonseed
crop. The next summer we had a call from the agent of that mill, who
had come North during their idle interval, while they were waiting for
their next crop, to make his report at Cincinnati, and had come out of
his way to tell us of the wonderful manner in which that engine had
carried them through their first season, which he concluded by
saying: “That is the engine for the cottonseed-oil business.” After he
had gone I said to Mr. Merrick: “That is an old story to me; everybody
says that is the engine for their business, whatever their business
may happen to be.”
What did I do with myself during that six months? Well, I was not
altogether idle. First I found all the drawers in the drawing-office filled
with piles of old drawings which Mr. Merrick ordered to be preserved
and which we piled up on the floor of the unoccupied third story. Out
of the contemplation of that confused heap I evolved a new system
of making and keeping mechanical drawings, which I described in
the following paper, read the next year before the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers:
“The system of making and keeping drawings now in use at the
works of the Southwark Foundry and Machine Company in
Philadelphia has been found so satisfactory in its operation that it
seems worthy of being communicated to the profession.
“The method in common use is to devote a separate drawer to the
drawings of each machine or each group or class of machines. The
idea of this system is keeping together all drawings relating to the
same subject-matter. Every draftsman is acquainted with its practical
working. It is necessary to make the drawing of a machine and of its
separate parts on sheets of different sizes. The drawer in which all
these are kept must be large enough to accommodate the largest
sheets. The smaller ones cannot be located in the drawer, and as
these find their way to one side or to the back, and several of the
smallest lie side by side in one course, any arrangement of the
sheets in the drawer is out of the question.
 “The operation of finding a drawing consists in turning the contents
of the drawer all up until it is discovered. In this way the smaller
sheets get out of sight or doubled up, and the larger ones are torn.
No amount of care can prevent confusion.
“In the system now proposed the idea of keeping together
drawings relating to the same machine, or of classifying them
according to subjects in any way, is abandoned, and in place of it is
substituted the plan of keeping together all drawings that are made
on sheets of the same size, without regard to the subject of them.
Nine sizes of sheets were settled upon as sufficient to meet our
requirements, and on a sheet that will trim to one of these sizes
every drawing must be made. They are distinguished by the first nine
letters of the alphabet. Size A is the antiquarian sheet trimmed, and
the smaller sizes will cut from this sheet, without waste, as follows:
“A, 51″×30″; B, 37″×30″; C, 25″×30″; D, 17″×30″; E, 12¹⁄₂″×30″; F,
8¹⁄₂″×30″; G, 17″×15″; H, 8¹⁄₂″×15″; I, 14″×25″.
“The drawers for the different sizes are made 1 inch longer and
wider than the sheets they are to contain, and are lettered as above.
The drawers of the same size are distinguished by a numeral
prefixed to the letter. The back part of each drawer is covered for a
width of from 6 to 10 inches, to prevent drawings, and especially
tracings, from slipping over at the back.
“The introduction of the blue-printing process has revolutionized
the drawing-office. Our drawings now are studies, left in pencil.
When we can find nothing more to alter, tracings are made on cloth.
These become our originals and are kept in a fire-proof vault. This
system is found admirably adapted to the plan of making a separate
drawing for each piece. The whole combined drawing is not
generally traced, but the separate pieces are picked out from it. All
our working drawings are blue-prints of separate pieces.
“Each drawer contains fifty tracings. They are 2¹⁄₂ inches deep,
which is enough to hold several times as many, but this number is all
that is convenient to keep together. Each drawing is marked in
stencil on the margin in the lower right-hand corner, and also with
inverted plates in the upper left-hand corner, with the letter of the
drawer and the number of the drawing, as, for example, 3F-31; so
that whichever way the sheet is put in the drawer, this appears at the
front right-hand corner. The drawings in each drawer are numbered
separately, fifty being thus the highest number used.
“For reference we depend on our indices. Each tracing when
completed is entered under its letter in the numerical index, and is
given the next consecutive number. From this index the title and the
number are copied into other indices, under as many different
headings as possible. Thus all the drawings of any engine, or tool, or
machine whatever, become assembled in the index by their titles
under the heading of such particular engine or tool or machine. So
also the drawings of any particular piece, of all sizes and styles,
become assembled by their titles under the name of such piece.
However numerous the drawings, and however great the variety of
their subjects, the location of any one is, by this means, found as
readily as a word in a dictionary. The stencil marks copy, of course,
on the blue-prints, and these, when not in use, are kept in the same
manner as the tracings, except that only twenty-five are placed in
one drawer.
“We employ printed classified lists of the separate pieces
constituting every steam-engine, the manufacture of which is the
sole business of these works, and on these, against the name of
every piece, is given the drawer and number of the drawing on which
it is represented. The office copies of these lists afford an additional
mode of reference, and a very convenient one, used in practice
almost exclusively. The foreman sends for the prints by the stencil
marks, and these are thus got directly without reference to any
index. They are charged in the same way, and reference to the
numerical index gives the title of any missing print.
“We find the different sizes to be used quite unequally. The
method of making a separate tracing of each piece, which we carry
to a great extent, causes the smaller sizes to multiply quite rapidly.
We are also marking our patterns with the stencil of the drawings, as
well as gauges, templets, and jigs.
“It is found best to permit the sheets to be put away by one person
only, who also writes up the indices, which are kept in the fire-proof
vault.
 “We have ourselves been surprised at the saving of room which
this system has effected. Probably less than one fourth the space is
occupied that the same drawings would require if classified
according to subjects. The system is completely elastic. Work of the
most diverse character might be undertaken every day, and the
drawings of each article would find places ready to receive them.”
It will be observed that in planning the sizes of sheets I was limited
to antiquarian paper. Now no limitation exists. I should to-day
increase the number of sizes.
The whole summer passed, many had taken trips to Europe and
back, when about the middle of September Mr. Morgan notified the
chairman that he had received the expert’s report and requested him
to call a meeting of the subscribers to hear it. I went to the meeting
with mingled hope and apprehension. Mr. Morgan read a long letter
from the expert containing an elaborate argument against the patent
which he concluded by saying that he could not recommend its
acceptance. When Mr. Morgan had finished reading the letter he
continued: “Mr. Chairman, I am tired of this man’s delays and
quibbling, and I now advise you that Mr. Porter has performed his
contract, and it only remains for you to perform yours.” This was the
harvest from the seed I had sown six months before.
The following is the Reissue on which the patent expert hung up
our business for six months. The specification was written by me, the
disclaimer and claims were written by Chief Examiner Fowler.
UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE
John F. Allen of Brooklyn, Assignor to George T. Hope, of Bay Ridge, N.
Y., and Charles T. Porter, of Philadelphia, Pa.
Balanced Valve.
SPECIFICATION forming part of Reissued Letters Patent No. 9303, dated July 20,
1880.
Original No. 167865, dated September 21, 1875. Application for reissue filed June
2, 1880.
To all whom it may concern:
Be it known that I, John F. Allen, formerly of the city, county, and State of New
York, but now of Brooklyn, New York, have invented certain new and useful
Improvements in Balanced Slide Valves, of which improvements the following is a
specification.
My invention relates to that class of balanced slide-valves in which the valve is
practically relieved from the pressure of the steam, this pressure being sustained
by a plate supported above the valve, but so nearly in contact with it that the space
between them will not admit steam enough to affect the valve. Such plates are
designated as “pressure” plates, and have been made in some instances
adjustable, in order that they may be closed up to the valve as the faces of the
valve and its seat become worn. Heretofore such adjustments have been affected
by different mechanical devices, among which there was, in one instance, a spring
to move the plate laterally or crosswise of the valve while the pressure of the
steam held the plate down; and in other instances screws were used to move the
plate in two directions, both in line with the movement of the valve, and to hold the
plate in its adjusted position. All of these devices, however, are liable to objections
well understood by engineers.
It is the object of my invention to obviate these objections in a balanced slide-
valve; and to this end my improvements consist in utilizing the pressure of the
steam for giving motion to the pressure-plate down inclined supports and toward
the valve; in employing supports inclined to the face of the valve at a steep angle,
considerably exceeding the angle of repose of the metal, so that the pressure of
the steam on the upper surface of the pressure-plate may be relied on for giving to
it the above-described motion, and in employing an adjustable stop to prevent the
pressure of the steam from forcing the pressure-plate into too close contact with
the valve.
In the accompanying drawings, which form part of this specification, Figure 1 is
a transverse section through a steam-chest in which my improved balanced slide-
valve is applied, the section being on the line x x of Fig. 2, and Fig. 2 is a
longitudinal section on the line y y of Fig. 1.
 The valve A is fitted upon its seat in the steam-chest B, and moved to and fro
over the ports in the usual manner. The back of the valve is a plane surface,
parallel with its face. Along the sides of the steam-chest I provide two parallel
guides—one, b, inclined downward and outward, and the other, b¹, inclined upward
and outward, as shown in Fig. 1, from a point in the same plane with the back of
the valve and at an angle considerably greater than the angle of repose of the
metal. Theoretically, the plate should move down its inclined supports if the angle
of inclination exceeds at all the angle of repose; but practically, under conditions,
often unfavorable, existing in the steam-chest to render the action certain, this
angle should be largely in excess, as shown in the model and drawings. In the
instance shown I have provided chambers G at the ends of the steam-chest,
through which the steam may pass over the ends of the pressure-plate to the
ports; but any other approved passage for the steam may be provided.
The pressure-plate C fits snugly in the steam-chest lengthwise, and moves
freely in it crosswise. This plate has an opening in the top and a hollow center, so
that the steam entering at the top passes through the center and into the
chambers G, at the ends of the steam-chest. The bottom of this plate has a plane
surface, parallel with the back of the valve A, and beyond this plane surface it has
lateral inclines c c¹, parallel with the lateral inclines b b¹ on the sides of the steam-
chest, so that when the plate is in place its lateral inclines rest upon and fit closely
to the inclines on the chest, thus supporting the plane surface of the bottom of the
plate close to the top of the valve.
The width of the plate being less than that of the chest B, it will be seen that the
plate in this position would have a certain range of movement upon the inclines
crosswise of the steam-chest.
A screw-stop, H, passes through the steam-chest, and bears upon the adjacent
side of the pressure-plate, which will still be free to be moved crosswise of the
valve.
The operation is as follows: The stop H being adjusted to the point at which it is
desired to maintain the pressure-plate, the pressure of the steam will act upon the
plate and tend to force it down the inclines b b¹ crosswise of the valve and against
the stop, which will thus determine the range of movement of the plate and the
relation between its plane surface and the back of the valve. At the same time the
stop, being entirely independent of or disconnected from the plate, can be
readjusted as required to compensate for any wear upon the surfaces of the valve
or its seat, and the steam will at all times maintain the plate at the point determined
by the adjustment of the stop. This adjustment is, of course, made without opening
the steam-chest.
I do not claim the employment of inclined supports by a movement along which
the pressure-plate is caused to approach or to recede from the valve, since this
device has been already the subject of patent; but
I claim as my own invention and desire to secure by Letters Patent—
1. A balance-valve provided with a pressure-plate acted upon by steam-
pressure and having a downward and lateral movement through means of steep
inclines, as shown, as and for the purpose set forth.
2. A balance-valve provided with a pressure-plate reposing upon steep inclines,
as shown, and suitable means for limiting its movement upon the inclines, the said
plate being held down by steam-pressure, as and for the purpose set forth.
John F. Allen.
Witnesses:
De Witt Bogardus,
J. W. Durbrow.

Mr. Morgan’s advice was received by the meeting with a feeling of

relief from a long suspense; it was at once accepted unanimously,
and the temporary organization was made permanent. The directors
immediately convened. Before proceeding to the transaction of
business one of the directors said to me: “Mr. Porter, you have now
been in the Southwark Foundry for six months, and I understand that
not a single engine has been sent out from that place in all that time;
will you tell us why this is so?” I had then an opportunity of
witnessing a nobility of soul such as few persons meet with in the
whole course of their lives. Mr. Merrick rose and said: “I will save Mr.
Porter the trouble of answering that question. Mr. Porter has not sent
a single engine out of these works because he has not had a single
tool with which he could make an engine. I thought I knew all about
those tools when, last March, I assured you and Mr. Porter he would
find everything he could possibly desire, when the fact was I knew
nothing about them. I have been through those tools carefully with
Mr. Goodfellow and have seen for myself that not one of them could
produce work fit to be put in these engines. While I am about it I wish
to make another confession: I said then, and you all agreed with me,
that it could not be expected that the manufacture of these engines
could employ all the resources of that great establishment, and so
we left the door open for the return to it of the class of work which
had formerly occupied it; but from what I have myself seen in the six
months I have been there I am able to say to you that if the works
had possessed the resources which I really believed they did
possess, these would have been insufficient to meet the demand for
these engines which has come to us from all parts of the country and
for many different kinds of business. Mr. Porter knew what he
wanted and the demand that might reasonably be expected; I had no
conception of the one or the other. It is a great pity that we did not
then give him the means he asked for, and I hope this will be done
now.”
Mr. Henry Lewis spoke up and said: “What did Mr. Porter ask for? I
have no recollection of his asking us for anything at all.” None of the
directors could remember anything about it; the letter which I had
addressed to the chairman had even disappeared. Luckily, however,
I had made a copy of it, and I produced the letter-book, in which it
was the first letter copied, and read them this copy. I should say here
that I have inquired at the works for this letter-book, but have been
told by Mr. Brooks, the president, that all correspondence more than
twenty years old having no legal value had been destroyed. When I
had finished, Mr. Lewis exclaimed: “Did you write that letter?” “I did,
sir,” I replied. “Well,” he said, “I suppose I must have heard it, but I
have not the faintest recollection of it.” All said the same thing except
Mr. Merrick, as it had brought out his reply.
This illustrates the indifference of the directors at that time to
anything that came from me. An earnest disposition was now
manifested to make all the amends possible; the $100,000 which I
had asked for was immediately appropriated. In view of the utter
barrenness of the works I was asked if it had not better be made
$200,000, but this I did not favor. I told them I would rather proceed
more slowly, especially as many of the old tools might be made
serviceable when we should have perfect tools with which to refit
them. So at last I had triumphed at every point, but at what a cost, O,
what a cost!
With a number of other engineers I attended, by invitation, a
meeting held at the office of the American Machinist, February 16,
1880, which determined upon the organization of the American
Society of Mechanical Engineers, and soon after I had the honor of
being invited to read a paper at the first regular meeting of this
society, held in the auditorium of the Stevens Institute at Hoboken,
N. J., on the 7th of April following. The date of this meeting, it will be
observed, fell during the time when the Philadelphia expert was
racking his brains to concoct for me an application for a patent
reissue which he felt sure could not be allowed.
I read the following paper:
“This association can vindicate its right to exist only by exerting a
constant beneficial influence upon engineering practice in all its
departments. At the outset of its career it should take a progressive
attitude, planting itself upon sound principles of construction, aiming
to inspire the engineers of our country with the highest conception of
mechanical truth, and to diffuse a correct understanding of the
means and methods by which this truth is to be attained.
“As one subject of primary importance, I wish to present that of
strength in machine tools. Truth of construction, facility of operation,
and range of application are all, in one sense, subordinate to this
fundamental quality of strength; for they are in a greater or less
degree impaired where adequate strength is not provided.
“But what is adequate strength? On this point there exists among
the makers and users of tools a wide diversity of opinion. On
examination it will be found that this diversity coincides with the
diversity in mechanical sensibility. As the mechanical sense is
developed, there arises in just the same degree the demand for
greater strength in machine tools.
“To the mechanic who has never formed a notion of a division of
an inch more exact than ‘a bare 32d,’ one tool, if it can in any way be
kept from chattering, is as good as another, and better if it is
cheaper.
“To those, on the other hand, who demand in every piece, as it
comes from the tool, the closest approach to perfection, both in form
and finish, a degree of strength in the tool appears, and is
demonstrated, to be indispensable that to the former class seems as
absurd as the results attained by means of it appear incredible.
“In this country, as indeed all over the world, the standard of
mechanical truth has been very low. It is here, however, as
everywhere, rapidly rising. The multitude are being educated up to
the standard of the few. In this work members of this association
have borne and now bear an honorable part. Just in the degree that
the standard of mechanical excellence is raised must the demand
become more general for greater strength in machine tools, as
indispensable to its attainment.
“But what is the standard of strength? The anvil affords perhaps its
best illustration. It is a strength enormously beyond that which
prevents a tendency to chatter, a strength that under even the
heaviest labor prevents the least vibration of any part of the tool, or
any indication of effort more than if the object being cut were a mass
of butter.
“It will be seen that this absolute solidity in machine tools, while
truth cannot be attained without it, enables also mechanical
operations generally to be performed with far greater expedition, and
the subsequent work of the finisher to be in any case much
diminished and often dispensed with entirely.
“We are enabled in most cases to come at once to the form
desired, whatever may be the quantity of material to be removed,
and always to finish the surface with a degree of truth and polish
otherwise unattainable, dispensing in a great measure with the use
of that abomination, the file.
“Now, with this standard in our minds we look over the face of the
land and behold it covered with rubbish.
“It is curious to observe how ingenious toolmakers have generally
been in trying to avoid this quality of strength, and how deceptive an
appearance in this respect many tools present.
“It is interesting also to note how little this quality of solidity adds to
the cost of castings. The addition is merely so much more pig-iron
and really not that, because in the stove-plate style the forms are
more complicated, the patterns more expensive and frail, and the
cost of molding is greater. But what signifies even a considerable
increase in the first cost of a tool that in daily use is to perform the
work of many and is to place its possessor on a mechanical
eminence?
“It is not the purpose of this paper to enter into details, interesting
and important as these are, but to draw attention to the subject in a
general way. The improvement observed quite recently in this
respect, as well as in other points of tool construction, is highly
gratifying and encourages the expectation of still further and more
general progress.”
 The following summer I employed some of my leisure time in
making the plans for a couple of machine tools. One of these was a
double-drilling machine for boring the boxes of connecting-rods,
there being then no such machine in existence to my knowledge. I
had been planning such a machine in my mind as long ago as when
I was in the works of Ormerod, Grierson & Co., in Manchester,
England, in 1864-5. This tool was designed first to bore the two
boxes simultaneously and rapidly, and, secondly, to bore them with
absolute accuracy in their distance apart and in the intersection by
their axes of the axis of the rod at right angles in the same plane,
and all this without measurement or setting out or the possibility of
error. The other tool was comparatively a small affair. I utilized an old
milling-machine for facing simultaneously the opposite sides of nuts
and taking the roughing and finishing cuts at the same time. The
ends of the nuts were first faced on a special mandrel which insured
their being normal to the axis of the thread. A string of these nuts
was then threaded on a mandrel fitting the top of their threads and
some 15 or 18 inches long, on which they were held against a
hardened collar, the diameter of which was equal to the distance
between their opposite finished faces. The cutting tools were set in
two disks about 12 inches in diameter; they were set about an inch
apart alternately in two circles, one about one eighth of an inch
inside the other, and were held in position by set-screws in the
periphery. The cutters in the outer circles did the roughing; those in
the inner circles were set projecting about 0.001 of an inch beyond
the roughing tools and finished the surfaces. The mandrel was set
between centers, and the string of nuts was supported from the table
at the middle of its length. The nuts were secured in position by a
dividing plate on the forward center-bearing. What was done with the
two drawings I will state presently.
My success, as already related, came so swiftly and completely
after six months of anxiety as to be almost overwhelming. The more I
thought about it the more ecstatic I became; all my disasters had
been of a nature the effect of which time would soon efface. I was
full of high anticipations, I could see no cloud in the sky; I awakened
to my old zeal and energy and set myself eagerly to the work of
providing new equipment, unable to realize the real helplessness of
my position. Little did I dream that I was already doomed to drink to
its dregs the bitter cup of responsibility without authority. That story
will come soon enough; now I will ask the reader to accompany me
in my work of filling the shop with new tools.
My principal orders were sent to my old friends, Smith & Coventry,
in England. Among others I sent one for my double-drilling machine
with the drawings. I received a reply from them stating that they had
just furnished a similar machine to the firm of Hick, Hargreaves &
Company, the eminent engine-builders of Bolton, and that they
thought I would prefer their design for this machine, of which they
sent a blue print, to my own. I should think I did prefer it; it was
simply wonderful. It presented one feature of especial interest, which
was that the two drills were driven independently and when not
employed on connecting-rods could be applied to any other drilling
work. So I ordered that tool, and its work fully justified my
expectations. I ordered from them several planers, the largest one
passing a body five feet square. The planers they sent me had two
novel features which filled me with admiration. The tables were
provided with broad, flat shoes running on corresponding flat guides,
the sideways wear being taken up by an adjustable gib on one side.
This construction enables the bearing surfaces to be made one true
plane from end to end, making cross-wind impossible. The next
feature by which these planers were distinguished was the mode of
lubricating these surfaces. Each guide was provided in the middle of
its length with an oil-well which was a large square box, formed in
the casting. In the middle of this box was a small rod on which two
levers were pivoted, the arms of which were of equal length. At one
end these arms carried a roller, and at the other end a weight
considerably heavier than the roller. The roller was thus kept up
against the under side of the shoe, while its lower side ran in the oil;
thus the lubrication was effected by the revolution of this roller, which
needed to be only one half the width of the face lubricated; this was
found to be the perfection of lubrication. The tables were very stiff
and were provided only with T slots from end to end for holding the
work.
I built a one-story addition to the erecting-floor, about 40×100 feet,
occupying a space which had before been used mostly as a stable. I
divided this into two bays by columns, and provided each bay with
an overhead traveler of about five tons capacity, worked by rope
loops hanging to the floor. These were also made for me by Smith &
Coventry.
I ordered from Mr. Moore, of Philadelphia, one or two of the heavy
and powerful lathes built by him for turning chilled rolls. I also
ordered a six-foot square planer from the Hewes & Phillips Iron
Works in Newark, which they made expressly heavy, having become
infected with my ideas on that subject. From Pratt & Whitney I
ordered one large lathe and one or two small planers, and other
tools from several other American makers.
In one instance only I was disappointed; that was the case of a 12-
foot horizontal turning and boring machine. On examining the blue-
prints which were sent me at my request, I was struck with the
lightness of the table, and conditioned my order on this being made
twice as heavy, which was done. If I had made the same
requirement for every other part of the machine, I should have done
a good thing for both the builders and myself. The table ran on a
circular track, which was superbly designed. This track consisted of
a circular trough perhaps 8 or 10 inches wide, and in the middle of it
a bearing surface for the table, raised perhaps half an inch above the
bottom of the trough and half an inch lower than its sides. This
bearing surface was about 6 inches wide and was intersected by
diagonal grooves about a foot apart. Oil could stand in this trough
above the level of the bearing surfaces. I made a little improvement
on the method of supplying the oil. As sent, a dose of oil was poured
through a hole in the table, which was filled with a screw plug when
not required to be used. I screwed a plug into that hole to stay, and
drilled a hole in the bottom of the trough, in which I screwed a ³⁄₈-
inch pipe that I carried under the bottom of the machine, and up
behind one of the uprights to a higher level, and in the end of this
pipe I screwed a sight-feed oil-cup. I provided a drain-pipe, which
would maintain the oil in the trough at the desired level, while it was
fed to the trough continually, drop by drop, as required. This table
came with an imperfectly finished bearing surface. I set several men
at work to bed these surfaces properly, and did a fine job of scraping
on them. When it was finished, I pulled the table around with one
hand, it floating dry on the air caught between the two surfaces.
When we came to use the tool it chattered, and would do so
however light the cut we were taking; every part of it was too light
and vibrated, except the table. After all, it was the best tool of this
kind and size that I could have got in this country. If made of proper
strength I should have been able to use four cutting tools in the work,
each leaving a perfectly smooth surface; but that was a degree of
strength and usefulness that builders at that time had not dreamed
of.
One of the first of our smaller engines, 10×20 inches, I built for
ourselves, setting it in a location convenient for transmitting power to
both the machine- and erecting-shops.
The job of taking the cross-wind out of the great planer interested
me perhaps more than anything else, on account of its difficulty. It
was a long time before I could decide how to go about it; besides the
cross-wind, the guides were not parallel; at one end the V’s on the
table bore on one side, and at the other end on the opposite side. I
finally made an apparatus consisting of two V’s about three feet long,
and connected by a cross-bar on which was set a spirit-level having
a ground bubble. Another similar level was set on top of one of the
V’s. With this apparatus, which was strong enough and was finished
in the most perfect manner, and a brass wire, I was able to
determine beforehand what was necessary to be done at every point
in the guides. To finish this job on the bed, and afterwards on the V’s
under the table, required fully three months’ work, including the time
spent in preparing the apparatus, a job I could not begin until I had
our new planers. When it was done I was able to make a perfect job
of the great engine beds already mentioned, and other work which
was waiting for it.
Among the old tools was one large drilling-machine, the size of
which and the strength of its framing impressed me very favorably;
but when we came to use it we found it would not drill a round hole.
This defect could doubtless have been remedied by grinding the
spindle, when we got a tool in which to do it, and fitting new boxes. It
was determined, however, by Mr. Goodfellow and myself, that it
would not be worth while to bother with it, because it had been so
badly designed that the two traversing screws for the compound