In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Future Directions in the Education of DeafBlind Multihandicapped Children and Youth David Tweedie, Ed.D. and Hank Baud, Ed.D. The field of "deaf-blind" education, although comparatively new when conceptualized as serving the heterogenous population of those individuals with these dual sensory handicaps, has undergone tremendous growth in the last 10 years. The most important impetus for this growth was the passage of federal legislation in 1969 which provided funding for the establishment of regional service centers. These centers were responsible for teacher training and parent programming, as well as direct and indirect services for deaf-blind children. These comprehensive services were provided for an estimated 500 children in 1969 and are now provided to over 6,500 children (Dantona, 1980). Within the. population of the 6,500 currently identified center clients are students ranging in ages from 6 months to 21 years, with levels of performance being equally diverse. The past 10 years have also seen tremendous positive developments in deaf-blind education. Diagnostic and evaluation methods have become more sophisticated. Educational programs have been developed that are specifically designed for children with deficits in both the auditory and visual sensory areas. Increased numbers of teachers have received training in the education of deaf-blind children. Families have also been assisted in dealing with the complex needs of their deaf-blind children. Comprehensive services to a population of this nature mandates constant monitoring and a well-defined system for future planning. Future planning efforts such as 1980 Is Now (Sherrick, 1974) and The State of the Art (Lowell, 1977) have provided a framework for growth in the field, but the task is far from complete. According to Robert Dantona (1980), National Coordinator for deaf-blind services, more than 3,000 additional deaf-blind children between the ages of 0-11 have been identified. Also the population of students between the ages of 1316 , the "rubella-children," are now in need of services beyond basic programming levels. In order to meet the future needs of this very unique and diverse population, long-range planning that reflects a multidisciplinary approach to the education of deaf-blind children is needed now. In order to determine future training needs, a projection study was conceived. PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to provide data, collected from a multidisciplinary and repr sentative population, that could be used to formulate a framework for future programming efforts in the area of deaf-blind education. METHODS AND PROCEDURES In order to determine the future issues in deaf-blind education, a means of collecting prediction data was needed. A modified form of the Delphi Technique was selected as the procedural means for data collection in this investigation . Previously used in projective studies in teacher education (Cyphert & Grant, 1970) and education of the hearing-impaired, (Prickett , 1975), the Delphi Technique is an attempt to gain consensus among influential individuals within a given field. The consensus is determined through a series of questionnaires withDavid Tweedie is the Dean of the School of Communication , Gallaudet College, Washington, D.C. Hank Baud is an Assistant Professor at Columbia College, Columbia, South Carolina. Authors' note: Due to space limitation requirements of the Annals, the contents of the Questionnaire I and II were, deleted from the manuscript. In addition, the rank ordering of responses presented in Tables 2-6 provide only the first 10 items with the highest mean scores. For complete tables andlor copies of the questionnaires, please write to the authors. A.A.D. !October 1981 829 Future Directions Table 1. Distribution of Respondents. General Total mailed: Responses: Percentage of responses: By Professions Administrators Teachers Others Total Questionnaire 1 80 67 84% Questionnaire 1 Number of Responses 37 20 10 67 Questionnaire 2 68 61 89.7% Questionnaire 2 Number of Responses 33 18 10 61 By Geographic Area East Mid-West West Total Questionnaire 1 24 20 23 67 Questionnaire 2 19 19 22 60 out bringing individuals together to a meeting, thus eliminating the influence of psychological factors such as personalities, reputations of the respondents, and a "bandwagon effect" on the consensus (Cyphert & Grant, 1970). The "influential individuals" involved in this survey were determined by telephoning the coordinators of the eight...

pdf