Search

Universal screening of students is increasing as programs are implemented for improving social emotional learning (SEL) skills. Assessments used to conduct SEL screenings focus on social emotional ...

This study aimed to examine whether having knowledge of student cognitive skill deficits changes teacher beliefs and responses in regard to classroom misbehavior. Teachers (N = 272) were randomly assigned to an experimental or control condition. Although teachers in both conditions read the same vignette describing a student's misbehavior, the experimental group also reviewed information about the student's cognitive skill deficits. Teachers provided with cognitive skill deficit information were, on average, less likely to believe the student had control over the misbehavior, suggesting perceptions of unintentionality. Furthermore, they were significantly more likely to indicate positive emotional responses. Results suggest that school psychologists may consider sharing cognitive skill deficits information with teachers who are working with students displaying challenging behavior.

The purpose of the current study was to examine dimensionality and concurrent validity evidence of the EARLI numeracy measures (DiPerna, Morgan, & Lei, 2007), which were developed to assess key skills such as number identification, counting, and basic arithmetic. Two methods (NOHARM with approximate chi-square test and DIMTEST with DETECT classifications) were used to examine the dimensionality of each of the dichotomously scored measures. Both indicated unidimensionality for four of the EARLI measures (Counting Aloud, Counting Object, Measurement, and Pattern Recognition); however, results were discrepant for Numbers and Shapes. For the polytomously scored measure (Grouping), exploratory factor analysis indicated essential unidimensionality. In addition, the majority of the EARLI numeracy items did not appear to function differently by demographic variables, and scores from the EARLI numeracy measures demonstrated adequate concurrent relationships with scores from the WJ-III mathematics subtests.

Two studies were conducted with samples of middle and high school teachers and students to examine cross-informant agreement on the Academic Competence Evaluation Scales. Cross-informant agreement was examined using Pearson correlations and conditional probability indices. Results of Study 1 (N = 65) and Study 2 (N = 66) indicated that teacher and student ratings shared more variance than typically reported in prior cross-informant studies of problem or social behavior. Although teacher and student ratings shared strong correlations, there was significant disagreement when scores were dichotomized for decision making. Implications of the results for school psychology practice and future research are discussed.

Research Findings: The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the structural validity of scores on a measure of global classroom quality, the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS K–3; Pianta, La Paro, & Hamre, 2008). Using observational data from a sample of 417 kindergarten classrooms from the southern and mid-Atlantic regions of the United States, we used confirmatory factor analysis to examine the structural validity of the CLASS K–3. Factor analytic findings supported a 3-factor and 10-dimension structure for the CLASS K–3; however, some modifications were made to the original CLASS model. Practice or Policy: Although the overall structure of the CLASS has been generally consistent across validation studies, some facets of the model may be less stable than others. Additional examination of alternative factor structures is needed to further clarify the relationships among the CLASS dimensions and domains. Current psychometric evidence provides support for continued use of the CLASS to guide...

The Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) are brief measures of early literacy skills for students in Grades K- 6 (University of Oregon, 2009; see Kaminski & Good, 1996). School psychologists and other educational professionals use DIBELS to identify students who are in need of early intervention. The purpose of this review was to synthesize the current psychometric evidence for each DIBELS indicator. Strong reliability and validity evidence was observed for DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency; however, evidence for the remaining DIBELS indicators demonstrated greater variability. Although the majority of evidence focused on individual score reliability and validity for single-point decisions, further studies are needed to determine effective practices for progress monitoring.

Mathematics proficiency is becoming increasingly important for all individuals in today's society. Specifically, successful math achievement is necessary for the technological jobs of the 21st century and for many other daily activities (Mazzocco & Thompson, 2005). As a result of the growing emphasis on technology in today's workplace, employees are expected to display a higher skill level in mathematics than in the past (Clarke & Shinn, 2004). Furthermore, according to the National Science Board (2003), the careers with the highest rate of growth will require individuals who are proficient in math and science. Therefore, students with mathematics deficiencies may have limited career opportunities. In addition to the limited job opportunities associated with mathematics deficiency, there are also economic consequences of poor mathematics achievement. Because math-oriented jobs tend to yield higher salaries, differences in mathematics achievement levels may contribute to the growing economic disparity among various groups in the United States. As such, there has been increased concern for individuals of lower socioeconomic status, minorities, and females because these groups generally tend to exhibit lower levels of mathematics achievement (Arnold, Fisher, Doctoroff, & Dobbs, 2002; Business-Higher Education Forum, 2005; National Science Foundation, 2003). As a result, these patterns of mathematics proficiency and career opportunities may contribute to the gender gap in salaries and to intergenerational cycles of poverty (Arnold et al., 2002). Given the importance of mathematics proficiency in today's society, it is necessary to understand current mathematics achievement among students in the United States. Children's Achievement in Mathematics Recent research shows that many students in the United States are failing to acquire the mathematics skills necessary to succeed both within and outside the classroom (Clarke & Shinn, 2004; National Research Council [NRC], 2001; Reese, Miller, Mazzeo, & Dossey, 1997). Furthermore, national studies examining students' math achievement indicate that students may not possess the skills necessary to meet the changing technological demands of the workplace (Clarke & Shinn, 2004). One such assessment is the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which is an ongoing assessment of the proficiency of America's students in various skill areas (e.g., reading, mathematics, writing). NAEP provides insights regarding the academic achievement, instructional experiences, and school environment for students in Grades 4, 8, and 12. The 2007 NAEP results in mathematics showed that approximately 18% of students in Grade 4 and 29% of students in Grade 8 were below the basic level of achievement. Approximately 37% of fourth-graders and 32% of eighth-graders were at the basic level. The basic level is defined by NAEP as "partial mastery of knowledge and skills that are fundamental for proficient work" (Reese et al., 1997, p. 53). In the same assessment, 39% of fourth-graders and 32% of eighth-graders were at or above the proficient level. Proficiency is defined by NAEP as students having "demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter" and being "well-prepared for the next level of schooling" (Reese et al., 1997, p. 53). Overall, results of the NAEP show that the majority of students are failing to meet the national standards set for proficiency in mathematics. The demand for mathematical skills in the workplace, coupled with current low levels of mathematics proficiency, suggest a need to examine how math skills develop and which early math skills are most important for later mathematics achievement. In addition, results of such research would inform early identification and intervention efforts to promote early mathematics development and prevent later failure. Early Development of Mathematics Skills The importance of early identification of children who are likely to experience later academic difficulties in school has been highlighted by many scholars and school-based practitioners. …

The current study examined the influence of symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) on student academic achievement in reading and in mathematics in a sample of 146 first- throu...

A variety of coding schemes are available for direct observational assessment of student classroom behavior. These instruments have been used for a number of assessment tasks including screening ch...

The purpose of this study was to begin to explore the relationship among teachers' knowledge of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), knowledge of common treatments for ADHD, and accepta...

Academic enabling behaviors play a significant role in the development of academically competent students. Academic enablers are behaviors that facilitate learning such as social skills, study skills, motivation, and engagement. In this study, teacher and student ratings were used to describe the academic enablers of a nationally representative sample of 2,060 K-12 students. Differences in academic enablers were also examined for students who differed according to their educational status (i.e., general education, at-risk, and learning disability) and sex. Teacher ratings indicated that students without disabilities demonstrated higher levels of academic enablers that students with disabilities and students at-risk. Teacher ratings also indicated that female students demonstrated academic enablers more frequently than male students. Student self-ratings indicated that students without disabilities exhibited academic enablers more frequently than students with disabilities. Implications and directions for future research are discussed. ********** Academic enablers are "attitudes and behaviors that allow a student to benefit from classroom instruction" (DiPerna & Elliott, 2000, p. 4). Academic enablers represent a collection of skills and behaviors, such as interpersonal skills, motivation, study skills, and engagement that can be taught to all students, which in turn can influence the development and use of academic skills such as reading, mathematics, and critical thinking. Researchers have theorized and demonstrated moderate to strong relationships between academic enabling behaviors and academic skills (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Pastorelli, Bandura, & Zimbardo, 2000; DiPerna & Elliott, 1999; Malecki & Elliott, 2002; Wentzel, 1993). Also, researchers testing models of academic achievement have indicated that academic enabling behaviors play a significant role in students' development and learning (DiPerna, 1999; DiPerna, Volpe, & Elliott, 2002; Haertel, Walberg, & Weinstein, 1983; Mroch, 2000). However, researchers have generally not explored potential differences in academic enabling behaviors among students differing in educational status (general education, at-risk, learning disability) or sex. Relationships Between Academic Enablers and Academic Achievement Several researchers have explored the magnitude of the relationships between specific academic enablers and academic achievement. Wentzel (1993) examined the relationship between measures of academic achievement (i.e., grades and standardized achievement test scores) and students' social and academic behavior. Results indicated that teacher ratings of students' prosocial, antisocial, and academic behavior were significant, independent predictors of student grade point average (GPA). Prosocial and antisocial behavior also contributed indirectly to GPA through academic behavior. Only prosocial behavior, however, was a significant, independent predictor of standardized achievement test scores. Malecki and Elliott (2002) used standardized measures of social behavior completed by parents, teachers, and students to explore the relationships between social behaviors and academic outcomes. Using regression analyses, Malecki and Elliott demonstrated that social skills were a significant predictor of academic competence, and academic competence, in turn, was a significant predictor of achievement. Like Wentzel (1993), they concluded that social skills have a significant predictive relationship with academic outcomes. Evidence supporting the relationships between academic achievement and the enablers of motivation, engagement, and study skills resulted from the development of the Academic Competence Evaluation Scales (ACES; DiPerna & Elliott, 2000), a family of rating scales designed to assess student academic competence. During the development of the ACES, DiPerna and Elliott conducted several studies (e. …

Two key characteristics of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), problems with attention and behavioral control, represent the most common reasons for school referrals (Barkley & Edwards, 1998). This makes it essential for school psychologists to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to conduct a comprehensive assessment of ADHD and ADHD-related symptoms. The current article reports a critical analysis of six published behavior rating scales commonly utilized in a best practices approach to a school-based comprehensive assessment of ADHD (DuPaul & Stoner, 1994). Each of the rating scales was evaluated for strengths and limitations with regard to purpose, content, standardization, and psychometric properties. Recommendations are delineated regarding the use of each rating scale with specific target populations (i.e., culturally diverse students) as well as specific stages of assessment within a problem-solving process. ********** Behavior rating scales represent an efficient method for gathering information about children and youth (Wilson & Reschly, 1996). Information obtained from rating scales can be used for several purposes including screening, diagnosis, or monitoring the effects of treatment. As a result of their utility, rating scales completed by adult informants have become a common method for identifying children with behavior problems including Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD; Power & Eiraldi, 1998). ADHD is a neurological disorder characterized by a persistent pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity-impulsivity and occurs in 3 to 7% of school-age children (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2000). A diagnosis of ADHD is determined by establishing the developmental deviance and pervasiveness of symptoms, level of impairment, age of onset, and ruling out of alternative explanations for deviations in child behavior (APA, 2000). Used within this context, behavior rating scales help establish the severity of ADHD-related behaviors across settings relative to a normative sample of children of the same age and gender. Pediatricians and psychiatrists historically have assumed the primary role in diagnosis and treatment of ADHD (Barkley & Edwards, 1998). However, two of the most common reasons for school referrals, problems with attention and behavioral control, make it essential for school psychologists to acquire knowledge and skills in the assessment of ADHD symptomatology (Landau & Burcham, 1995). Best practices in the school-based assessment of ADHD recommend that school-based practitioners use an ongoing, problem-solving process that leads to the development of effective interventions (Hoff, Doepke, & Landau, 2002). DuPaul and Stoner (1994) recommend several specific stages of assessment for ADHD, and rating scales are considered relative to three of these: (a) screening, (b) multimethod assessment/ comprehensive evaluation, and (c) progress monitoring or program evaluation. Considerations in Conducting a School-Based Assessment of ADHD Selecting an appropriate rating scale can be a confusing task given the extensive array of rating scales currently available. In addition to the purpose or stage of assessment and age of the child, the psychometric integrity of instruments and the adequacy of normative data with respect to the child's culture are essential considerations when selecting an appropriate instrument. Purpose of assessment. Information obtained from screening activities, such as interviews and rating scales, helps determine the need for a more comprehensive evaluation (i.e., multimethod assessment). A multimethod assessment is designed to determine the developmental deviance of the child's behavior as well as pervasiveness of impairment across settings. Strategies used in this stage include behavior ratings, direct observations, interviews, review of school records, and assessment of academic skills (DuPaul & Stoner, 1994). …

Response to intervention (RTI) has received considerable attention as a mechanism for preventing academic and behavioral difficulties as well as identifying and teaching students with learning or behavioral difficulties. Unfortunately, despite extensive literature and discourse highlighting the 2004 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the use of RTI for special education verification (e.g., Gresham, 2002; Hale, Naglieri, Kaufman, & Kavale, 2004; Speece, Case, & Molloy, 2003), research and scholarship pertaining to the delivery of services required to appropriately implement RTI is limited. The purpose of this special issue is to provide a framework for critically evaluating the strengths and shortcomings of existing empirical contributions related to service delivery for RTI. Rationale The rationale for creating this special series was based on the need for a critical appraisal of extant knowledge. Although models for implementing interventions and monitoring student performance have been applied within educational settings (e.g., Vaughn, 2003; Walker & Shinn, 2002), more research on core components of service delivery systems (e.g., assessment and data-based decision making, intervention provision) is needed. Despite growing empirical support for academic and behavior screening and progress monitoring, additional investigations are warranted to determine the psychometric integrity and treatment utility of various RTI-appropriate assessment and data-based decision-making approaches. Research is also needed to evaluate the most effective selection, sequencing, intensity, and duration for individualized intervention. Although a handful of protocols have been developed to promote systemic change and implementation integrity, future studies are also required to determine the utility of specific practices applied within schools. Primary Objectives and Potential Effects This special issue has been designed to address some of the limitations in previous discussions by introducing researchers and practitioners to core service delivery components needed to implement RTI. The primary objectives for this issue are (a) to provide an analysis of core components and considerations related to service delivery systems required for RTI implementation, (b) to critically review the current state of the empirical research base related to the individual components, and (c) to identify necessary directions for future research to further our understanding of service delivery for RTI. To achieve the primary objectives, the special issue includes six full-length articles and two commentaries. In the first article, Glover and DiPerna (2007) provide a conceptual framework outlining five core service delivery components or considerations within RTI service delivery: (a) multitier implementation, (b) student assessment and decision making, (c) evidence-based intervention provision, (d) maintenance of procedural integrity, and (e) development and sustainability of systems level capacity. They provide an overview of the current evidence base and future research needs within each of these components. The next two articles focus on research pertaining to student interventions. Wanzek and Vaughn (2007) provide a synthesis of research on early reading interventions for students with reading difficulties or disabilities. Daly, Martens, Barnett, Witt, and Olson (2007) then focus on the individualization of RTI interventions based on student needs. The pair of articles that follow are concerned with RTI assessment and decision making. Jenkins, Hudson, and Johnson (2007) systematically critique the classification accuracy of various screening approaches for early reading difficulties. Shinn (2007) focuses on the empirical basis for using curriculum-based measurement to identify students' instructional need, response to intervention, and status with regard to specific learning disabilities. …