Search

To date, extant research has not established how rater training affects the accuracy of data yielded from Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) methods. The purpose of the current study was to examine whether providing users of DBR methods with a training session that utilized practice and performance feedback.would increase rating accuracy. It was hypothesized that exposure to direct training procedures would result in greater accuracy than exposure to a brief familiarization training session. Results were consistent with initial hypotheses in that ratings conducted by trained participants were more accurate than those conducted by the untrained participants. Implications for future practice and research are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the reliability of, and sources of variability in, language measures from interviews collected from young school-age children. Method: Two 10-min interviews were collected from 20 at-risk kindergarten children by an examiner using a standardized set of questions. Test-retest reliability coefficients were calculated for 8 language measures. Generalizability theory (G-theory) analyses were completed to document the variability introduced into the measures from the child, session, sample length, and topic. Results: Significant and strong reliability correlation coefficients were observed for most of the language sample measures. The G-theory analyses revealed that most of the variance in the language measures was attributed to the child. Session, sample length, and topic accounted for negligible amounts of variance in most of the language measures. Conclusion: Measures from interviews were reliable across sessions, and the sample length and topic did not have a substantial impact on the reliability of the language measures. Implications regarding the clinical feasibility of language sample analysis for assessment and progress monitoring are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The implementation of multi-tiered systems in schools necessitates the use of screening assessments which produce valid and reliable data to identify students in need of tiered supports. Data derived from these screening assessments may be evaluated according to their classification accuracy, or the degree to which cut scores correctly identify individuals as “at-risk” or “not-at-risk.” The current study examined the performance of mean scores derived from over 1700 students in Grades 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, and 8 using Direct Behavior Rating—Single Item Scales. Students were rated across three time points (Fall, Winter, Spring) by their teachers in three areas: (a) academically engaged behavior, (b) disruptive behavior, and (c) respectful behavior. Classification accuracy indices and comparisons among behaviors were derived using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analyses, partial area under the curve (pAUC) tests, and bootstrapping methods to evaluate the degree to which mean behavior ratings accurately identified students who demonstrated elevated behavioral symptomology on the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System. Results indicated that optimal cut-scores for mean behavior ratings and a composite rating demonstrated high levels of specificity, sensitivity, and negative predictive value, with sensitivity point estimates for optimal cut-scores exceeding .70 for individual behaviors and .75 for composite scores across grade groups and time points. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examined interventions for addition and subtraction that were implemented through single-case design (SCD) research studies. We attempted to extend prior SCD meta-analyses by examining differences in effect sizes across several moderating variables and by including a novel index of effect, improvement rate difference (IRD). We also examined the extent to which effect sizes differed by degree of experimental control achieved in the studies. Forty-seven effect sizes were obtained across 11 studies. IRD effect sizes ranged from .59 to .90 and suggested a moderate to large effect for the math interventions. Variables that appeared to moderate the effects were student age, time spent in intervention, and intervention type. We also identified a relationship between experimental control and the obtained effect sizes. Findings indicated that further SCD research in basic arithmetic and rigorous experiments are necessary to establish an evidence base that accurately characterizes intervention effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]