Search

The purpose of this article was to examine a typology of child behavior using the Behavioral Assessment System for Children, Teacher Rating Scale (BASC TRS-C, 2nd edition; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004). The typology was compared with the solution identified from the 1992 BASC TRS-C norm dataset. Using cluster analysis, a seven-cluster solution was identified and replicated using internal and external validation procedures. Five of the seven clusters were similar to the original solution; however, two new maladaptive behavior clusters emerged. Results also showed that the percentages of students exhibiting problematic behavior increased over time. (Contains 4 tables.)

Gender differences in aggression have typically been based on studies utilizing a mean difference method. From a measurement perspective, this method is inherently problematic unless an aggression measure possesses comparable validity across gender. Stated differently, establishing measurement invariance on the measure of aggression is prerequisite to making any inferences about gender differences. This paper investigated whether aggression functions in the same way across gender using teacher-rated aggression scales from the Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC). The samples for this study consisted of the BASC standardization samples, including 1,223 children (628 boys, 595 girls) and 788 adolescents (379 boys, 409 girls). The measurement invariance of the BASC aggression scales was examined with both confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT). CFA results showed that there was not enough evidence to support the measurement invariance of the scales across gender at a scale level; IRT results found that only a few items were significantly different across gender. The two methods have similarities and differences in studying measurement invariance, so they can be complementary to each other. The implications of the findings for research and practice in school psychology are discussed. (Contains 6 tables and 2 figures.)

The Individuals with Disabilities Act (Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act; IDEIA, 2004) has been reauthorized, and new parameters for defining learning disabilities (LD) have been established that provide more flexibility for corresponding state and local regulations. The field now has a unique opportunity to shape the practice of LD diagnosis and should consider important conceptual, theoretical, empirical, economic, legal, and practical issues related to LD diagnosis. This article highlights five key recommendations for the diagnostic definition of learning disabilities: (1) the definition needs to be unambiguous; (2) it must be universally accepted across professions, researchers, and governmental entities; (3) it must incorporate clearly defined subtypes of learning disabilities; (4) it must be empirically supported; and (5) it must point to valid, reliable, and cost-effective procedures for the identification of children with and without learning disabilities. Consideration of these points may help the field to avoid repeating past mistakes and returning to the folly of poor LD diagnostic practice.

Education research changed significantly with the passage of the Education Science Reform Act of 2002. That legislation created the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) within the U.S. Department of Education, forever changing research in education broadly writ, including school psychology. The creation of IES served many purposes, from defining education as a scientific discipline to encouraging research designs based on the premise that they make causal inferences more tenable. Something had to change, and IES brought about this shift.

The author explores his views about conflicts of interest (COI) within the context of psychology. He asserts that COI are regular part of the work of scientists and practitioners. He cites the definition of COI as provided by the journal "Toxicological Sciences." He reveals the effort of scientists to mitigate biases in their research findings by employing methods and accept alternative explanations for their results.

Gender differences in aggression have typically been based on studies utilizing a mean difference method. From a measurement perspective, this method is inherently problematic unless an aggression measure possesses comparable validity across gender. Stated differently, establishing measurement invariance on the measure of aggression is prerequisite to making any inferences about gender differences. This paper investigated whether aggression functions in the same way across gender using teacher-rated aggression scales from the Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC). The samples for this study consisted of the BASC standardization samples, including 1,223 children (628 boys, 595 girls) and 788 adolescents (379 boys, 409 girls). The measurement invariance of the BASC aggression scales was examined with both confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and item response theory (IRT). CFA results showed that there was not enough evidence to support the measurement invariance of the scales across gender at a scale level; IRT results found that only a few items were significantly different across gender. The two methods have similarities and differences in studying measurement invariance, so they can be complementary to each other. The implications of the findings for research and practice in school psychology are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]