Search

This study describes first-year underrepresented college students' sense of belonging following participation in the initial cohort of All Rise, a Career and Calling Circle (CCC). While Restorative Practices, like the circle process, have emerged in response to addressing student disciplinary issues, little research exists regarding how these approaches could be applied to proactively contribute to a sense of belonging. Specifically, this emerging intervention leverages the career interests of underrepresented first-year students to create spaces that attempt to promote a sense of belonging. Understanding whether CCC contributed to the participants’ sense of belonging can assist career advisors and faculty in order to more fully support underrepresented students. Interview data revealed themes related not only to making their professional goals more tangible and increasing confidence to pursue those goals, but also providing a safe space to connect with others. This suggests that CCC positively influenced students' sense of belonging.

The growth of school-based initiatives incorporating multitiered systems of support (MTSS) for social, emotional, and behavioral domains has fueled interest in behavioral assessment. These assessments are foundational to determining risk for behavioral difficulties, yet research to date has been limited with regard to when and how often to administer them. The present study evaluated these questions within the framework of behavioral stability and examined the extent to which behavior is stable when measured by two school-based behavioral assessments: the Direct Behavior Rating-Single-Item Scales (DBR-SIS), and the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS). Participants included 451 students rated three times per year across 4 years, with the primary teacher from each year providing the within-year ratings. Latent variable models were employed to measure the constructs underlying the observed assessment scores. Models demonstrated that the DBR-SIS best captured changes within the year, whereas the BESS scores remained stable across time points within a year. Across years, scores from both assessments captured changes. The unique contributions of each assessment in the data-based decision-making process are discussed, and recommendations are given for their combined use within and across school years. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Effective classroom management is of critical importance to the success of universal, Tier I supports and services. Unfortunately, teacher-reported deficits in classroom management training are wel...

Growing centralisation in the tech sector is raising global governmental concern, and the winds of change are blowing. Interoperability – in this context, the ability of internet-connected technolo...

This article examines the particularly complex relationship between Jeremy Bentham and Henry Brougham, with reference to the respective schemes that they devised in the late 1820s and early 1830s for achieving accessible justice through a new network of local courts across England and Wales. For a considerable part of the first few decades of the nineteenth century, Bentham and Brougham remained great friends and allies, but their disagreements gradually intensified, most notably following Brougham's six-hour law reform speech in the House of Commons on 7 February 1828, the printing of his Local Courts Bill on 7 June 1830, and the beginning of his Lord Chancellorship on 22 November of the same year. By analysing Bentham's highly detailed annotated copies of Brougham's law reform speech and Local Courts Bill—as well as Bentham's articles in the Westminster Review, and a substantial portion of his unpublished writings—it is shown how Bentham's complete loss of faith in Brougham as a reformer and as a legislator led him from describing Brougham as his own grandson to calling him an enemy of the people and a serpent. It is argued that the severity of Bentham's criticisms of the then Lord Chancellor in print, and the personal nature of the insults that he levelled towards him in manuscript, effectively dispel any suggestion that the two men were acting in concert on the issue of law reform in general, or on the matter of local courts in particular.

Next generation β-glucuronidases can effectively cleave glucuronides in urine at room temperature. However, during the discovery studies, additional challenges were identified for urine drug testing across biologically relevant pH extremes and patient urine specimens. Different enzymes were evaluated across clinical urine specimens and commercially available urine control matrices. Each enzyme shows distinct substrate preferences, pH optima, and variability across clinical specimens. These results demonstrate how reliance on a single glucuronidated substrate as the internal hydrolysis control cannot ensure performance across a broader panel of analytes. Moreover, sample specific urine properties compromise β-glucuronidases to varying levels, more pronounced for some enzymes, and thereby lower the recovery of some drug analytes in an enzyme-specific manner. A minimum of 3-fold dilution of urine with buffer yields measurable improvements in achieving target pH and reducing the impact of endogenous compounds on enzyme performance. After subjecting the enzymes to pH extremes and compromising chemicals, one particular β-glucuronidase was identified that addressed many of these challenges and greatly lower the risk of failed hydrolyses. In summary, we present strategies to evaluate glucuronidases that aid in higher accuracy urine drug tests with lower potential for false negatives.

Research has supported the applied use of Direct Behavior Rating Single-Item Scale (DBR-SIS) targets of "academic engagement" and "disruptive behavior" for a range of purposes, including universal screening and progress monitoring. Though useful in evaluating social behavior and externalizing problems, these targets have limited utility in evaluating emotional behavior and internalizing problems. Thus, the primary purpose of this study was to support the initial development and validation of a novel DBR-SIS target of "unhappy," which was intended to tap into the specific construct of depression. A particular focus of this study was on the novel target's utility within universal screening. A secondary purpose was to further validate the aforementioned existing DBR-SIS targets. Within this study, 87 teachers rated 1,227 students across two measures (i.e., DBR-SIS and the Teacher Observation of Classroom Adaptation-Checklist [TOCA-C]) and time points (i.e., fall and spring). Correlational analyses supported the test-retest reliability of each DBR-SIS target, as well as its convergent and discriminant validity across concurrent and predictive comparisons. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses further supported (a) the overall diagnostic accuracy of each target (as indicated by the area under the curve [AUC] statistic), as well as (b) the selection of cut scores found to accurately differentiate at-risk and not at-risk students (as indicated by conditional probability statistics). A broader review of findings suggested that across the majority of analyses, the existing DBR-SIS targets outperformed the novel "unhappy" target. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Reliable and valid data form the foundation for evidence-based practices, yet surprisingly few studies on school-based behavioral assessments have been conducted which implemented one of the most fundamental approaches to construct validation, the multitrait-multimethod matrix (MTMM). To this end, the current study examined the reliability and validity of data derived from three commonly utilized school-based behavioral assessment methods: Direct Behavior Rating – Single Item Scales, systematic direct observations, and behavior rating scales on three common constructs of interest: academically engaged, disruptive, and respectful behavior. Further, this study included data from different sources including student self-report, teacher report, and external observers. A total of 831 students in grades 3–8 and 129 teachers served as participants. Data were analyzed using bivariate correlations of the MTMM, as well as single and multi-level structural equation modeling. Results suggested the presence of strong methods effects for all the assessment methods utilized, as well as significant relations between constructs of interest. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

A line of research has supported the development and validation of Direct Behavior Rating–Single Item Scales (DBR-SIS) for use in progress monitoring. Yet, this research was largely conducted within the general education setting with typically developing children. It is unknown whether the tool may be defensibly used with students exhibiting more substantial concerns, including students with social competence difficulties. The purpose of this investigation was to examine the concurrent validity of DBR-SIS in a middle school sample of students exhibiting substantial social competence concerns ( n = 58). Students were assessed using both DBR-SIS and systematic direct observation (SDO) across three target behaviors. Each student was enrolled in one of two interventions: the Social Competence Intervention or a business-as-usual control condition. Students were assessed across three time points, including baseline, mid-intervention, and postintervention. A review of across-time correlations indicated small to moderate correlations between DBR-SIS and SDO data ( r = .25–.45). Results further suggested that the relationships between DBR-SIS and SDO targets were small to large at baseline. Correlations attenuated over time, though differences across time points were not statistically significant. This was with the exception of academic engagement correlations, which remained moderate–high across all time points.

In 1929 Sir William Holdsworth argued that Jeremy Bentham wrote ‘the best criticism’ of Lord Mansfield’s attempts to ‘fuse’ law and equity that has ever been made. As the present article will show,...

The number of homeless adults on our streets is increasing which, due to their associated health problems, is causing increasing demand and inefficiencies on the National Health Service (NHS). Currently the homeless are experiencing inequalities of healthcare due to a lack of access to primary care. As a consequence, there has been an increasing use of secondary care, which has become the preferred provider of healthcare for the homeless community. Homeless health is often complex involving tri morbidity and although legislation already exists to embrace these needs within current models of primary care, they are not being met. Innovative and specific healthcare models are needed in order to access this disengaged community. This project is focussed on delivering an accessible primary care clinic specifically for the homeless community. The project will deliver improved efficiencies and reduced costs for the NHS, including ambulance services, which will benefit the wider community and reduce the inequalities of health currently being experienced. It is hypothesised that this increased provision of primary care to the homeless demographic will result in reduced morbidity and mortality, improved health and a more efficient NHS which is vital in the current climate of austerity and uncertainty.

Indigenous communities are increasingly taking the lead in river restoration, using the process as an opportunity to re-engage deeply with their rivers, while revealing socio-cultural and political dimensions of restoration underreported in ecological and social science literatures. We engaged in collaborative research with representatives from three Indigenous nations in the United States, New Zealand, and Canada to explore the relationship between Indigenous ways of knowing and being (i.e., “Indigenous knowledges”) and their restoration efforts. Our research project asks the following: how are Indigenous knowledges enacted through river restoration and how do they affect outcomes? How do the experiences of these Indigenous communities broaden our understanding of the social dimensions of river restoration? Our research reveals how socio-cultural protocols and spiritual practices are intertwined with restoration methodologies, showing why cultural approaches to restoration matter. We found that in many cases, a changing political or legal context helps create space for assertion of Indigenous spiritual and cultural values, while the restoration efforts themselves have the potential to both repair community relationships with water and empower communities vis-a-vis the wider society. We show that restoration has the potential to not only restore ecosystem processes and services, but to repair and transform human relationships with rivers and create space politically for decolonizing river governance.

The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the models for interpretation and use that serve as the foundation of an interpretation/use argument for the Social and Academic Behavior Risk Screener (SABRS). The SABRS was completed by 34 teachers with regard to 488 students in a Midwestern high school during the winter portion of the academic year. Confirmatory factor analysis supported interpretation of SABRS data, suggesting the fit of a bifactor model specifying 1 broad factor (General Behavior) and 2 narrow factors (Social Behavior [SB] and Academic Behavior [AB]). The interpretive model was further supported by analyses indicative of the internal consistency and interrater reliability of scores from each factor. In addition, latent profile analyses indicated the adequate fit of the proposed 4-profile SABRS model for use. When cross-referenced with SABRS cut scores identified via previous work, results revealed students could be categorized as (a) not at-risk on both SB and AB, (b) at-risk on SB but not on AB, (c) at-risk on AB but not on SB, or (d) at-risk on both SB and AB. Taken together, results contribute to growing evidence supporting the SABRS within universal screening. Limitations, implications for practice, and future directions for research are discussed herein.

Recent studies have suggested single case design (SCD) intervention research is subject to publication bias, wherein studies are more likely to be published if they possess large or statistically significant effects and use rigorous experimental methods. The nature of SCD and the purposes for which it might be used could suggest that large effects and rigorous methods should not always be expected. The purpose of the current paper is to propose and describe a theory-driven cycle of SCD intervention research. The proposed SCD-specific cycle serves several purposes including (a) defining the purposes for which SCD research might be adopted, (b) specifying the types of evidence to be collected in establishing an intervention for applied use, and (c) illustrating the phases of SCD-based intervention research (i.e., development, efficacy, effectiveness, contextualization, and implementation). The proposed model is intended to serve as an intermediary between theory and research, facilitating the consi...

Multi-tiered problem-solving models that focus on promoting positive outcomes for student behavior continue to be emphasized within educational research. Although substantial work has been conducted to support systems-level implementation and intervention for behavior, concomitant advances in behavior assessment have been limited. This is despite the central role that data derived from behavior assessment methods must play in making defensible multi-tiered decisions such as those for screening and progress monitoring. In this commentary, the role of assessment in the evidence-based practice movement is described, alongside necessary features of behavior assessment methods utilized in multi-tiered systems. The relevance of these features to articles in this special issue is described. Finally, observations and suggestions for future directions regarding the current state of behavior assessment in educational research are offered.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of two different Direct Behavior Rating–Single Item Scale (DBR-SIS) formats on rating accuracy. A total of 119 undergraduate students participated in one of two study conditions, each utilizing a different DBR-SIS scale format: one that included percentage of time anchors on the DBR-SIS scale and an explicit reference to duration of the target behavior (percent group) and one that did not include percentage anchors nor a reference to duration of the target behavior (no percent group). Participants viewed nine brief video clips and rated student behavior using one of the two DBR-SIS formats. Rating accuracy was determined by calculating the absolute difference between participant ratings and two criterion measures: systematic direct observation scores and DBR-SIS expert ratings. Statistically significant differences between groups were found on only two occasions, pertaining to ratings of academically engaged behavior. Limitations and directions for future research are discussed.

Legislations mandates that educators use evidence-based practices (EBPs) that are supported by scientifically based research. EBPs have demonstrated a likelihood to work for students with disabilities. EBPs should match targeted needs of the student receiving the instruction, which sometimes requires educators to search for the best intervention to meet specific student needs. This article discusses the impetus for practices supported by evidence, where to find interventions and strategies, and what to do when targeted interventions do not exist. Additionally, this article emphasizes the need to evaluate effectiveness of intervention at the student level.

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. Language: en

Despite advances in evidence-based core instruction and intervention, many students with disabilities continue to achieve poor academic and behavioral outcomes. Many of these students are not sufficiently responsive to standardized programs and require more intensive, individualized supports. While many interventions and school problem-solving teams focus primarily on either academic or behavioral concerns, students with the most intensive needs often have interrelated needs in both areas. The next big idea in special education should be to merge these efforts, building upon all that we have learned about problem solving at all levels of support, to improve outcomes for these students. Data-based individualization provides a framework for integrating academic and behavioral problem solving and intervention.

The purpose of this study was to examine the relation between teacher-implemented screening measures used to identify social, emotional, and behavioral risk. To this end, 5 screening options were evaluated: (a) Direct Behavior Rating - Single Item Scales (DBR-SIS), (b) Social Skills Improvement System - Performance Screening Guide (SSiS), (c) Behavioral and Emotional Screening System - Teacher Form (BESS), (d) Office discipline referrals (ODRs), and (e) School nomination methods. The sample included 1974 students who were assessed tri-annually by their teachers (52% female, 93% non-Hispanic, 81% white). Findings indicated that teacher ratings using standardized rating measures (DBR-SIS, BESS, and SSiS) resulted in a larger proportion of students identified at-risk than ODRs or school nomination methods. Further, risk identification varied by screening option, such that a large percentage of students were inconsistently identified depending on the measure used. Results further indicated weak to strong correlations between screening options. The relation between broad behavioral indicators and mental health screening was also explored by examining classification accuracy indices. Teacher ratings using DBR-SIS and SSiS correctly identified between 81% and 91% of the sample as at-risk using the BESS as a criterion. As less conservative measures of risk, DBR-SIS and SSiS identified more students as at-risk relative to other options. Results highlight the importance of considering the aims of the assessment when selecting broad screening measures to identify students in need of additional support.

To date, rater accuracy when using Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) has been evaluated by comparing DBR-derived data to scores yielded through systematic direct observation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an alternative method for establishing comparison scores using expert-completed DBR alongside best practices in consensus building exercises, to evaluate the accuracy of ratings. Standard procedures for obtaining expert data were established and implemented across two sites. Agreement indices and comparison scores were derived. Findings indicate that the expert consensus building sessions resulted in high agreement between expert raters, lending support for this alternative method for identifying comparison scores for behavioral data.

This study examined the treatment sensitivity of Direct Behavior Rating–Single Item Scales (DBR-SIS) in response to an evidence-based intervention delivered in a single-case, multiple-baseline design. DBR-SIS was used as a formative assessment in conjunction with a frequently used intervention in schools, a Daily Behavior Report Card (DRC). The intervention and concurrent assessment were conducted by five teachers in a rural Midwestern elementary school with five male students displaying mild to moderate behavioral challenges in the classroom. Study findings indicated DBR-SIS displays appropriate treatment sensitivity following intervention implementation. Agreement in the documentation of response and nonresponse to intervention implementation between DBR-SIS and systematic direct observation (SDO) data was evident across visual and empirical analyses. In addition, through a multiple-baseline design, this study documented negligible to no change in student behavior following implementation of a DRC in an applied classroom setting. These findings support previous calls for continued examination of the forms and components of DRC employed in schools. Finally, the study found educators rated the use of a combined DRC intervention and progress monitoring with DBR-SIS as favorable.