Search

Universal screening has emerged as one strategy within schools for identifying students who demonstrate social emotional and behavioral (SEB) concerns to provide appropriate support. However, research has demonstrated little evidence of equity around diagnostic accuracy; that is, how students might be differentially identified as at-risk for SEB concerns based on race/ethnicity. The current study examined the diagnostic accuracy of the "Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener" (SAEBRS) teacher screening measure as affected by student race/ethnicity, drawing from a sample of 730 students and 54 teachers from four urban, Midwestern elementary schools. Data were analyzed using nonparametric receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses, as well as ROC regression tests incorporating student race/ethnicity status as a covariate. Results indicated the SAEBRS (1) demonstrated borderline to optimal sensitivity and specificity across student racial/ethnic subgroups in predicting student SEB risk status, and (2) diagnostic accuracy did not vary across racial/ethnic subgroups to a statistically significant degree. Results highlight the need for further research on this topic.

The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of function-based decisions made in consideration of scores from the Intervention Selection Profile--Function (ISP-Function), a tool founded upon direct behavior rating (DBR) methodology. The ISP-Function is designed to be a brief measure, given the need for efficient and low-resource assessments in schools. Data from a previous investigation were used to create data reports for each of 34 elementary students with a history of exhibiting disruptive behavior in the classroom. The first report summarized ISP-Function data that the student's classroom teacher collected. The second report was representative of more typical functional behavior assessment (FBA), summarizing data collected via a functional assessment interview with the teacher, as well as systematic direct observation data. Nine school psychologists conducted blind reviews of these reports and derived decisions regarding the function of each student's behavior (e.g., adult attention or escape/avoidance). Gwet's agreement coefficients were statistically significant and suggested fair to almost perfect correspondence between ISP-Function and FBA reports. Limitations and implications for practice are discussed herein.

Teachers' perceptions of high cultural responsiveness in the classroom may be related to positive behavioral outcomes (e.g., higher academic engagement, lower social risk), but little research has explored this possibility. This article addresses this research gap by building upon findings from a preliminary paper in which these relationships were evidenced. Specifically, we present two interrelated follow-up studies. Study 1 examined the relationship between ratings of 20 U.S. teachers on a measure of cultural responsiveness, the Double Check Self-Refection Tool, and students' observed classroom behavior. Results from multilevel modeling indicated that higher Double Check scores significantly predicted higher academic engagement and lower disruptive behavior for 454 students observed. Study 2 investigated the relationship between ratings of 30 U.S. teachers on the Double Check Self-Refection Tool and ratings of 622 students' risk on the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS). Results indicated higher Double Check scores were associated with lower ratings of students' social and emotional risk. Findings also indicated identification as a Black student and a student with a disability predicted teachers' perceptions of higher risk, consistent with previous research. As results remain preliminary, implications include recommendations for additional research and high-quality professional development to promote teachers' cultural responsiveness.

The purpose of this study was to examine: (1) the effect of a reading intervention based on reading need compared to a mismatched behavior intervention; and (2) the effect of an academic behavior intervention based on behavior need in comparison to a mismatched reading intervention. Six students took part in the multiple baseline study. Half of the students were selected based on their reading screening scores (CBM-R), and half were selected based on their behavior screening scores (SAEBRS). Interventions were provided in a contraindicated fashion. Providing mismatched intervention did not lead to improvements, but the matched interventions increased positive outcomes. Results indicate that additional brief problem analysis is warranted when planning interventions. Limitations and suggestions for future research are provided.

The Behavior Assessment System for Children, Third Edition (BASC-3) Behavioral and Emotional Screening System Teacher Form (BESS) is a universal screening measure designed to identify social, emotional, and behavioral risks in students. A series of confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were conducted to examine the extent to which the developer-proposed factor model fits the BASC-3 BESS data within an elementary K-5 sample of students (N = 1472). Results suggested a higher-order factor structure, which was specified in accordance with developer recommendations, provided acceptable fit to the BASC-3 BESS data. Measurement invariance of the factor structure across student age levels was then examined via a series of multi-group CFA models. Introduction Multi-group CFA findings supported the configural, metric, and scalar invariance of the factor structure across age levels. Practical implications for educators and school psychologists interested in universal screening and directions for future research are discussed.

It is important to explore the relationship between teachers' perceptions of their cultural responsiveness as well as students' classroom behavior and risk, as these relationships may impact decisions about equitable access to school behavioral health supports. This paper includes two studies conducted with teachers in two large suburban school districts. Study 1 investigated the relationship between teachers' (n = 20) ratings on a measure of cultural responsiveness, the "Assessment of Culturally and Contextually Relevant Supports" (ACCReS), and students' classroom behavior. Results indicated that higher "ACCReS" scores significantly predicted lower classwide disruptive behavior. Study 2 investigated the relationship between teachers' (n = 30) ratings on the ACCReS and ratings of their students' risk on the "Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener." For social behavior, higher "ACCReS" scores predicted teachers perceiving lower social risk; however, identification as a Black student and a student with a disability predicted higher risk. Findings are preliminary, yet implications include recommendations for high-quality professional development to promote teacher cultural responsiveness. Such support could guide teachers to create educational environments in which fewer discipline referrals for behavior occur, teachers perceive less social risk, and access to school behavior supports is more equitable.

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. [This article was published in "School Psychology" (EJ1201848).]

Teachers are often called upon to identify students at behavioral and emotional risk by completing a variety of assessment tools. However, many teachers may lack the requisite skills to reliably identify students at risk or use data derived from assessment tools to inform intervention. A series of trainings was developed to improve decision making on the Intervention Selection Profile-Social Skills, with a focus on improving accuracy and use of data. Specifically, a two-study randomized controlled design was employed to evaluate the efficacy of a basic informational training and a training with a practice component with regards to a control condition on the collection and use of social-emotional assessment data on the ISP-SS. Results suggest limited influence of training on the accuracy of data collection, yet significant influence on improving how data are used to inform intervention. Implications for practice and research, as well as limitations, are discussed.

Although most junior faculty are expected to produce research, studies suggest that mentorship and support for promoting their research careers may be limited. Accordingly, in 2003, the School Psychology Research Collaboration Conference (SPRCC) was developed as an opportunity for early career scholars to establish scholarly networks and collaborate with peers and top researchers in the field of school psychology. The conference was intended to both facilitate important and collaborative research, while also enhancing the productivity among early career participants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the SPRCC on the research trajectories of 147 participants between 2003 and 2015. The findings indicate that SPRCC has positive research outcomes, especially for participants from institutions with the highest research activity, those with more publications prior to SPRCC, and males. Implications for the field and ideas for future research are discussed.

Detecting mental health concerns in youth accurately and promptly may prevent poor school outcomes, long-term mental illness, and adverse lifelong outcomes. Practitioners often use universal behavioral risk screeners to identify students at-risk on indicators related to mental health concerns. However, research is needed to inform the stability of risk identification scores across the academic year. Using a sample of N = 1496 elementary and middle school-aged students, latent class analysis and latent transition analysis were employed to identify and characterize the risk classes and the stability of latent classes of student risk longitudinally across one school year (i.e., fall, winter, and spring). The screener of interest within this study was the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener--Student Rating Scale (SAEBRS-SRS). Results revealed three distinct risk classes (low, moderate, and high risk) that remained stable across screening periods. Future directions and implications for practice are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the structural validity, internal consistency, and measurement invariance of scores from the "Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener--Student Rating Scale" (mySAEBRS), a student self-report universal screening tool. Participants included 24,094 K-12 students who completed the mySAEBRS. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) supported the fit of a bifactor model, wherein each item corresponding to both a general factor (i.e., Total Behavior) and one of three narrow factors (i.e., Social Behavior, Academic Behavior, and Emotional Behavior). Such model fit was superior to that of alternative factor structures (i.e., unidimensional, correlated-factor, and higher order). A review of pattern coefficients suggested items were relatively split, with some items loading higher on the general factor and others loading higher on their narrow factor. A series of multigroup CFAs supported the configural and metric invariance of the bifactor model, while yielding less consistent support for scalar/threshold invariance. Omega reliability coefficients indicated each mySAEBRS scale was associated with acceptable internal consistency (>0.70). However, when accounting for other factors, only the Total Behavior, Social Behavior, and Emotional Behavior scales demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (i.e., >0.50). Implications for practice and directions for future research are discussed.

Universal screening is a promising and proactive method to detect emotional and behavioral risk in schools. To date, most of the research on screening has evaluated teacher report formats. Despite the potential benefits, there has been a general lack of research on student self-report particularly in elementary grade levels. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative predictive ability of teacher and student report of risk on later academic outcomes. Results indicated that student self-report of risk significantly contributed to the prediction of academic outcomes even when controlling for demographic variables and in comparison to teacher report. The strength of this relationship increased from first to fifth grade. Implications and future research are discussed.

This study examined the feasibility and potential efficacy of the Resilience Education Program (REP), a Tier 2 school-based internalizing intervention. REP represents a hybrid intervention approach, incorporating both small-group cognitive-behavioral instruction and a check-in/check-out reinforcement-based mentorship program. A randomized controlled trial research design was employed, in which students (grades 4-7) were randomly assigned to treatment (n = 21) or waitlist control (n = 17) groups. Given the early phase of REP research, the trial was underpowered but capable of generating unbiased effect size estimates that could inform subsequent fully powered efficacy trials. Outcomes of interest included student internalizing concerns (as reported by teacher and self-report measures) and the change mechanisms by which REP was theorized to influence internalizing concerns (i.e., emotional control and social support). Primary MANCOVA findings indicated that although non-statistically significant, between-group differences in youth self-reported and teacher-reported internalizing concerns corresponded to large effect sizes ([partial eta-squared] = 0.15-0.19). A follow-up MANCOVA inclusive of change mechanism variables was also non-statistically significant, but representative of a large effect ([partial eta-squared] = 0.38). Following trial completion, REP implementers positively rated the acceptability of the REP intervention as a Tier 2 intervention for addressing internalizing concerns in the school setting.

Systematic literature reviews have supported the effectiveness of behavioral Tier 2 interventions, with research being particularly plentiful in relation to Check-In/Check-Out (CICO) and social skills training (SST). Though findings indicate either approach is effective in isolation, a recent study suggested these approaches might be particularly effective when integrated. The purpose of the current study was to build upon this initial single-case design study with a larger sample within a randomized controlled trial. Participants included 91 elementary students who had been identified as being at risk of social-emotional and behavioral difficulties. Students were randomized into three intervention conditions: CICO only, SST only, and CICO + SST. Prior to intervention, information was collected regarding the function of student problem behavior and the extent of social skill deficits. Systematic direct observation data were then completed at pre- and post-test regarding student positive and negative social engagement. Multivariate general linear models were then conducted, with pre-test scores serving as covariates and intervention group and behavioral function serving as fixed factors. Results indicated that implementation of CICO, SST, and a combined CICO + SST was functionally related to a reduction in negative social engagement. Follow-up post hoc tests indicated that after adjusting for pre-test responding, the difference between conditions in effectiveness was moderated by behavioral function. Specifically, SST was less effective for students whose behavior functioned to escape social and academic situations. No such differences were noted between students whose behavior functioned to attain adult or peer attention. Implications for practice, methodological limitations, and directions for future research are reviewed.

This study used item response theory (IRT) to derive sets of maximally efficient items (SMI) for a brief behavior rating scale (BBRS) from a common universal screening tool (i.e., the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener--Student Rating Scale [mySAEBRS]). We also evaluated the change sensitivity of these items for potential use in progress monitoring. Data from over 24,000 students (47% female; 40% White; 17% African American; 7% Hispanic) in Kindergarten through 12th grades were included in the first phase of analyses. A subsample of 774 students (43% female; 33% White; 3% African American; 0.5% Hispanic) was included in the change sensitivity analyses. Results suggested 3 items from each of the SAEBRS subscales (Social Behavior, Academic Behavior, and Emotional Behavior) could be considered maximally efficient and psychometrically informative. Additionally, change sensitivity analyses across the SMIs offered some evidence for the development of brief, 3-item standard BBRSs for use in progress monitoring students with social, academic, and emotional behavioral challenges. More research is needed to examine whether using BBRSs result in meaningful behavioral and social emotional change, particularly for specific demographic subgroups.

Universal screening is useful in the early identification of behavioral and emotional concerns, but teacher-related variance can potentially influence screening scores and resulting decisions. The current study examined the extent to which burnout and self-efficacy as teacher-level variables accounted for variance in universal screening scores. The study participants included 1,314 K-6 students and 56 elementary school teachers. Teachers completed the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) for each student in their classroom, while also completing rating scales regarding their personal self-efficacy and levels of burnout. Hierarchical linear modeling was employed to estimate the extent of teacher-related variance and whether burnout and self-efficacy accounted for this variance. Unconditional models indicated 12-30% of variance in screening scores was between teachers. Conditional models indicated teacher self-efficacy and the depersonalization component of teacher burnout were statistically significant predictors of Emotional Behavior and Total Behavior scores on the SAEBRS. Results further suggested that when combined, burnout and self-efficacy variables accounted for 7-30% of between-teacher variance in screening scores. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

A line of research has supported the incremental and construct validity of multi-informant assessment. Accordingly, multiple universal screening systems have been designed to support the collection of information from multiple informants. The purpose of the study was to expand the "Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener" (SAEBRS) suite of tools to include a novel parent form (SAEBRS-P). Specific aims of the study included the examination of SAEBRS-P factor structure, internal consistency reliability, and concurrent validity. Screening was conducted across four elementary schools in the Pacific Northwest with 212 students and their parents. Factor analytic results supported the retention of four factors, which demonstrated acceptable internal consistency reliability. Further analyses supported SAEBRS-P concurrent criterion-related validity, indicating moderate to high correlations between SAEBRS-P and "Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire" (SDQ) scales. Limitations and implications for research are discussed.

Detecting mental illness in school students may prevent poor school outcomes. Clinicians often use universal behavioral screeners to identify students at risk for mental illness. This study examined the applicability of Kane's interpretation and use argument (IUA) to the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener--Teacher Rating Scale (SAEBRS-TRS). Using an imputed sample of N = 1,357 students, latent transition analysis was employed to understand the IUA framework on this sample and the stability of the latent classes of student risk over time. Results provide initial support for the interpretation and use of the SAEBRS-TRS, and suggest that student risk statuses remain relatively stable across time. Future directions and implications for practice are discussed.

Due to early onset and rising prevalence rates, there is an established need for early identification of youth demonstrating symptoms of internalizing disorders (e.g., anxiety and depression). Accordingly, calls have been made for the use of universal screening tools to identify internalizing behavior risk. Current research has spoken to the adequacy of individual screeners, but researchers have yet to quantitatively synthesize the broader internalizing screening literature. The purpose of the current study was to systematically review the literature and conduct a reliability and validity generalization meta-analysis of available psychometric evidence. This meta-analysis identified 40 studies in which 18 distinct internalizing behavior screeners were examined. Of interest were both (a) broadband screeners, which included internalizing items along with items specific to other areas (e.g., externalizing problems), and (b) narrowband screeners, which included internalizing items alone. Across examined studies, mean coefficient alpha reliability estimates were equal to 0.84 for broadband screeners and 0.78 for narrowband screeners. For broadband screeners, mean validity correlation coefficients were equal to 0.66 when predicting other internalizing measures and 0.51 when predicting other criteria (e.g., extant academic and behavioral data). For narrowband screeners, mean validity coefficients were equal to 0.45 when predicting other internalizing measures and 0.26 when predicting other criteria. Interestingly, moderator analyses indicated neither reliability nor validity was moderated by any study or measurement characteristics. Taken together, results supported the psychometric defensibility of both broadband and narrowband internalizing screeners. Limitations of the study and implications for research are discussed, including recommendations for additional diagnostic accuracy research.

The purposes of this study were twofold. The first was to use latent class analysis to identify groupings of students defined by the presence or absence of academic or behavioral risk. The second was to determine whether these groups differed across various dichotomous academic and behavioral outcomes (e.g., suspensions, office discipline referrals, statewide achievement test failure). Students (N = 1,488) were sampled from Grades 3-5. All students were screened for academic risk using AIMSweb Reading Curriculum-Based Measure and AIMSweb Mathematics Computation, and behavioral risk using the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS). Latent class analyses supported the fit of a three-class model, with resulting student classes defined as low-risk academic and behavior (Class 1), at-risk academic and high-risk behavior (Class 2), and at-risk math and behavior (Class 3). Logistic regression analyses indicated the classes demonstrated statistically significant differences statewide achievement scores, as well as suspensions. Further analysis indicated that the odds of all considered negative outcomes were higher for both groups characterized by risk (i.e., Classes 2 and 3). Negative outcomes were particularly likely for Class 2, with the odds of negative behavioral and academic outcomes being 6-15 and 112-169 times more likely, respectively. Results were taken to support an integrated approach to universal screening in schools, defined by the evaluation of both academic and behavioral risk.

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 = 0.25-0.45). 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.

Early intervention and prevention services for students at risk of emotional and behavioral problems are increasingly plentiful in the schools. However, recent reviews have revealed gaps in the literature regarding supports for students with internalizing problems. This gap has set precedent for the development of novel Tier 2 interventions that specifically address internalizing behavior problems. The primary purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a novel, targeted intervention for elementary students who are at risk of internalizing problems: the "Resilience Education Program" ("REP"). REP is founded upon a social-ecological framework, integrating small-group cognitive-behavioral instruction with a modified check-in/check-out procedure. The current study employed a multiple-baseline single-case design with three student participants at risk of internalizing concerns. Visual analysis of direct observation data and single-case effect size estimates indicated that the REP intervention resulted in the decrease in internalizing behaviors and an increase in social engagement relative to baseline levels for two of three participants. Findings were further supported in that the changes noted in observational data were also partially confirmed by teacher ratings. Limitations of this study and future directions for researchers and practitioners are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the internal consistency reliability, validity, and diagnostic accuracy of Social, Academic, and "Emotional Behavior Risk Screener--Teacher Rating Scale" (SAEBRS) scores. Teachers (n = 68) universally screened 1,242 elementary students using two measures: the SAEBRS and the "Behavioral and Emotional Screening System" (BESS). Multilevel analyses indicated that although SAEBRS scores were internally consistent at the overall level, reliability suffered for certain SAEBRS scores at the between-group (classroom) level. Multilevel correlational analyses revealed moderate-to-large and statistically significant relations between SAEBRS and BESS scores at the overall, between-group, and within-group levels. Follow-up Fisher's z tests revealed a pattern of convergent and discriminant relations in accordance with theory-driven expectations. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses supported the diagnostic accuracy of each SAEBRS scale. Further examination of findings relative to prior research suggested SAEBRS diagnostic accuracy is moderated by the type of criterion measure under consideration.

The purpose of this diagnostic accuracy study was to evaluate the sensitivity and specificity (among other indicators) of three universal screening approaches, including the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS), a SAEBRS-based teacher nomination tool, and a multiple gating procedure (MGP). Each screening approach was compared to the BASC-2 Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS), which served as a criterion indicator of student social-emotional and behavioral risk. All data were collected in a concurrent fashion. Participants included 704 students (47.7% female) from four elementary schools within the Midwestern United States (21.6% were at risk per the BESS). Findings yielded support for the SAEBRS, with sensitivity = 0.93 (95% confidence interval [0.89-0.97]), specificity = 0.91 (0.89-0.93), and correct classification = 0.92. Findings further supported the MGP, which yielded sensitivity = 0.81 (0.74-0.87), specificity = 0.93 (0.91-0.95), and correct classification = 0.91. In contrast, the teacher nomination tool yielded questionable levels of diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity = 0.86 [0.80-0.91], specificity = 0.74 [0.70-0.78], and correct classification = 0.76). Overall, findings were particularly supportive of SAEBRS diagnostic accuracy, suggesting the MGP might also serve as an acceptable approach to universal screening. Other implications for practice and directions for future research are discussed.

Universal screening has been proposed as a method for effectively and efficiently identifying students at risk for mental health concerns. As with traditional rating scales, screeners have historically been used in the absence of any user training. Recent research suggests, however, that systematic training can be used to enhance the psychometric defensibility of teacher rating data. Thus, the present investigation evaluated the effectiveness of a pilot teacher training intervention on improving identification of students with behavioral or emotional concerns. A total of 91 teachers (57 training, 34 control) participated in the study. Participants in the training group received information on the utility of universal screening and were provided with information regarding mental and behavioral risk in schools. Videos depicting examples of problem behaviors and student concerns were also provided, and trainees were given the opportunity to practice rating videos with performance feedback. Following training, teachers completed the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) for their 1,158 students in four urban elementary schools. Teachers also completed measures of perceived assessment usability and willingness and efficacy to engage in universal screening. Finally, schools provided extant data regarding each student's academic and behavioral functioning (e.g., benchmark assessments, suspensions, and disciplinary referrals). Structural equation modeling and moderation analyses indicated a stronger relationship between SAEBRS fall risk and end-of-year behavioral outcomes in the trained group, and this relationship was moderated by assessment acceptability. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

The primary purposes of this investigation were to (a) continue a line of research examining the psychometric defensibility of the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener - Teacher Rating Scale (SAEBRS-TRS), and (b) develop and preliminarily evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a novel multiple gating procedure based on teacher nomination and the SAEBRS-TRS. Two studies were conducted with elementary and middle school student samples across two separate geographic locations. Study 1 (n=864 students) results supported SAEBRS-TRS defensibility, revealing acceptable to optimal levels of internal consistency reliability, concurrent validity, and diagnostic accuracy. Findings were promising for a combined multiple gating procedure, which demonstrated acceptable levels of sensitivity and specificity. Study 2 (n=1534 students), which replicated Study 1 procedures, further supported the SAEBRS-TRS' psychometric defensibility in terms of reliability, validity, and diagnostic accuracy. Despite the incorporation of revisions intended to promote sensitivity levels, the combined multiple gating procedure's diagnostic accuracy was similar to that found in Study 1. Taken together, results build upon prior research in support of the applied use of the SAEBRS-TRS, as well as justify future research regarding a SAEBRS-based multiple gating procedure. Implications for practice and study limitations are discussed.

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.

The purpose of this study was to conduct reliability and validity generalization meta-analyses of evidence regarding the "Student Risk Screening Scale" (SRSS), a universal screener for externalizing behavior problems. A systematic review of the literature resulted in the identification of 17 studies inclusive of evidence regarding SRSS score (a) internal consistency reliability (i.e., alpha coefficients), and/or (b) criterion-related validity (e.g., correlations between the SRSS and various outcomes). Multilevel meta-analyses indicated that across studies, SRSS scores were associated with adequate internal consistency (a = 0.83). Analyses further suggested the SRSS was a valid indicator of both social and behavioral outcomes (r = 0.52) and academic outcomes (r = 0.42). Follow-up analyses suggested that in accordance with theory-driven expectations, the SRSS was a stronger indicator of externalizing problems and broad behavior outcomes relative to alternative outcomes (e.g., internalizing problems). Limitations and directions for future research are discussed, including recommendations for the collection of additional SRSS diagnostic accuracy evidence.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the concurrent validity, sensitivity to change, and teacher acceptability of Direct Behavior Rating single-item scales (DBR-SIS), a brief progress monitoring measure designed to assess student behavioral change in response to intervention. Twenty-four elementary teacher-student dyads implemented a daily report card intervention to promote positive student behavior during prespecified classroom activities. During both baseline and intervention, teachers completed DBR-SIS ratings of 2 target behaviors (i.e., Academic Engagement, Disruptive Behavior) whereas research assistants collected systematic direct observation (SDO) data in relation to the same behaviors. Five change metrics (i.e., absolute change, percent of change from baseline, improvement rate difference, Tau-U, and standardized mean difference; Gresham, 2005) were calculated for both DBR-SIS and SDO data, yielding estimates of the change in student behavior in response to intervention. Mean DBR-SIS scores were predominantly moderately to highly correlated with SDO data within both baseline and intervention, demonstrating evidence of the former's concurrent validity. DBR-SIS change metrics were also significantly correlated with SDO change metrics for both Disruptive Behavior and Academic Engagement, yielding evidence of the former's sensitivity to change. In addition, teacher Usage Rating Profile-Assessment (URP-A) ratings indicated they found DBR-SIS to be acceptable and usable. Implications for practice, study limitations, and areas of future research are discussed. Impact and Implications: K-12 educators need quick and efficient progress monitoring measures to assess the effectiveness of behavioral interventions in the classroom. The current study found that the Direct Behavior Rating single-item scales achieved this goal by demonstrating high teacher acceptability and appropriate psychometric properties for evaluating student academic engagement and disruptive behaviors in the classroom.

The purpose of this study was to support the identification of Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) cut scores that could be used to detect high-risk students. Teachers rated students across two time points (Time 1 n = 1,242 students; Time 2 n = 704) using the SAEBRS and the Behavioral and Emotional Screening System (BESS), the latter of which served as the criterion measure. Exploratory receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses of Time 1 data detected cut scores evidencing optimal levels of specificity and borderline-to-optimal levels of sensitivity. Cross-validation analyses of Time 2 data confirmed the performance of these cut scores, with all but one scale evidencing similar performance. Findings are considered particularly promising for the SAEBRS Total Behavior scale in detecting high-risk students. Impacts and Implications: Schools are increasingly screening their students for social-emotional and behavioral difficulties. The results of the study indicate how the Social, Academic, and Emotional Behavior Risk Screener (SAEBRS) can be used to identify those students with the highest degree of need.

Data derived from universal screening procedures are increasingly utilized by schools to identify and provide additional support to students at risk for behavioral and emotional concerns. As screening has the potential to be resource intensive, effort has been placed on the development of efficient screening procedures, including brief behavior rating scales (BBRS). This study utilized classical test theory and generalizability theory to examine the extent to which differences among students, raters, occasions, and screening measures affect the amount of variance in data derived from universal screening procedures. Teacher pairs from three middle school classrooms completed two BBRS during fall and spring for each student in their classrooms. Correlation coefficients examining interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, and convergent validity were generally strong. Generalizability analyses indicated that the majority of variance in teacher ratings was attributable to student differences across all score comparisons, but differences between teacher ratings for particular students accounted for relatively large percentages of error variance among student behavior ratings. Although decision studies suggested that increasing the number of screening occasions resulted in more generalizable data, they also demonstrated that increasing the number of raters not only resulted in more generalizable data but also procedures that are more efficient.

The first purpose of the current study was to examine the defensibility of common recommendations for the frequency of screening administrations. The second purpose was to examine the internal consistency and criterion-related validity of the Devereux Student Strengths Assessment (DESSA)-mini (Naglieri, LeBuffe, & Shapiro, 2011a), a strength-based social-emotional and behavioral (SEB) risk screening tool. Specifically, the current study examined the defensibility of the oft-recommended triannual screening schedule, while also evaluating alternative screening schedules (i.e., once and twice per year). Participants included 525 students sampled across 2 rural midwestern elementary schools. Teachers completed the DESSA-mini across 3 time periods throughout the school year. Schools provided data for outcome variables, including student attendance, reading scores, and office discipline referrals (ODRs). Analyses revealed (a) adequate internal consistency and alternate forms reliability of DESSA-mini scores, and (b) small to moderate relations between DESSA-mini scores and the various outcomes. Findings also suggested strength-based SEB risk status was relatively stable over the 3 screening periods. Furthermore, generalized linear modeling and classification accuracy analyses indicated that after accounting for fall screening scores, winter and spring screening scores contributed little to the prediction of the outcome variables. Limitations and implications for practice are discussed.

Social-emotional learning (SEL) programs and practices have garnered increased interest over recent years, primarily in response to a preponderance of research regarding universal, targeted, and intensive SEL programs. Along with this interest have come repeated calls for the adoption of standards for SEL at the state level. A systematic review was conducted to examine existing preschool and kindergarten through 12th grade SEL standards across all 50 states within the United States and the District of Columbia. This review included an examination of freestanding SEL standards, as well as those embedded within health, physical education, and/or counseling standards. Coded variables of interest included the specification of age- or grade-related categories (e.g., birth to age 3, grades K-2) and standards alignment with the five Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) core competencies (i.e., self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision making). Results demonstrated every state has freestanding preschool SEL standards; however, only 11 states have freestanding SEL standards at the K-12 level. SEL standards were much more prevalent within health education standards across K-12 settings. Implications for practice and research are discussed in relation to the development and appropriateness of age- and grade-level SEL standards.

In recent years, schools have started implementing preventive practices such as universal screening. Yet, researchers have not evaluated the extent to which universal screening contributes to academic and behavioral outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment utility of universal screening for behavioral risk. Student participants were randomly assigned to two groups, corresponding to a different method of identification (office discipline referrals and universal screening). Participants identified as at risk, based on their office discipline referral data or universal screening data, and selected for intervention, received a Tier 2 intervention. Data were analyzed using a fixed-effects regression model. Analyses identified no statistically significantly differences between the two groups with regard to various academic and behavioral outcomes, suggesting universal screening did not contribute to changes in student functioning.