Search

The purpose of the present study was to document the development and standardization of the "Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale" and to examine its factor structure, internal consistency, and criterion validity. Data from a nationally representative sample (N = 1,471) of preschool children with and without disabilities were collected. An exploratory factor analysis identified four factors: Emotional Regulation, School Readiness, Social Confidence, and Family Involvement. The subscales and total instrument appear remarkably stable and consistent (0.838 to 0.983). Age differences across 3-, 4-, and 5-year olds were small in magnitude, although girls were rated as possessing significantly more strengths than boys. Preschool children with disabilities were seen as having less emotional and behavioral strength than their peers without disabilities. The limitations and future research needs are discussed. (Contains 5 tables.)

Behavior rating scales are important tools in the process of assessing students' emotional and behavioral needs. Best practices in behavioral assessment dictate that the perspectives of multiple informants (e.g., teacher, parent, youth) should be considered. Overall, agreement between multiple informants is modest at best and is especially low between adult and youth respondents. Low cross-informant agreement has primarily been determined with behavior rating scales that are deficit- based; the scales almost exclusively measure behavior deficits and pathologies. Recently developed strength-based instruments examine the students' behavioral and emotional strengths and competencies. Cross-informant agreement, however, has not been examined with most strength-based scales. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cross-informant agreement between parents and youth on the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale-2 (BERS-2), a standardized instrument that assesses children's emotional and behavioral strengths. The results of this study suggest that the BERS-2 possesses moderate to high cross-informant agreement with coefficients ranging from .50 to .63.

Behavior rating scales are important tools in the process of assessing students' emotional and behavioral needs. Best practices in behavioral assessment dictate that the perspectives of multiple informants (e.g., teacher, parent, youth) should be considered. Overall, agreement between multiple informants is modest at best and is especially low between adult and youth respondents. Low cross-informant agreement has primarily been determined with behavior rating scales that are deficitbased; the scales almost exclusively measure behavior deficits and pathologies. Recently developed strength-based instruments examine the students' behavioral and emotional strengths and competencies. Cross-informant agreement, however, has not been examined with most strength-based scales. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cross-informant agreement between parents and youth on the Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale-2 (BERS-2), a standardized instrument that assesses children's emotional and behavioral strengths. The results of this study suggest that the BERS-2 possesses moderate to high cross-informant agreement with coefficients ranging from .50 to .63.

The purpose of the present study was to document the development and standardization of the Preschool Behavioral and Emotional Rating Scale and to examine its factor structure, internal consistency, and criterion validity. Data from a nationally representative sample (N = 1,471) of preschool children with and without disabilities were collected. An exploratory factor analysis identified four factors: Emotional Regulation, School Readiness, Social Confidence, and Family Involvement. The subscales and total instrument appear remarkably stable and consistent (.838 to .983). Age differences across 3-, 4-, and 5-year olds were small in magnitude, although girls were rated as possessing significantly more strengths than boys. Preschool children with disabilities were seen as having less emotional and behavioral strength than their peers without disabilities. The limitations and future research needs are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]