Assessment in action: Toward a more complete and justice-oriented understanding of the social consequences of educational measures.

The studies in this special issue examine the social consequences of educational measures. In this commentary, I reflect on past and contemporary conceptualizations of the consequences of measurement and discuss advancing a more justice-oriented approach. To this end, it is imperative that we engage a critical lens in order to interrogate and act upon structural issues as they manifest in testing, assessment, and measurement. Importantly, we must attend to both the intended and unintended consequences of the use and interpretation of educational measures in order to advance equity and social justice. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

A roadmap to equitable school mental health screening.

Youth in the United States are experiencing mental health concerns at alarming rates. Considering the nation's legacy of racism and growing recognition of the impact of social determinants of health on educational and mental health inequities, it is imperative to re-envision how we approach mental health screening in schools to center equity. A focus on mental health screening for the sole purpose of identifying individual at-risk students ignores key contextual considerations, is ineffective in addressing health and educational inequities, and has the potential to perpetuate oppressive practices in schools. Equity-focused mental health screening requires a shift from individual- and deficit-focused approaches to systems- and holistic-focused approaches that (a) identify strengths and stressors among individuals, groups, and communities; (b) dismantle structural forms of oppression; and (c) promote positive mental health outcomes for minoritized youth. Integrating recommendations from the educational equity literature and critical school mental health frameworks, this paper identifies core considerations for equitable school mental health screening and provides guiding principles for each phase of the screening process, from screening readiness to execution to follow up. To implement these recommendations and transform school-based mental health care, schools should (a) incorporate multiple perspectives; (b) prioritize student, family, and community voices; and (c) build collaborative partnerships to co-construct a vision for equitable school mental health.

A call to action for school psychology to address COVID-19 health disparities and advance social justice.

The health, economic, and social challenges associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) present a range of threats to students' well-being, psychoeducational experiences, and outcomes, spurring fears for a "lost generation." In this article, we present COVID-19 as a large-scale multisystemic disaster causing massive disruptions and losses, with adversities moderated by the intersectional nature of systemic inequity. We first synthesize the broad effects of COVID-19 as they relate to equity and social justice, followed by the major implications for students and schools, with a focus on intersectional systemic issues. We then propose foundational considerations and resources intended to usher a paradigm shift in how school psychologists' roles and activities are conceptualized in the years to come, ending with key imperatives for practice and graduate education in school psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Examining the stability of social, emotional, and behavioral risk status: Implications for screening frequency.

Responsive service delivery frameworks rely on the use of screening approaches to identify students in need of support and to guide subsequent assessment and intervention efforts. However, limited empirical investigations have been directed to informing how often screening should occur for social, emotional, and behavioral difficulties in school settings. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the stability of risk status on 3 different screening instruments across 3 administrations across the course of a school year. A total of 1,594 students had complete screening data across 3 time points, corresponding to a total of 187 teachers from 22 different public schools located within the northeastern and midwestern United States. Across measures, we examined patterns of risk across time points and investigated the utility of (a) different screening schedules (fall, winter, and spring) and (b) borderline screening when conducting multiple screenings per year. Results indicated that a large proportion of students exhibited stable risk patterns across time points and suggested that borderline screening may be a viable alternative for schools with limited resources. Implications for practice and future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Classroom management for ethnic-racial minority students: A meta-analysis of single-case design studies.

Diversification trends of U.S. schools make clear the need for evidence-based practices supporting ethnically-racially diverse students. Yet, there are significant hindrances to readily identifying and summarizing findings generated from diverse classroom contexts. The current meta-analytic review was designed to address this gap in the classroom management literature. This review includes single-case design studies conducted in majority ethnic-racial minority classrooms (≥50%) that included a direct comparison of baseline to treatment for behavior management strategies implemented at the whole class level. A total of 22 studies spanning from 1973 to 2014 met eligibility criteria for this review, including 838 students and 46 K-12 classrooms. Results indicate that classwide management approaches applied in diverse classrooms are heavily behavioral and highly effective in improving student behavior (Mτ = |.92|, MHedges's g = 2.52). Overall, interventions that included an individual or group contingency consistently demonstrated large effects and were the most frequently used strategies. However, other interventions displayed comparably high results but were less frequently studied. Findings further revealed significant gaps in the quality and diversity of research completed to date. Specifically, half of the studies did not include cases that met What Works Clearinghouse design standards for demonstrating methodological rigor. There were also few studies that included minority populations other than African American, and there was limited variation in educational settings and intervention designs. Of some concern was the heightened frequency of response cost procedures included in interventions for diverse classrooms, possibly running counter to recommendations that emphasize reinforcement-based strategies. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Methods matter: A multi-trait multi-method analysis of student behavior.

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.

Initial development and evaluation of the student intervention matching (SIM) form.

There is currently a large gap in both research and practice between student identification practices for those at-risk (i.e., universal screening, teacher referral, or extant data as early identification methods) and the selection of appropriate Tier 2 interventions for social, emotional, and behavioral concerns. The purpose of this study was to develop and test the treatment validity of the Student Intervention Matching (SIM) Form, an intervention matching protocol designed for use at Tier 2. To this end, single-case design methodology was employed to systematically evaluate outcomes associated with use of the SIM Form in the intervention selection process. Participants included eight elementary-age students arranged in sets of four student dyads. A multiple baseline design was used in order to examine the relative effectiveness of matched interventions according to the SIM Form, and mismatched interventions according to the SIM Form. Results indicated that interventions matched using the SIM Form were functionally related to improved student outcomes across a variety of dependent variables when compared to mismatched phases. Implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Getting "SMART" about implementing multi-tiered systems of support to promote school mental health.

With the growing adoption and implementation of multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) in school settings, there is increasing need for rigorous evaluations of adaptive-sequential interventions. That is, MTSS specify universal, selected, and indicated interventions to be delivered at each tier of support, yet few investigations have empirically examined the continuum of supports that are provided to students both within and across tiers. This need is compounded by a variety of prevention approaches that have been developed with distinct theoretical foundations (e.g., Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports, Social-Emotional Learning) that are available within and across tiers. As evidence-based interventions continue to flourish, school-based practitioners greatly need evaluations regarding optimal treatment sequencing. To this end, we describe adaptive treatment strategies as a natural fit within the MTSS framework. Specifically, sequential multiple assignment randomized trials (SMART) offer a promising empirical approach to rigorously develop and compare adaptive treatment regimens within this framework.

Test order in teacher-rated behavior assessments: Is counterbalancing necessary?

Counterbalancing treatment order in experimental research design is well established as an option to reduce threats to internal validity, but in educational and psychological research, the effect of varying the order of multiple tests to a single rater has not been examined and is rarely adhered to in practice. The current study examines the effect of test order on measures of student behavior by teachers as raters utilizing data from a behavior measure validation study. Using multilevel modeling to control for students nested within teachers, the effect of rating an earlier measure on the intercept or slope of a later behavior assessment was statistically significant in 22% of predictor main effects for the spring test period. Test order effects had potential for high stakes consequences with differences large enough to change risk classification. Results suggest that researchers and practitioners in classroom settings using multiple measures evaluate the potential impact of test order. Where possible, they should counterbalance when the risk of an order effect exists and report justification for the decision to not counterbalance. (PsycINFO Database Record

Evaluating the technical adequacy of DBR-SIS in tri-annual behavioral screening: A multisite investigation.

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.

A comparison of measures to screen for social, emotional, and behavioral risk.

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.