No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Assessing the severity of behavior disorders: Rankings based on clinical and empirical criteria
Abstract
School psychologists need to assess the severity of behavior disorders accurately to facilitate comprehensive diagnosis, to provide appropriate intervention, to enlighten research efforts, and to be in compliance with state and federal guidelines. Although clinicians in fields such as mental retardation categorize severity of behavior to make diagnostic and general treatment decisions, school psychologists rarely attempt to assess severity in any systematic or comprehensive way. The primary purpose of this study is to see how 92 practicing school psychologists rank 11 variables in their assessments of SED in school‐age children. A secondary purpose is to examine the extent of school psychologists' reliance upon clinical and empirical criteria in assessing the severity of SED. It is concluded that school psychologists agree in their rankings of variables from most to least important and that they do not consider empirical criteria more important than clinically based criteria when assessing SED. Implications for practice are presented.
... Therefore, the school psychologist must be able to sift through the unimportant information to find what is relevant before an accurate description of the student and his/her problem is apparent (Knoff, 1990;Worchel, 1990). Clarizio and Klein (1995) In 1983, the issue of personality assessment by school psychologists was the topic of an entire issue of School Psychology Review. Goh and Fuller (1983) further analyzed the data from the study by Goh, Teslow and Fuller (1981), ...
... literature (Clarizio, 1992;Forness, 1992;Skiba & Grizzle, 1992;Skiba, Grizzle, & Minke, 1994). School psychologists' awareness of emotional problems also has been highlighted at the same time that an apparent paradigm shift is occurring toward emotional/behavioral concerns in the school psychology literature (e.g., Adams, Wass, March, & Smith, 1994;Jones, Sheridan, & Binns, 1993;Laurent, Hadler, & Stark, 1994;Sandoval, 1996;Sandoval & Brock, 1996), in the core professional skills advocated for doctoral level school psychologists (American Psychological Association, 1994;Hughes & Conoley, 1995), and by articles describing how to identify and quantify emotional/behavioral problems using objective instruments (Clarizio, 1990;Clarizio & Klein, 1995;Mattison & Gamble, 1992;McConaughy, 1993;McConaughy, Mattison, & Peterson, 1994;McDermott, et al., 1995). School psychologists' practice regarding preferred instruments, chronicity of symptoms, and social maladjustment exclusion likewise have been reported (Clarizio & Higgins, 1989;Wodrich & Barry, 1990). ...
Students with serious emotional disturbances (SEDs) are identified at relatively low rates, perhaps because of confusion about how to meet the federal definition's elements. The authors address a practical aspect of the SED definition: how to determine if emotional disturbance has adversely affected educational performance. It is suggested that effects of emotional disturbance should not be equated with those of learning disabilities, especially if an emotional disorder begins late in a student's educational career or has a variable course. Three ways to determine whether an emotional problem has adversely affected educational performance are suggested: severe ability/achievement discrepancy, failure to master the curriculum, and chronic absence from school. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
In response to United States special education law requirements, this study attempted to differentiate emotionally disturbed and socially maladjusted students using parent ratings on the FACES III and a newly developed interview measure of primarily internalizing and externalizing behaviors. Forty mothers of students in special education and 40 mothers of students in court schools rated the target student and a close in age sibling. Data showed differences in family typology between the groups. Mothers rated socially maladjusted students similar to siblings but did not rate emotionally disturbed youth similar to siblings. Study results also indicated the importance of peer influence and age of problem onset for multidisciplinary teams to consider in evaluations of emotional disturbance.
The Teacher's Report Form (TRF) was investigated over 3 years for its practical ability to track the outcome in 89 elementary school students with serious emotional disturbance (SED). The pupils who remained in SED programming the entire time were characterized as unchanged by serial TRF's.The students whose placement was changed over the course of the study to less restrictive settings by school staff unaware ofTRF findings demonstrated significant improvement on consecutive TRF's in academic performance, classroom functioning, and aggressive behaviors.Those students who were placed in more intensive SED settings over time had TRF results that indicated significant generalized worsening without academic or classroom improvement. Overall, the TRF shows promise as an empirical supplement to the current less objective approaches used by school teams during their yearly individualized education program (IEP) assessment and subsequent placement and treatment planning for students with SED.
This article reviews the debate regarding the education of children who are classified as either seriously emotionally disturbed or socially maladjusted. It considers the debate from the standpoint of entitlement, including federal mandates, logical analysis, medical definition, and case law. The article examines how empirical research has supported or contradicted the notion of entitlement from the standpoint of prevalence, classification, intervention, and cost. Ethical guidelines are provided for the multidisciplinary team.
Three controversial issues surrounding the differentiation between the socially maladjusted (SM) and the seriously emotionally disturbed (SED) are examined. The first issue addresses the question whether treatment methods should differ for these two groups. Some have argued that the same treatment methods should be used with both groups, while others advocate that differentiated treatment is necessary if these two groups are to receive an appropriate education. The second issue focuses on whether the SM are truly handicapped. Drawing upon professional opinion, research findings, and rational analysis, it is argued that the socially maladjusted as a group are free from serious emotional disturbance. The third issue pertains to the education of the SM. It is pointed out that many provisions for the SM are already available, although perhaps overlooked. The call for a continuum of services is made.
School psychologists are routinely required to make judgments about the severity of behavior disorders in children. While federal law demands that a child exhibit an emotional problem “to a marked degree,” school psychologists are given few clearcut guidelines for making judgments about the severity of students' adjustment problems. The purpose of this paper is to present a list of empirically based criteria for assessing the severity of behavior disorders in children. To this end, research on major behavior disorders in children of interest to school psychologists is reviewed.