2 Behavioral And Emotional Screening System Essay

Most contemporary psychological treatment approaches are predecessors of the ancient and medieval philosophies and theories. Cognitive behavioural therapy as one of the modern treatment method in not an independently formed treatment, different theories have contributed to its present shape and application.

The Behavior Assessment System for Children, Third Edition (BASC 3) is a comprehensive set of rating scales and forms that help parents, teachers, and clinicians understand the behaviors and emotions of children and adolescents. The BASC 3 Rating Scales measures both adaptive and clinical characteristics in the home and school settings. The Parent Rating Scales and Teacher Rating Scales were completed by Christopher’s mother Mrs. Chavez and Christopher teacher, Ms. Mask. Scores in the table below, are based on a Mean of 50 and an SD of 10. On the Clinical Scales, scores of 60+ indicate difficulties, with those difficulties rising to the level of clinical significance at 70. High scores on these scales are indicative of behaviors that are

Behavior rating scales scores were shared. Rating scores from parents and teachers were elevated for the area of depression. Trinity’s self-rating indicated that she recognizes the need to take responsibility, acknowledges that there are areas of her life that she needs helps with and she is open to continuing therapy

In addition to this, I have conducted Child Behaviour Checklists (CBCL) with the teachers and parent of a child who was displaying behaviours indicating a Social Emotional Disorder. This information was provided to the student’s doctor so she could make a referral to a psychologist as part of his Mental Health Treatment Plan.

As a Behavior Therapist you would provide behavioral services to children in their home and in the community. Implement protocols, taking reliable data, and working closely with members of the child's team.

These interventions included 2 major tiers to enhance all behavior disabled students. Tier 1 included an implementation of activities that were implemented across the school for emotional behavior students. According to (Wehby & Kern 2014), this tier included the core school-wide expectations implemented in both classroom and non-classroom settings; opportunities to acknowledge and reinforce appropriate behavior, consistent responses when students fail to adhere to expectations; and a data-monitoring system for determining responsiveness to Tier 1 supports (Sugai & Horner, 2009). Tier 1 was known for describing the intensive behavior intervention that were being tailored toward emotional behavior students. Tier 2 encompass small-group of students to support the intervention programs, which were made to integrate vaild methods. These methods and procedures were made to help emotional behavior students progress self-control strategies in areas they lack such as social relationships, as well as improving academic performance to enhance student growth and

Behavioral health is a major determinator of health status and serious behavioral disorders have devastating effects on the well-being of individuals and communities. Behavioral health consequences

Overall, the BDEFS-CA displays satisfactory validity. It should be noted that divergent and discriminant validity were explored using the BDEFS, adult version not the child and adolescent version, replication with the BDEFS-CA may be necessary. Criterion validity was established using parent reports of diagnosis of developmental, learning, and psychiatric disorders in their children. Research using children who have a verifiable disorder may be necessary for further validation of the BDEFS-CA.

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was initially used as a screener to classify participants in one of two groups, namely ‘at risk’ and ‘not at risk’. The SDQ total scores were also used to evaluate the impact of the program on promoting student’s emotional health. The SDQ is a questionnaire to evaluate psychological adjustment for children from 3 to 16 years old (Goodman, 1997). The 25 items are rated by a 3-point Likert scale and are divided in 5 sub-scales, that is, emotional difficulties, conduct problems, hyperactivity and inattention, peer difficulties, and pro-social

School counselors need to use assessment tools to support students with issues that may interfere with their academic success. Further, it is important that school counselors use assessments that are both reliable and valid so that the data is accurate and the student is not harmed (Whiston, 2013). This paper compares the behavior assessment system for children second edition (BASC-2) and the child behavior checklist (CBCL) to compare the assessments to identify if one may be more appropriate for use with students to measure the same construct. A comparison of the assessments’ psychometric properties of reliability and validity are discussed, along with an analysis of theory and procedures to acquire reliability and validity. Next, an interpretation

In this next section, the three selected tests will be reviewed for their "appropriateness of test content, skills tested, and content coverage for the intended purpose of testing," (Code, 2004, p. 5, See #2). ASEBA 's behavior checklist and self-reports contains DSM-Oriented, syndrome, competence, and adaptive functioning scales that target specific behavior, thought, emotions, and social interactions, (Lacalle et al, 2012). As a result, this test can provide appropriate behavioral treatment plans. When Lacelle, Ezpeleta, and Doménech evaluated this test,

Allison, I enjoy reading your post and I agree that there are multiple tools that can be used to assess specific behavioral or characteristics. Behavioral screening instruments have the same desirable characteristics as developmental screening tests as long as they are accurate, reliable, valid, and validated in a representative population (LaRosa, 2017). The ideal screening test should have established psychometric qualities, be easy to perform, interpret, inexpensive, and acceptable to the child and parents. I also agree that parents most often have dependable information about their children. There are several developmental screening tests that make use of information provided by the parents, direct observation or elicitation of developmental

P., Dulcan, M. K., & Schwab-Stone, M.E., 2000). This interview is based on the DSM-IV (DSM–IV; American Psychiatric Association 2000). For disruptive behaviors it is said to be a higher standing evaluation tool providing validity that parallels other interviews. (Lemery-Chalfant, K., Schreiber, J. E., Schmidt, N. L., Van Hulle, C. A., Essex, M. J., & Goldsmith, H. H., 2007; Rhodes & Dadds, 2010). When giving this interview, I will ask Michael’s parents questions relating to the symptomology of their son as they relate to common disorders in children. The questions in the interview will also give me an idea of how the behavior is effecting Michael’s life. The other assessment tool I will use is the Emotion Regulation Checklist (ERC). This test is used to test the emotion regulation in children. It is a 25-item test and each item is rated on a 4 point Likert scale. Each point ranges from 1 = never to 4 = always (Onchwari, G., & Keengwe, J., 2011). At the end of the interview, I will gather information from Michael so he feels empowered and will know that his needs are important and valued. Obtaining a working knowledge of how Michael perceives himself in the different facets of his life will be valuable. I believe if Michael feels he is a part of the process from the beginning it will help in trust building as we could begin the counseling relationship with a need the child feels is

The Child and Adult Functional Assessment Scale has a long history in the mental health of children with serious emotional disturbances (Bates, 2001). According to Bates (2001) this assessment is useful determining eligibility, development, and outcome evaluation. Several states in United States have begun to utilize the CAFAS in their assessments of children and adolescents (Bates, 2001). Proper utilization and expansion gives the client better treatment with their psychological and behavioral issues (Bates, 2001).

One of the key cultural issues in this assessment is regarding the norms used to categorised the scores. Hayden’s categorisation for the total difficulties, emotional problem scale, conduct problem scale, hyperactivity score, peer problems scale, and prosocial scale were based from the Australian population norm of males aged 11 to 13 years (Mellor, 2005). This norm was chosen as it is most relevant to the New Zealand context. Moreover, the impact score was based from a British population of both female and males aged 11 and above as it was the only norm available for this scale (Meltzer, Gatward, Goodman, & Ford, 2000). Although the norm used is aimed to match the New Zealand context, they may not be appropriate for