The Behavior Rating Profile, Second Edition Is An Instrument That 's Designed For Student 's Ranging

The BASC- 2 BESC consists of 3 different rating scales taken by the BASC-2 (BASC-2; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2004). The authors of the BASC-2 BESS composed the assessment to identify: externalizing problems, internalizing problems, school problems, adaptive skills/personal adjustment, and inattention/hyperactivity. The rating scales can be completed in 5 minutes and a Level 2 recipient with no specialized training can administer the test. The rating scales are: Teacher Rating Scale (TRS – 27 items), Parent/Caregiver Scale (PRS – 30 items), and a student Self-Report of Personality (SRP – 30 items). A 4-point frequency scale is used – never, sometimes, often, and almost always (BASC-2 BESC; Reynolds & Kamphaus, 2007). Each rating scale is straightforward and

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

|The duration of this behavior is exhibited daily in 3 out of 6 class periods. |

The ABAS II is a comprehensive measure that assesses an individual’s behavior scale. It was developed by Patti Harrison and Thomas Oakland based on information gathered in a matter of eight years. The standardization has samples for the Parent/Primary Caregiver and Teacher/Daycare Provider Forms for children ages birth to five years comprised 2,100 individuals. The standardization samples for the Parent and Teacher Forms, and Adult Form is comprised of 5,270 individuals that represent the U.S. population. (Harrison & Oakland, 2008) ABAS-II was designed to assess how a person responds to daily demands, and to determine eligibility for services. The ABAS-II has new features in its test that encompass infant-pre-school rating forms, and it has an expanded structure that focuses on the current American Association of Mental Retardation (AAMR). (Sattler, 2002)

Reviews for the RBVSS show some ethical concerns that should be addressed when using the assessment in the school setting. According to Sink and Edwards’ (2005) review, the SVAS psychometric properties were less supported and the standardization sample did not include students in third or fourth grade, thus, the scores should be interpreted with caution. For example, if a student was only assessed with the SVAS without other forms of assessments being administered, the information may not be reliable. In addition, the Spanish-language version of the assessment scale scores should be viewed with extreme caution because only 104 Spanish-speaking Hispanic American students were in the norming sample (Sink & Edwards, 2005). These ethical considerations align with the ASCA (2010) ethical standard A.9.f, which states that school counselors “use caution when utilizing assessment techniques,

The participants of the study were Spanish parents and their children. The study consisted of three hundred and thirty-eight outpatient children who were between the ages of eight and seventeen. Children who had symptoms of mental retardation or pervasive developmental disorder (atypical autism) were excluded from the study. In order for individuals to participate in the study a written consent form had to be filled out by the parents and an oral assent of the children or adolescents had to be obtained. The participants were given a questionnaire which had five-point options, zero meaning absence of the symptom and four meaning maximum disturbance. The questionnaire was taken home, to be completed and returned the next day. The results of this study showed that there is an association between parental psychopathology and antisocial behavior and that the gender of the child did

The scale that was used to measure the children’s performance when they found a firearm was the interval scale. The interval scale was measured zero to three. Level three being the highest form that meets the criteria and level 0 being the lowest form that meets criteria. Level zero is when the child handles a firearm with regardless of subsequent responses. Level one is when the child does not handle the firearm but does not leave the area or tell an adult. Level two the child does not handle the firearm and leaves the area but does not tell an adult. Level 2.5 the child does not touch the gun, leaves the area, and tells an adult, but does not indicate an appropriate adult to tell. Level three the child does not handle the firearm, leaves

The Functional Assessment Screening Tool (FAST) is a 16-question rating scale formatted with yes or no answers. Utilization of this method reduces the potential for bias and subjectivity seen in the interview. Once administered, the FAST aides in identifying maintaining variables as either social or non-social factors, such as positive or negative reinforcement, or automatic reinforcement (Fisher et al., 2011). Completion of the FAST will reveal the likely maintaining variables of aggressive behaviors as either access to preferred activities or tangible items or escape by calculating the total number of positive answers under each category; a predominantly higher number of “yes” responses in a category identifies the maintaining factor. Although reliability and validity analysis have not been conducted for the FAST, through providing the tool to both parents and teacher, comparisons may be completed which will enable interrater agreement (Cooper et al., 2007; Fisher et al.,

The last test, that will be reviewed, is Conners Comprehensive Behavior Rating Scales (CBRS). The target population, for this test, includes individuals ' whose ages range from 6 to 18. Conners CBRS was created to assess a wide range of behaviors, emotions, social functioning, and academic issues, in order to diagnose, develop, and monitor treatment plans for the individual, (Conners, 2015). Conners CBRS, also, aids with special education classification, intervention planning, progress monitoring, and research.

While Second Step® is a universal classroom-based program, according to the success stories referenced on the Committee for Children website, many schools with a high percentage of students on free or reduced lunch programs demonstrated improvements. In addition, the program offers lessons in Spanish for K – Grade 5. Lastly, although the design of the lessons focus on a typical general education classroom, the University of Kansas through Project LAUNCH conducted a study which include students with a diagnosis of social-emotional disturbance and after the Second Step® program students showed increased empathy and decreased physical

According to the article, "Direct Behavior Rating (DBR) : An emerging method for assessing social behavior within a tiered intervention system," by Chafoules, Riley-Tillman and Christ (2009), schools have sought to improve teacher efficacy in recent years by developing a new way to conduct student assessments called Direct Behavior Rating (DBR). "DBR is conceptualized to capture the strengths of behavior rating scales and the benefits of systematic direct observation" (Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman & Christ 2009: 195). With the previously-preferred method of systematic direct observation, "typically an independent observer evaluates the student's behavior using a standardized coding system to record the presence of prespecified behaviors" (Chafouleas, Riley-Tillman & Christ 2009: 195). Using this method offered several theoretical added advantages beyond that of a typical, less formally-constructed reporting system. It was objective because of the independence of the assessor; it was repeatable and thus the data on the student could be compared over time and also compared with other students, and because it involved direct reporting by a trained professional it also retained a certain degree of flexibility in

The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Functions (BRIEF) is a performance-based test that is administered by teachers, parents and self-assessment that was created to measure executive functioning (BRIEF, 2017). It is produced and authored by PAR, a company engaged in the purpose of creating psychological assessment tools (BRIEF, 2017). Review of the BRIEF will be evaluated for materials, format, fairness, technology usage, and a final analysis will be provided utilizing literature research and scholarly articles.

My overall experience in this course was wonderful, as I enjoyed doing and administering the assessment tools provided to us. The new assessment materials have impacted me each week’s lecture tremendously. The in-class exercises were practical and assessment tools were spot on although some of the manuals were not useful. The reading material were spot on, as it was coordinated with each week’s lectures. The weekly reading assignments and reflection papers were helpful.

At the age 8 stage it measured two variables that were called constructive behavior and compliant behavior. Constructive behavior was measured with a separate score that involved three different items (Pulkkinen, Nygren, & Kokko, 2002, p. 256). The compliant behavior was measured the same way as constructive behavior. With this came the teacher rating, which was based on a score form zero to three with three standing for prominent characteristics (Pulkkinen, Nygren, & Kokko, 2002, p. 256). Following age 8 was age 14 and it was measured through grade point average (GPA) and school motivation. GPA was measure through the schools computer system and school motivation was measures by the teacher’s ratings of one to four (Pulkkinen, Nygren, & Kokko, 2002, p. 256). Age 27 measured child-centered parenting, socioeconomic status (SES), and controlled parental drinking. Child-centered parenting was assessed during an interview and collected a score through five separate variables that are: good parental relationship, good relationship with the father, maternal support, maternal supervision, and lack of physical punishment (Pulkkinen, Nygren, & Kokko, 2002, p. 256). SES was assessed by gathering the mother’s and father’s economic status and rating it from one to five, with one being low social status and five being high social status (Pulkkinen, Nygren, & Kokko, 2002, p. 256). Controlled parental drinking was assessed based on how much the parent was depended on alcohol